Concerns about the delay in presenting the Fiji Electoral Law Reform Report to Parliament have been raised by Professor Wadan Narsey, a member of the Electoral Review Team. In a recent column for the Fiji Times, he questioned the government’s failure to facilitate public discussion on the report while ongoing legal processes are taking place. He emphasized that the report should have been tabled in Parliament or released to the public to allow for necessary debate and modifications.
The review committee has proposed introducing a Proportional Open List Constituency System (POLCS) to improve the electoral framework, which would split Fiji into 25 constituencies, including five maritime seats. However, Professor Narsey noted that this number could be adjusted to 20 constituencies. He expressed apprehension that internal resistance within the Fiji Elections Office may be delaying these proposed changes, suggesting that some senior staff might oppose the POLCS due to the increased work it entails compared to the current system.
He further pointed out that the Fiji Electoral Commission is the “superior authority” that can hire new staff if there are existing personnel unwilling to adapt to the new electoral processes. Additionally, Narsey speculated that political self-interest might be fueling the delay, questioning whether the current Coalition Government is receiving advice that it could benefit from retaining the existing electoral system rather than moving to the proposed reforms.
Prof. Narsey warned that allowing selfish political motivations to impede progress would harm the democratic principles in Fiji, stating it would be “tragic” if such interests are the reason behind the government’s hesitance to table the report and release it for public discourse, which he believes voters strongly desire.
This situation mirrors tensions within Fiji’s political landscape where calls for electoral reform have gained momentum. Commission chairman Daniel Fatiaki has previously expressed disappointment with the government’s handling of the electoral reform process, citing a lack of transparency and a delay in tabled recommendations, despite the public’s demand for change after numerous consultations indicated discontent with the existing electoral framework.
Looking ahead, there is cautious optimism that these reforms—if addressed promptly—can enhance civic engagement and create a political environment that better represents the needs of all Fijians. The ongoing dialogues around electoral reforms symbolize a critical moment for Fiji’s democracy, bridging the gap between governmental actions and public representation, and underscoring the importance of inclusive governance.