The election result was something of a foregone conclusion
given the degree of control exercised by the erstwhile dictatorship over all
aspects of political life.
Draconian decrees restricting fundamental human rights
such as freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, and
freedom of the press meant that opposition voices would have trouble being
heard.
Control over the news media was especially important for Frank
Bainimarama to gain legitimacy as elected prime minister, and it was assured by
intimidation of both Fiji TV and the Fiji Times under the Media Decree. The Fiji
Sun and FBC, meanwhile, could be counted on for shameless cheerleading on
behalf of the regime.
Scottish writer Andrew Fletcher (1655-1716) observed
that “if a man were permitted to make all the ballads, he need not care
who should make the laws of a nation.” That was back when ballads were the main
means of spreading the news, which even 400 years ago was well understood as
the key to forming public opinion.
Now imagine if a politician could both
control the news AND make all the laws of a nation. How would you like his
chances at the polls?
That was the situation in Fiji
for almost eight years subsequent to Bainimarama’s 2006 coup. The only real
surprise is that he didn’t take all 50 seats, as he boasted he would. That Sodelpa
managed as many seats as it did speaks to the depth of indigenous outrage that
will not be going away anytime soon.
The real question is whether Fiji
could handle a genuine democracy with a free press, or if the country needs an über-authoritarian
strongman like Bainimarama to keep control.
Those who claim the latter is true
point to the country’s history of coups dating back to 1987. Some blame the
press for fomenting the 2000 coup, which on my reading of the record seems
specious, at best.
But the fact remains that Fiji’s
two
solitudes have shown they simply cannot play nicely enough together for
a real democracy. Calls for an end to the “coup culture” that has
bedeviled
the country have perhaps been answered with a militarisation which has
seen an
elected government laced with army officers.
Combined with restrictive
decrees
which amount to almost as much government control as during martial law,
the
result is perhaps a permanent state of coup which will indeed preclude
future
coups.
