"What must be resisted, firmly and without apology, is the emerging narrative that these arrests somehow “close the chapter” on Section 131 of the Constitution, neutralise the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, and confine it permanently to political irrelevance. The prosecution of two former officials does not repeal the Constitution. It does not suspend history. And it does not erase institutional responsibility. Section 131 remains in force. Its meaning has not changed. And neither has the reality that Fiji’s stability still depends on how that provision is understood, respected, and practised."
 |   |
 Inciting To Mutiny Suspect | The Danger of Turning Prosecution into Political Licence  There is now a real risk that these prosecutions will be weaponised politically. Some will argue that because Bainimarama and Qiliho stand accused, any future reference to Section 131 is illegitimate. That any citizen who speaks about the RFMF’s constitutional role is “inviting mutiny”. That any concern about governance is “sedition”. That any appeal to institutional vigilance is criminal. This is profoundly dangerous. It converts law enforcement into a tool of intimidation. It transforms civic engagement into a legal hazard. And it teaches citizens that silence is safer than conscience. A society in which people are afraid to invoke their own Constitution is already in constitutional decline. History offers a brutal warning. |
Under Idi Amin Dada, Uganda’s armed forces aligned themselves with ethnic populism and authoritarian power. Once the army chose sides, the fate of Ugandan Asians was sealed. Expulsion, dispossession, and exile followed swiftly. Legal protections collapsed. Courts became irrelevant. Appeals to fairness became meaningless.
Uganda’s tragedy did not begin with decrees. It began when institutions stopped belonging to everyone. Minorities did not flee because of rhetoric alone. They fled because they saw that the state, including its security forces, no longer stood neutrally between citizens and power.
That lesson is not about replicating outcomes. It is about recognising institutional failure early.
When minorities lose confidence that the state will protect them impartially, they stop thinking about rights. They start thinking about exits. They will have no faith in RFMF.
Uganda’s tragedy did not begin with decrees. It began when institutions stopped belonging to everyone. Minorities did not flee because of rhetoric alone. They fled because they saw that the state, including its security forces, no longer stood neutrally between citizens and power.
That lesson is not about replicating outcomes. It is about recognising institutional failure early.
When minorities lose confidence that the state will protect them impartially, they stop thinking about rights. They start thinking about exits. They will have no faith in RFMF.
   Colonel Viliame Draunibaka |   It is alleged that Bainimarama between the 1st of January 2023 and the 31st of July 2023 around Suva, sent viber messages to Brigadier General Manoa Gadai in his attempt to incite him to take over command and overthrow the authority of the Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, Major General Jone Kalouniwai. For the second count of inciting to mutiny, it is alleged that Bainimarama and Qiliho between the 1st of July 2023 to the 31st of July, 2023 jointly spoke to Lt Colonel Atunaisa Vakatale, Colonel Aseri Rokoura, Colonel Viliame Draunibaka and others, who were senior officers of RFMF in their joint attempt to incite the senior officers to unlawfully arrest and take over the authority of the Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, Major General Jone Kalouniwai. |    Colonel Atunaisa Vakatale  Colonel Aseri Rokoura |
The Arrest of Bainimarama and Qiliho Does Not Bury Section 131
The arrest and charging of Frank Bainimarama and Sitiveni Qiliho on allegations of inciting mutiny is a serious and consequential development in Fiji’s political and legal life. These are not minor charges. They go to the heart of civil–military relations and constitutional order. They must be tested in open court, on evidence and law, without fear or favour.
That is how the rule of law functions.
But what must be resisted, firmly and without apology, is the emerging narrative that these arrests somehow “close the chapter” on Section 131 of the Constitution, neutralise the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, and confine it permanently to political irrelevance. The prosecution of two former officials does not repeal the Constitution. It does not suspend history. And it does not erase institutional responsibility.
Section 131 remains in force. Its meaning has not changed. And neither has the reality that Fiji’s stability still depends on how that provision is understood, respected, and practised.
Section 131 Was Never Meant to Produce a Silent Military
Section 131 assigns to the RFMF responsibility for the “security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians.” Those words were not chosen casually. “Well-being” is not limited to territorial defence. It speaks to constitutional stability, social cohesion, and civic peace. “All Fijians” is not a slogan. It is a legal and moral commitment to equality.
This provision was never intended to authorise coups. Nor was it designed to manufacture a mute, disengaged military that retreats into the barracks whenever politics becomes uncomfortable. It was meant to embed the RFMF within the democratic order while recognising that, in Fiji’s particular history, institutional guardianship matters.
To pretend otherwise is to engage in wilful amnesia.
A professional military in a democracy is restrained, lawful, and subordinate to civilian authority. But it is not blind, indifferent, or morally vacant. It is constitutionally literate. It is alert to institutional decay. It understands when social cohesion is under strain. And it remains committed to the integrity of the Republic as a shared civic project.
The Danger of Turning Prosecution into Political Licence
There is now a real risk that these prosecutions will be weaponised. Some will argue that because Bainimarama and Qiliho stand accused, any future reference to Section 131 is illegitimate. That any citizen who speaks about the RFMF’s constitutional role is “inviting mutiny.” Any concern about governance is “sedition”. That any appeal to institutional vigilance is criminal.
This is profoundly dangerous.
It converts law enforcement into a tool of intimidation. It transforms civic engagement into a legal hazard. And it teaches citizens that silence is safer than conscience. A society in which people are afraid to invoke their own Constitution is already in constitutional decline.
Uganda and the Cost of Institutional Alignment
History offers a brutal warning. Under Field-Marshal Idi Amin, Uganda’s armed forces aligned themselves with ethnic populism and authoritarian power. Once the army chose sides, the fate of Ugandan Asians was sealed. Soldiers enforced decrees, intimidated and robbed families, seized property, and ensured that resistance was futile. Legal protections collapsed. Courts became irrelevant. Appeals to fairness became meaningless.
Uganda’s tragedy did not begin with mass expulsions. It began when institutions stopped belonging to everyone. Minorities did not flee merely because of rhetoric. They fled because they saw that the state, including its security forces, no longer stood neutrally between citizens and power.
That lesson is not about predicting identical outcomes. It is about recognising institutional failure early. When minorities lose confidence that the state will protect them impartially, they stop thinking about rights. They start thinking about exits.
Indo-Fijian Anxiety Is Not Paranoia
For many Indo-Fijians, the accelerating iTaukeinisation of public life is not an abstract concern. It is read through history: coups, displacement, constitutional manipulation, and repeated reminders that belonging in Fiji has too often been conditional.
When political language becomes ethnic, when institutions tilt toward majoritarian comfort, and when constitutional safeguards weaken, fear is not irrational. It is empirical.
If the present moment is interpreted as a licence for unchecked nationalism, safe in the belief that the military has been politically neutralised, then Fiji will be storing up long-term instability. No society remains cohesive when one community lives in permanent uncertainty about its future.
The Role of Major-General Kalouniwai Is Now Pivotal
This is why the leadership of Ro Jone Kalouniwai is historically significant. The Commander’s role is not political brokerage. It is institutional stewardship.
It is to ensure that the RFMF remains apolitical, professional, constitutionally literate, loyal to equal citizenship, and resistant to ethnic or partisan capture. Professionalism does not mean disengagement. It means disciplined awareness. It means understanding that exclusionary politics undermines national security as surely as any external threat.
A military loyal to the Constitution must be loyal to its spirit, not merely its text.
Citizens Must Be Free to Appeal to Institutions
There will be moments—there must be moments—when citizens feel compelled to call upon institutions to uphold constitutional norms. That is not sedition. That is democratic citizenship. Questioning whether institutions are fulfilling their mandate is not incitement. It is accountability.
Warning of democratic backsliding is not mutiny. It is civic vigilance. If such speech becomes criminalised, Fiji will have crossed a quiet but decisive threshold: from constitutional democracy to managed silence.
If Nationalism Is Allowed to Harden in Fiji
If this moment is misread, if it becomes a political trophy for aggressive ethno-nationalism, then Fiji will have invited a far more dangerous future.
If majoritarian iTaukei power is exercised without restraint, if institutions retreat into convenient silence, and if constitutional safeguards are hollowed out under cover of “law and order,” then the arrests of two men will mark not democratic progress, but institutional drift.
Democracies rarely collapse dramatically. They decay through complacency, selective enforcement, and the slow silencing of dissent. In such environments, minorities read the signals: in appointments, in rhetoric, in policy choices, in selective outrage, and in institutional timidity. When those signals accumulate, trust evaporates.
Uganda did not fall apart because of one decree. It fell apart because institutions stopped belonging to everyone.
Prosecution Must Not Become Erasure
The courts must do their work. If wrongdoing is proved, consequences must follow. No one is above the law. But prosecution must not become a historical erasure. It must not be used to discredit constitutional debate, intimidate civic engagement, silence minorities, neutralise institutional responsibility, rewrite Section 131 out of relevance.
The Constitution does not belong to governments. It belongs to citizens.
The Real Test of Fiji’s Maturity
The test before Fiji is not whether it can prosecute former leaders. Many countries can do that. The real test is whether it can do so while preserving free constitutional debate, institutional integrity, minority security, equal citizenship, and democratic confidence.
Section 131 remains part of Fiji’s constitutional architecture. The RFMF remains a central institution. And Ro Jone Kalouniwai remains its steward.
None of that disappears because two men are charged.
If Fiji allows fear, opportunism, and ethnic politics to hollow out these foundations, it will not be escaping its past. It will be repeating it, slowly, quietly, and with far greater long-term cost.
History shows that slow collapses are often the hardest to stop. Loyalties shift in Fiji
The arrest and charging of Frank Bainimarama and Sitiveni Qiliho on allegations of inciting mutiny is a serious and consequential development in Fiji’s political and legal life. These are not minor charges. They go to the heart of civil–military relations and constitutional order. They must be tested in open court, on evidence and law, without fear or favour.
That is how the rule of law functions.
But what must be resisted, firmly and without apology, is the emerging narrative that these arrests somehow “close the chapter” on Section 131 of the Constitution, neutralise the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, and confine it permanently to political irrelevance. The prosecution of two former officials does not repeal the Constitution. It does not suspend history. And it does not erase institutional responsibility.
Section 131 remains in force. Its meaning has not changed. And neither has the reality that Fiji’s stability still depends on how that provision is understood, respected, and practised.
Section 131 Was Never Meant to Produce a Silent Military
Section 131 assigns to the RFMF responsibility for the “security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians.” Those words were not chosen casually. “Well-being” is not limited to territorial defence. It speaks to constitutional stability, social cohesion, and civic peace. “All Fijians” is not a slogan. It is a legal and moral commitment to equality.
This provision was never intended to authorise coups. Nor was it designed to manufacture a mute, disengaged military that retreats into the barracks whenever politics becomes uncomfortable. It was meant to embed the RFMF within the democratic order while recognising that, in Fiji’s particular history, institutional guardianship matters.
To pretend otherwise is to engage in wilful amnesia.
A professional military in a democracy is restrained, lawful, and subordinate to civilian authority. But it is not blind, indifferent, or morally vacant. It is constitutionally literate. It is alert to institutional decay. It understands when social cohesion is under strain. And it remains committed to the integrity of the Republic as a shared civic project.
The Danger of Turning Prosecution into Political Licence
There is now a real risk that these prosecutions will be weaponised. Some will argue that because Bainimarama and Qiliho stand accused, any future reference to Section 131 is illegitimate. That any citizen who speaks about the RFMF’s constitutional role is “inviting mutiny.” Any concern about governance is “sedition”. That any appeal to institutional vigilance is criminal.
This is profoundly dangerous.
It converts law enforcement into a tool of intimidation. It transforms civic engagement into a legal hazard. And it teaches citizens that silence is safer than conscience. A society in which people are afraid to invoke their own Constitution is already in constitutional decline.
Uganda and the Cost of Institutional Alignment
History offers a brutal warning. Under Field-Marshal Idi Amin, Uganda’s armed forces aligned themselves with ethnic populism and authoritarian power. Once the army chose sides, the fate of Ugandan Asians was sealed. Soldiers enforced decrees, intimidated and robbed families, seized property, and ensured that resistance was futile. Legal protections collapsed. Courts became irrelevant. Appeals to fairness became meaningless.
Uganda’s tragedy did not begin with mass expulsions. It began when institutions stopped belonging to everyone. Minorities did not flee merely because of rhetoric. They fled because they saw that the state, including its security forces, no longer stood neutrally between citizens and power.
That lesson is not about predicting identical outcomes. It is about recognising institutional failure early. When minorities lose confidence that the state will protect them impartially, they stop thinking about rights. They start thinking about exits.
Indo-Fijian Anxiety Is Not Paranoia
For many Indo-Fijians, the accelerating iTaukeinisation of public life is not an abstract concern. It is read through history: coups, displacement, constitutional manipulation, and repeated reminders that belonging in Fiji has too often been conditional.
When political language becomes ethnic, when institutions tilt toward majoritarian comfort, and when constitutional safeguards weaken, fear is not irrational. It is empirical.
If the present moment is interpreted as a licence for unchecked nationalism, safe in the belief that the military has been politically neutralised, then Fiji will be storing up long-term instability. No society remains cohesive when one community lives in permanent uncertainty about its future.
The Role of Major-General Kalouniwai Is Now Pivotal
This is why the leadership of Ro Jone Kalouniwai is historically significant. The Commander’s role is not political brokerage. It is institutional stewardship.
It is to ensure that the RFMF remains apolitical, professional, constitutionally literate, loyal to equal citizenship, and resistant to ethnic or partisan capture. Professionalism does not mean disengagement. It means disciplined awareness. It means understanding that exclusionary politics undermines national security as surely as any external threat.
A military loyal to the Constitution must be loyal to its spirit, not merely its text.
Citizens Must Be Free to Appeal to Institutions
There will be moments—there must be moments—when citizens feel compelled to call upon institutions to uphold constitutional norms. That is not sedition. That is democratic citizenship. Questioning whether institutions are fulfilling their mandate is not incitement. It is accountability.
Warning of democratic backsliding is not mutiny. It is civic vigilance. If such speech becomes criminalised, Fiji will have crossed a quiet but decisive threshold: from constitutional democracy to managed silence.
If Nationalism Is Allowed to Harden in Fiji
If this moment is misread, if it becomes a political trophy for aggressive ethno-nationalism, then Fiji will have invited a far more dangerous future.
If majoritarian iTaukei power is exercised without restraint, if institutions retreat into convenient silence, and if constitutional safeguards are hollowed out under cover of “law and order,” then the arrests of two men will mark not democratic progress, but institutional drift.
Democracies rarely collapse dramatically. They decay through complacency, selective enforcement, and the slow silencing of dissent. In such environments, minorities read the signals: in appointments, in rhetoric, in policy choices, in selective outrage, and in institutional timidity. When those signals accumulate, trust evaporates.
Uganda did not fall apart because of one decree. It fell apart because institutions stopped belonging to everyone.
Prosecution Must Not Become Erasure
The courts must do their work. If wrongdoing is proved, consequences must follow. No one is above the law. But prosecution must not become a historical erasure. It must not be used to discredit constitutional debate, intimidate civic engagement, silence minorities, neutralise institutional responsibility, rewrite Section 131 out of relevance.
The Constitution does not belong to governments. It belongs to citizens.
The Real Test of Fiji’s Maturity
The test before Fiji is not whether it can prosecute former leaders. Many countries can do that. The real test is whether it can do so while preserving free constitutional debate, institutional integrity, minority security, equal citizenship, and democratic confidence.
Section 131 remains part of Fiji’s constitutional architecture. The RFMF remains a central institution. And Ro Jone Kalouniwai remains its steward.
None of that disappears because two men are charged.
If Fiji allows fear, opportunism, and ethnic politics to hollow out these foundations, it will not be escaping its past. It will be repeating it, slowly, quietly, and with far greater long-term cost.
History shows that slow collapses are often the hardest to stop. Loyalties shift in Fiji
Yesterday's Bainimarama loyalists are now Tomorrow's State witnesses.
In June 2023, a military delegation, led by Col ATUNAISA VAKATALE, the Commanding Officer of Fiji's largest foot soldiers, and Col ASERI ROKOURA, feted their former military commander at his residence
Looking to RFMF: In December 2022, Rabuka crossed a constitutional red line rhetorically, but did he cross the criminal threshold operationally
 People’s Alliance leader Sitiveni Rabuka says his request for the military to intervene in the electoral counting process was denied by Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) Commander Major General Ro Jone Kalouniwai. |  |
From Fijileaks Archive, 16 December 2022
“I wish to reassure the people of Fiji that the RFMF will not respond to People’s Alliance (PAP) leader Sitiveni Rabuka’s insistence or any political party, that we intervene under our responsibilities from Section 131.2 of the 2013 Constitution” Kalouniwai said.
“The constitutional responsibility of the RFMF section 131.2 does not make any reference to intervening or getting involved with the electoral processes or management of voting or counting of votes with the assistance of the military,” he said.
Kalouniwai explained that using the military in any form during the electoral process is unconstitutional.
“The RFMF will leave it in the good hands of those responsible of the electoral process under the 2013 constitution.”
The Commander went on to say the constitution has other avenues that the opposition parties can resort to when seeking redress.
“In this instance, I urge any dispute with reference to the electoral process be referred to the Supervisor of Elections, the Electoral Commission and the Court of Disputed Returns. These are the various organisations that deal with all electoral matters.”
The statement comes after a group of opposition party leaders called for a halt to vote counting on Thursday, demanding an audit of the country’s electoral system.
It was triggered by an anomaly in provisional results that was displayed on a Fiji Election Office results app on Wednesday night.
The app was taken offline for several hours and then restarted in the early hours of Thursday showing an almost unassailable lead for the ruling Fiji First Party over all other parties.
Speaking for a group of political parties at a media conference in Suva on Thursday, PAP leader Sitiveni Rabuka said the anomaly raised questions about the integrity of the entire electoral system.
Meanwhile, five political parties have today launched a petition to gather support in their quest to prove the election results are not free and fair.
The People’s Alliance, National Federation Party, Fiji Labor Part, Unity Fiji, and We Unite parties are working a coalition of parties.
PA leader Sitiveni Rabuka says they will be launching the petition in a few days.
The five leaders are also now saying they agree that manual count has been happening but they do not want the use of the results software and also the app.
“The constitutional responsibility of the RFMF section 131.2 does not make any reference to intervening or getting involved with the electoral processes or management of voting or counting of votes with the assistance of the military,” he said.
Kalouniwai explained that using the military in any form during the electoral process is unconstitutional.
“The RFMF will leave it in the good hands of those responsible of the electoral process under the 2013 constitution.”
The Commander went on to say the constitution has other avenues that the opposition parties can resort to when seeking redress.
“In this instance, I urge any dispute with reference to the electoral process be referred to the Supervisor of Elections, the Electoral Commission and the Court of Disputed Returns. These are the various organisations that deal with all electoral matters.”
The statement comes after a group of opposition party leaders called for a halt to vote counting on Thursday, demanding an audit of the country’s electoral system.
It was triggered by an anomaly in provisional results that was displayed on a Fiji Election Office results app on Wednesday night.
The app was taken offline for several hours and then restarted in the early hours of Thursday showing an almost unassailable lead for the ruling Fiji First Party over all other parties.
Speaking for a group of political parties at a media conference in Suva on Thursday, PAP leader Sitiveni Rabuka said the anomaly raised questions about the integrity of the entire electoral system.
Meanwhile, five political parties have today launched a petition to gather support in their quest to prove the election results are not free and fair.
The People’s Alliance, National Federation Party, Fiji Labor Part, Unity Fiji, and We Unite parties are working a coalition of parties.
PA leader Sitiveni Rabuka says they will be launching the petition in a few days.
The five leaders are also now saying they agree that manual count has been happening but they do not want the use of the results software and also the app.
