Fiji and the franchise : a history of political representation, 1900-1937
Abstract
This thesis attempts to explain the nature of the Crown Colony
constitution of Fiji. Hence it concentrates on the demands of the
inhabitants of the Colony and the response of the rulers. The
problem that confronted the rulers was a complex one in that, they nad
to deal with the conflicting aspirations of three distinct communities.
The nature of these demands for representation in the Legislative,
Executive and Municipal Councils, are analysed in some detail as well
as the steps that were taken by the administration in response. This
thesis explores the reasons that motivated the political demands oi trie
various ethnic groups and shows how far these were realized. Further
the methods whereby the rulers reached their decisions, and their
motives for these, are examined and commented upon. Thus the work
endeavours to throw some light on political aspects of colonial
constitution-making in a plural society by its discussion and analysis
of the often conflicting interplay of the political aspirations of the
contending ethnic groups.
Since the issue of the franchise in Fiji was largely a struggle
for political rights first for Europeans and then for Indians, thesetwo
groups receive the greatest attention. Chapters I and II discuss
European efforts to obtain the franchise and then on receipt of it to
consolidate the political position of the community. The original
European intention of obtaining democratic representative government
is modified when Indians begin to agitate for political rights. The
next two chapters (III and IV) discuss tne Indians’ political
awakening and the Government's efforts to enfranchise' them. The
discussion in Chapter IV highlights the constraints upon the
Government in enfranchising the Indians. The dissatisfaction
(Chapter V) of some Indians with the nature of the franchise granted
Lo them opens a new source of conflict, the constitutional implications
of which are discussed in Chapters VII, VIII and IX.
Since the Fijians were not the proponents cf constitutional change
they receive considerably less attention. But they cannot be ignored,as their presence and rights were the crucial determinants in the
process of political change in their native land. Hence they are the
subject of Chapter VI which concentrates on describing and explaining
Fijian aspirations and reactions. But the chapters that follow also
take full cognizance of the Fijian point of view and assess its impact.
Seen from this dimension the thesis studies European-Indian political
goals in relation to the native position and the doctrine of the
paramountcy of Fijian interests which was in existence in this
Pacific colony much earlier than it was enunciated in 1923 in Africa.
Chapters VII, VIII and IX are essentially concerned with the
consequences of the enfranchisement of the Indians. the Indians found
the communal franchise granted to them inadequate. Instead they
demanded a common franchise (one man one vote) and they pursued
this with a single-mindedness that split their own community ana
angered and frightened both Europeans and Fijians. Chapter VII, on
Muslim separatism illustrates that c mimon roll was as unpalatable to
a significant Indian minority as it was to Fijians and Europeans. Ihe
reaction of the anti-common roll elements including the colonial
regime was to seek the total abolition of the elective principle, both
in t.he Municipal boards of Suva and Levuica and in the Legislative
Council. Chapters VIII and IX detail the steps towards constitutional
retrogression and attempt to fathom the reasons behind the action.
While the municipal franchise was abolished the compromise authorized
by the Secretary of State for the Colonies preserved the elective
principle in the Legislative Council though nomination of candidates
by the Governor was re-introduced. Chapter IX concludes witn an
examination of demographic and economic factors that aroused European
and Fijian anxiety.
The Conclusion (Chapter X) briefly sums up what the earlier
chapters have discussed in considerable detail. It admits that the
colonial regime was prepared to grant communal franenise to both
Europeans initially and to Indians later. The Government was, moreover,
'willing to allay the fears of minorities such as tne Europeans and
Muslims. But it was unwilling to concede to a common franchise
demanded by a vocal section of the Indian community because this was
repudiated by a majority of others as it presaged Indian political
domination which threatened the very basis of colonial policy in the
colony. In all its decisions the regime remained true to its original
undertaking that in Fiji, Fijian interests were paramount.