One can understand the realpolitik motive for wanting to ensure strong and stable government, but for the Fiji Human Rights Commission to recognize – and indeed encourage – a political oversight role for the military is imprudent, as experience in Latin America and elsewhere has shown. Condemnation of a government for its actions is one thing, but to encourage the military to adopt the role of final arbiter is fraught with dangers.

The military owes its allegiance to the duly constituted civil authorities, and it is not for the armed forces to question the actions of the political leadership, or to purport to sit in judgement upon them. In an environment of the increasing politicization of the military, the actions of Commodore Bainimarama are not particularly surprising. But for the Commission to back the military is a serious blow for the long-term development not merely of democracy, but of the rule of law, in Fiji. It remains to the legal profession to educate the population – and perhaps most importantly, the military and political leadership – on questions of basic constitutional principles.