The ruling by the Fijian Court of Appeal could have gone only one way. The case turned on whether the 1997 constitution was still in force, or was abrogated by the military commander after last year's coup. The presiding judge, Sir Maurice Casey, remarked during the hearing that the court accepted the legitimacy of the 1997 constitution and was sitting on that basis.
Nevertheless, there is a difficult question. Constitutions should not be thrown aside simply because one group or other does not like a Government that the constitution has permitted.
But neither should it be overlooked that the purpose of a constitution is to produce Governments that people can accept, though not necessarily support. A constitution that cannot produce broadly acceptable Governments is not worth keeping.
The question in Fiji is whether the Government overthrown at gunpoint last May was unacceptable to indigenous Fijians at large or only to a disgruntled group led by George Speight. And if it concluded that most ethnic Fijians could not accept a Government led by an Indo-Fijian, what then?
Racial distinctions should not be a feature of a democratic system but they already figure in the constitution devised for Fiji a few years ago. The interim Government, now declared illegitimate by the courts, wanted the constitution altered to ensure that the prime minister is always an indigenous Fijian.
