A disputed election result in Fiji is a reminder of something that countries such as ours with a long democratic tradition take for granted. We suffer not the slightest doubt that if there is a clear result of our election today, all parties will accept it. Apart from an occasional demand for a recount in seats where the numbers are very close, the election will not be challenged. It is worth pausing to consider how remarkable this is.
Politics is not a game. Those who bid for power are utterly convinced they understand our needs and national interests better than their rivals. They have invested weeks, months, years of effort in most cases, to make their appeal to the voters today. None of them finds it easy to believe that the majority of voters might not see the merits of their argument and programme as clearly as they do. But if the election says otherwise, so be it.
In places where democracy has not taken root it is a hard plant to establish, partly because those who lose elections are too ready to challenge the integrity of the poll. Too often they are right. Autocratic rulers who submit to an election are quite likely to decide their merit, or their self-interest, justifies undermining the ballot. The likelihood is so great that accusations against them of electoral fraud always have credibility. If the delicate flower is to be nurtured it cannot afford those accusations to be made without cause.
On Wednesday, Fiji held its first election on a hard road back to democracy. Former coup leader Frank Bainimarama leads a political party which appeared to have won 60 per cent of the vote before all the ballots had been counted.
An international group of election observers says it has seen no evidence of fraud. Yet the five other parties contesting the election announced on Thursday they would not accept the result, alleging vote rigging.
