Abstract
The judgment in Qarase v. Bainimarama provided a legal basis for the 2006 military coup in Fiji and stated that the President was entitled to grant authority to the military to act outside of the powers prescribed by the written Constitution. According to the ruling, the Royal Prerogative powers that remained in government following British rule could be utilised by the President at any time that he considered it necessary. This paper explores the rationale for that judgment and the role that Royal Prerogative powers may play in the governance of countries that were previously subject to British rule. It further considers the impact of this judgment upon democracy in Fiji and the future protection of human rights for its citizens.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Paragraph [32]
Paragraph [55]
Law of the Constitution 10th Edit p. 424
It was held by Lord Reid in the Burma Oil case, also relied upon by Gates, that this quotation “[did] not take us very far” p. 99
Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 1902
A position adopted by Ong Hock Thye F.J. in his dissenting judgment in the Federal Court Appeal stage of the Ningkan v. Government of Malaysia [1968] 1 M.L.J. 119 at 126.
Constitution of Fiji s. 86
Page 86
Page 55
Paragraph [132]
Paragraph [128]
Fourth edition, reissue 1996 paragraph 370
Fiji Sun, 9th October 2008
Paragraph 79, Qarase and Ors v. Bainimarama and Ors ABU0077 [2008]S
Paragraph 84, as above
Court order number 2, as above
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bache, A. Qarase v. Bainimarama: the End of Democratic Rule in Fiji?. Hum Rights Rev 11, 357–371 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-009-0134-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-009-0134-2