Gone Turaga Bale na Tui Nayau Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba Mara has backed the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC), Fiji’s assembly of iTaukei chiefs, as Parliament takes up the Constitution Review Commission report. FBC News, the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation’s news service, carried his comments on 28 September 2026, as debate on the report opened in the House in Suva.
The high chief said he fully supports GCC chairman Ratu Viliame Seruvakula and the consultation the Council ran with chiefs from all 14 provinces, FBC News reported. Ratu Tevita holds no seat in Parliament: his intervention carries chiefly weight rather than a vote.
Key facts
- Ratu Tevita has publicly backed the GCC and its chairman as MPs begin debating the Constitution Review Commission report, according to FBC News.
- FBC News describes the Council’s consultation as “genuine and culturally grounded” and says it involved 278 chiefs from all 14 provinces — a figure Fiji News has not independently verified.
- The chairman has said the Council accepted the review’s outcome “including areas where it did not succeed”; which submissions fell away has not been reported.
- The Council has no role in the 2013 Constitution that MPs are debating.
What the Tui Nayau said — and what he did not
FBC News largely paraphrases the Tui Nayau rather than publishing his remarks at length. Only short phrases appear inside quotation marks: the consultation is “genuine and culturally grounded”, and MPs are asked to bring “gravity and generosity of spirit” to the debate, handling it with respect and humility, with the focus on Fiji’s future.
The rest is reported indirectly. According to FBC, he said the Council deserves recognition for accepting the Commission’s findings even where its own submissions were not fully carried through, that protection of iTaukei identity, land and customs should not be read as opposition to other communities, and that in standing with his people he stands for all of Fiji.
He is not reported to have asked for any specific amendment, vote or timetable. FBC records no response from any government or opposition MP, and Fiji News has not obtained the full text of the remarks.
A chiefly body arguing from outside the document
The context that gives the endorsement its edge is the Council’s own legal position. Under the 1997 Constitution it appointed Fiji’s President and a bloc of senators. It was suspended in 2007, disestablished by decree in 2012, and omitted entirely from the 2013 Constitution. The Rabuka coalition government repealed the 2012 decree and the Council reconvened in 2023 — restored by ordinary legislative action rather than by constitutional text.
So the chiefs are being consulted on constitutional reform as a body with standing in custom and none in the document itself. FBC’s account does not say whether the Commission recommended restoring a formal role for the Council.
The chairman’s framing — acceptance “including areas where it did not succeed” — implies that the Commission’s text and the chiefs’ submissions part company somewhere. That inference is this report’s reading, not a claim made by the chairman or by FBC, and neither source identifies which submissions were declined.
The numbers in the House
Chapter 11 of the 2013 Constitution, as drafted, sets a two-stage amendment test: three-quarters of all members of Parliament, then three-quarters of registered voters at a referendum. The second figure is measured against the roll rather than turnout.
On the published results of elections held under that Constitution, no party has won three-quarters of the seats. On this report’s reading, that is why an appeal addressed explicitly to both sides of the chamber is more than a plea for good manners — cross-bench votes are arithmetically unavoidable for any amendment. FBC does not make that argument and does not say which amendment route the government intends to take.
House composition is therefore inseparable from the report’s fate. If MPs do not act before the next election, the same test falls to a differently constituted chamber; Fiji News has reported that NFP leader Biman Prasad has said Lenora Qereqeretabua may not contest the next election, one instance of that turnover. Recommendations such as the review’s call for a new parliament and an end to coup immunity would require the full supermajority. FBC’s report does not itemise which recommendations MPs are debating first.
iTaukei identity, land and customs
Ratu Tevita said constitutional protection for iTaukei interests should provide a foundation for national unity while recognising the rights and belonging of all Fijians, FBC News reported — protection framed as a basis for unity rather than a claim against other communities.
The argument over custom is not confined to constitutional wording. Fiji News earlier reported claims that foreign researchers “poach” Fiji indigenous knowledge, a dispute about who controls iTaukei knowledge in practice. What the House writes into the document would set the terms on which such claims can later be pressed.
How this was sourced
This report rests on a single published account: FBC News’ story of 28 September 2026. Fiji News has not obtained a second published report, a Council statement, a Hansard record or an attendance list corroborating the chiefs figure, the chairman’s quoted position or the Tui Nayau’s remarks. The historical material above is drawn from the public record and offered as background, not as FBC reporting. Readers should weight the story accordingly until a second account appears.
What is not yet clear
- Which GCC submissions the Commission declined, and how far apart the Council and the report actually are.
- Whether the Commission recommended restoring any constitutional role for the Great Council of Chiefs.
- The debate timetable, and which amendment route the government intends to rely on.
- Whether any MP has responded to Ratu Tevita’s intervention, and the names of the Commission’s members, neither of which FBC reports.
Fiji News will update this report if the Great Council of Chiefs, Parliament or a second outlet publishes material that confirms, corrects or extends the account above.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is the Tui Nayau, and what standing does he have in this debate?
Tui Nayau is the paramount chiefly title of the Lau Group, held by Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba Mara and rendered in full as Gone Turaga Bale na Tui Nayau. It is a traditional title, not a public office: he holds no seat in Parliament and no role in the Constitution Review Commission, and FBC News reports no official capacity for him beyond his chiefly title. His intervention therefore carries chiefly authority within the iTaukei structure but no vote on the report MPs are considering.
Does the Great Council of Chiefs exist in law, and can it be abolished again?
The Council exists today because the Rabuka coalition government repealed the 2012 decree that had disestablished it — an ordinary legislative act, not a constitutional amendment. The 2013 Constitution itself contains no reference to the body. On this report’s reading, that means the Council’s legal existence rests on the same kind of instrument that removed it in 2012 and could be reversed by a future government without touching the Constitution; FBC News does not address the point, and does not say whether the Commission recommended writing the Council back into the text.
What majority would be needed to change Fiji’s 2013 Constitution?
As drafted, Chapter 11 sets two tests: three-quarters of all members of Parliament, then three-quarters of registered voters at a referendum. The second figure is measured against the electoral roll rather than against votes actually cast, so non-voters count against an amendment in the same way as opponents. FBC News’ report does not say which amendment route the government intends to pursue, or whether the Commission proposed altering the threshold itself.
How well verified is this account?
It rests on one published report: FBC News’ story of 28 September 2026. Fiji News has not obtained a Great Council of Chiefs attendance list, a parliamentary Hansard record, a Council statement or a second published account. The figure of 278 chiefs, the chairman’s quoted position and the Tui Nayau’s remarks are all FBC’s reporting, and the full text of his remarks has not been published. The historical material in this report comes from the public record, not from FBC.
