Naidu Calls for Moving Beyond Coup Immunity Debate

Prominent lawyer Richard Naidu has argued that constitutional immunity for past coup perpetrators should remain, saying removing it may have little practical effect and would not necessarily deter future coups.

In a Facebook post, Naidu said the debate needed to move beyond rhetoric and consider what immunity provisions actually do.

He explained that the clauses protect coup perpetrators from prosecution or damages claims over past actions, rather than granting protection to anyone who stages a coup in the future.

Naidu said removing immunity could lead to complaints against Sitiveni Rabuka and Frank Bainimarama. However, any investigation or prosecution would depend on decisions by police and the Director of Public Prosecutions.

He said those independent authorities would need to consider whether action was justified, including whether prosecution would serve the public interest after the passage of time.

Naidu also argued that people seeking civil damages could face legal time limits, given how long ago the coups occurred.

On that basis, he suggested removing immunity might produce little practical change.

He questioned whether deleting the provisions would discourage future coup perpetrators, noting that anyone attempting to overthrow a government already risked prosecution for treason.

A successful coup leader could subsequently replace the Constitution and introduce fresh immunity for their own actions, he argued.

Naidu said retaining the existing provisions would draw a line under the past and allow greater attention to Fiji’s future.

He warned that two decades of inaction on basic issues had left the country facing challenges greater than many people understood.