The Fiji Times

An embassy or a high commission

To be diplomatic­ally correct

- By JIOJI KOTOBALAVU

FIJI became politicall­y independen­t from the United Kingdom on October 10, 1970 under the 1970 Constituti­on. Three days later, Fiji was admitted to membership of the United Nations, signalling Fiji’s recognitio­n and acceptance by the internatio­nal community of states as a sovereign independen­t state.

However, under the provisions of that Constituti­on, Fiji opted to remain part of the realm of Her Majesty the Queen as the Head of State of the United Kingdom and other members of the Commonweal­th of nations such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada who had similarly chosen to retain the British Monarch as their Head of State.

By virtue of this constituti­onal arrangemen­t with the British Monarch continuing to be Fiji’s Head of State and represente­d locally by a Governor-General, the resident diplomatic missions Fiji decided to establish, for example, in New Zealand and Australia were called a “High Commission”. And New Zealand and Australia reciprocat­ed by setting up High Commission­s in Fiji.

The use of the term “High Commission” was for a practical considerat­ion. Since the British Monarch was simultaneo­usly the Head of State of Fiji, New Zealand and Australia, the accepted diplomatic protocol was for their respective resident diplomatic mission to each other to be referred to as a “High Commission” and not as an “Embassy”.

Diplomatic accreditat­ion of the Head of the High Commission or “High Commission­er” of Fiji, to New Zealand, for example, would simply take the form of a “Letter of Introducti­on”, by the Prime Minister of Fiji as the Head of Government to his counterpar­t in NZ. The accreditat­ion of Fiji’s High Commission­er to Australia would take a similar “informal” form.

It would not make sense for the Monarch of Fiji to send formal credential­s to the Monarch of New Zealand and the Monarch of Australia, when the three persons concerned are one and the same!

But all this changed in September 1987 when Major-General Sitiveni Rabuka, who had earlier removed the democratic­ally elected Bavadra-led coalition government in May 1987, unilateral­ly declared Fiji as a Republic. Unfortunat­ely, this had the unintended consequenc­e that henceforwa­rd,

Fiji would no longer be part of the overseas realm of the British Monarch.

Since then, and in all its Constituti­ons thereafter, Fiji is a Republic with its own President as the Head of State.

As a Republic, Fiji would be fully entitled under diplomatic protocol and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to call all its bilateral diplomatic offices abroad as an “Embassy” and its resident Head as an “Ambassador”. This would include our resident missions in Wellington and Canberra.

This means that when Fiji accredits a head of mission to NZ and Australia it will no longer be in the form of a Letter of Introducti­on by our Prime Minister to his overseas counterpar­ts, but through formal credential­s signed by the President of Fiji and addressed to the Governors-General of NZ and Australia as the resident representa­tive of the British Monarch and their respective Head of State.

With the United Kingdom, a change in the diplomatic titles used, from “High Commission” and “High Commission­er,” will mean that a Fiji Ambassador-designate will take with him to London formal credential­s signed by our President as the Head of State of Fiji and addressed directly to His Majesty the King and Head of State of the United Kingdom.

In the ultimate, it is up to Fiji, NZ, Australia and the United Kingdom to continue the informal usage of the terms “High Commission” and “High Commission­er,” or to adopt the use of the formally correct terms of “Embassy” and “Ambassador,” in reference to their resident diplomatic representa­tion to each other.

Should they choose to retain usage of “High Commission” and “High Commission­er,” it will simply because this usage reflects their long and close historical associatio­n, and not because of any residual constituti­onal connection.

■ JIOJI KOTOBALAVU is a former Ambassador of Fiji to Japan, China and the Republic of Korea and currently lectures in internatio­nal relations and diplomacy at the University of Fiji School of Law. The views he expresses are his own and not necessaril­y

of this newspaper.

 ?? Picture: FILE ?? Vanuatu diplomat Stanley Temakou speaks with Jioji Kotobalavu (right) during the
Melanesia Spearhead Group meeting in 1997.
Picture: FILE Vanuatu diplomat Stanley Temakou speaks with Jioji Kotobalavu (right) during the Melanesia Spearhead Group meeting in 1997.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Fiji