Recent development highlights need to understand Tonga’s fledgling democracy and the role of Monarch

Op-Ed

By Tevita Motulalo

Yesterday news of His Majesty firing and withholding of high level ministerial portfolios from Cabinet appointees stirred up fervour that His Majesty King Tupou VI is rolling back progress on Tonga’s democracy journey.

This is not only far from the truth, it is intentionally misleading, and amounts to misinformation and mal-information cycles causing harm and confusion against Tonga and the Tongan government. That confusion is setback to the progress of democratisation and inability of the civil society to effectively check on governance and leaders’ actions.

Some background

In the previous weeks, Cabinet made submissions for new Cabinet Ministerial appointments including for former Director of Health Dr. Siale Akauola for the new Minister of Health replacing Dr. Saia Piukala who’s taken up a new role as WHO Regional Director for the Western Pacific.

Akauola’s appointment was the only one of three submitted by Cabinet, and one of the other two included Moale Finau (Haapai District MP) for Minister of Tourism, the portfolio was till last week held by Fekita Utoikamanu who also was Minister for Foreign Affairs.

The King did not assent to Moale Finau’s appointment. However, the signal was clear: PM and Cabinet would like to relieve Fekita of the Tourism Ministry.

For her part as Minister for Foreign Affairs, Fekita Utoikamanu recently sent the Ministry into disarray and a host of court problems that did not bode well for her tenure, especially as government’s Principal Diplomat, responsible for menial stuff like harbouring good relations.

Initially in the formation of the government, the Prime Minister did not have a nomination for the Foreign Minister role, and the King proposed Utoikamanu who had recently been Tonga’s Ambassador to the UN in New York.

In the previous weeks, apparently Cabinet had voted among themselves to ‘decommission’ Utoikamanu as “they did not see her doing anything useful for government” according to sources.

Minister bogged by Petty Office Politics

Previously the Courts ruled in favour of a former Deputy Secretary of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who the Minister caused to be fired by the Public Service Commission.

The dismissal was allegedly because the Minister emailed the Deputy Secretary and the (chief) Secretary of Foreign Affairs to book urgent flights for her, and not only did the Secretary and the Deputy did not respond, the flights weren’t booked.

The Deputy took the Public Service Commission to the Courts, and won. It was a big humiliation for the Minister in the public trust.

Her failure to oversee that minor problem and ultimately blew up in such a prestigious institution as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs did harm the Ministry’s veneer and lacklustre and maybe even spoke to her own competence as a leader and Diplomat.

CEO over the Secretary of Foreign Affairs

There are some technical issues in the above case, including but not limited to the fact that the de facto chief executive of the Foreign Ministry has the title of “Secretary”. But its important to note that in most cases, the words “Director”, “Secretary”, and “CEO” are all somewhat synonymous in the public lexicon, even though only the word and title of CEO is acknowledged in the Public Service Act.

The Courts emphasised this fact articulating the law’s clear definition, although neglecting the de facto nature and tradition through which the role has evolved. Since the reforms of 2010, the King retained his prerogative to choose and appoint the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, whilst the Prime Minister was allowed by law to propose the person to be Minister.

Cabinet thus moved on the opportunity and proposed a new CEO for Foreign Affairs, Paula Ma’u, who is currently Chief Secretary (Chief of Staff) and Secretary to Cabinet.

His Majesty declined the appointment of Paula Ma‘u, but here the government is in another predicament in direct contravention of the established relationship between the government and the state, between politicians and King.

Even the radical left PTOA government of the late Akilisi Pohiva kept a fair distance and delicate touch when came to Foreign Affairs senior appointments.

Understanding the Complexity of Government: Ministers for State, Security, and Strategic Affairs

The public discourse on government and governance and how it relates to the democratisation process.

The push for political change that resulted in the riots in 2006, not only encompassed genuine public need for reform but also harboured radical elements that justified political violence.

The problem was with extreme radicalisation and partisanship.

In the ensuing years, that lesson has been learnt. The public green square of Pangai Si’i was occupied by the government due to its proximity to the Prime Minister’s Office and the Palace and Palace Offices. The Chinese was then allowed to build the St George Palace now the new Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Offices, and the central government building.

It must be acknowledged that His Majesty is still legitimately the reigning monarch, the Head of State, and the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Services.

For those that know, this is not a problem, but for the rest that still ask or misinform the public, all the services relating to the purview of the Head of State and his responsibilities as Commander- In-Chief must know, that there are other relevant Ministries congruent with those roles.

As Head of State, Foreign Policy is part and partial his role. High Commissioners and Ambassadors are sent forth in his charge. And Foreign Policy is not limited to the Foreign Ministry, but especially including the Strategic and Security Services including the Armed Services, Police, the National Reserve Bank, the Finance and Trade Ministries, and of course the Prime Minister’s Office.