Are we really a Constitutional Monarchy? [1]
Sunday, February 12, 2006 - 09:42. Updated on Wednesday, September 17, 2014 - 15:11.
Dear Editor,
If the general consensus is for Tonga to have a new political system then two questions must feature in public discussions and debates. What do we transform to? What do we transform from? This piece endeavors to answer the second question.
Tonga is described by her government, albeit others, as a Constitutional Monarchy. If that description is correct then the Constitution of Tonga (the Constitution) should mark a political transformation from Absolute to Constitutional Monarchy. As shown below, none of the history of Tonga, the nature of her political system, and the Constitution, supports the claim that Tonga is a Constitution Monarchy.
The fundamental difference between an Absolute Monarchy and a Constitutional Monarchy lies in the possession or the distribution of the ultimate political power or sovereign power. An Absolute Monarchy has the sovereign power in the King and monarchical supremacy rules. A Constitutional Monarchy, in contrast, rests the sovereign power in the people, which manifests in parliamentary supremacy.
Origin of Absolute Authority and Divine Kingship
The first Tu'i Tonga, 'Aho'eitu, was revered as half-spiritual. The early Roman Catholic missionaries in Tonga noted the local acceptance of 'Aho'eitu and the notion of Divine Kingship: "In ['Aho'eitu and his heirs] the civil and political power is exalted and sanctified by the divine power; wherefore their authority is boundless" ("Church and the State" Latukefu, 1974: 2). 'Aho'eitu was generally accepted by the populace as having acquired, by divine right, both absolute sovereignty and political legitimacy. Divine Kingship and Absolute Monarchy became the traditional polity in Tonga.
The Constitutional Monarchy Claim
Advocates contend that Tonga has been a Constitutional Monarchy since the ratification of the Constitution in 1875. They invoke King Tupou I who, in his opening speech of the Parliament of 1875, said: "The form of our Government in the days past was that my rule was absolute, and that my wish was law.... But that, it appears to me, was a sign of darkness ... it is my wish to grant a Constitution and to carry on my duties in accordance with it ...." (Latukefu 1974: 204)
Furthermore, they assert that the political power is no longer centralized in the King:
"Another departure from the traditional Tongan system was the adoption of a constitutional monarchy, a departure both in its degree of centralization and in the acceptance of limits to the King's authority in the rule of law.... [The King] could no longer lawfully act on his own in matters of political importance without the approval of either the Cabinet, the Privy Council or the Legislative Assembly." (Latukefu 1974: 210)
Rebutting the claim
The claim that Tonga, since the ratification of the Constitution, is a Constitutional Monarchy fails to hold up in three respects. Firstly, the theoretical framework of Tonga's current monarchical system is not compatible with the theoretical basis of Absolute Monarchy. Secondly, the claim relies on a narrow interpretation of the Constitution. Thirdly, the claim lacks historical evidence.
1. Theoretical Analysis
If Tonga was a Constitutional Monarchy then her political system should reconcile with the Populist Theory of Government, which holds that the ultimate political power resides in the people. Corresponding to that theory is a democratic system of government that enforces popular sovereignty and parliamentary supremacy. The elected Government, by a process of partial delegation of political power, is granted by the people, limited and sufficient power to govern. The residual power, the ultimate political power or sovereign power, remains in the people.
The theoretical framework of Tonga's monarchical system is, however, compatible with the theoretical underpinning of an Absolute Monarchy, the Theocratic Theory of Government, which has the ultimate political power in the King, by divine right. Such political systems entail monarchical supremacy. Parliament is subordinate to the King whose wish, as the holder of the ultimate political power, is the constitution and fundamental law of the land.
2. Constitutional Interpretation
The Constitution, apologists for the Constitutional Monarchy claim would argue, places certain limitations on the King's power by virtue of, for example, Clauses 36, 37, and 39, where the King requires the consent of the Privy Council and the Legislative Assembly in certain matters. The force of those clauses, however, is severely compromised by other limbs of the Constitution, such as Clauses 38 and 51. Those two Clauses cultivate the social forces of loyalty and patronage which render Ministers and Nobles subservient to the King, for their political survival. Thus, if the Constitution was ever meant to limit the authority of the King and to decentralize the political power then it is an ineffective and self-defeating instrument.
Clause 31 of the Constitution states: "The form of Government for this Kingdom is a Constitutional Government under His Majesty King Taufa'ahau, his heirs and successors." On account of Clauses 31 and 41, the following can be said about the political system of Tonga: The Government must act in accordance with the Constitution, which is the wish of the Sovereign, the King. The King is above both the Constitution and the Government. As Dr Guy Powles of Monash University, writes: "In the guise of a 'constitutional monarchy', an expression used by historians and commentators to describe ... [Tupou I's] achievement, he had created a constitution under a monarchy." (Herda et al (eds.) 1990: 155)
3. Historical Context
The history of Tonga's traditional political system is one of Divine Kingship and Absolute Monarchy. The sovereign power has always been residing in the King since the rule of 'Aho'eitu in around 950. There may have been some power-sharing between the Tu'i Tonga, Tu'i Ha'atakalaua, and Tu'i Kanokupolu, and actual power may have briefly rested with some powerful local chiefs in their own areas, but the commoners have never been a party in the sharing of political power. Commoners were simply regarded as political non-entities and social lowlife creatures or kainangaefonua.
When Taufa'ahau became Tu'i Kanokupolu Tupou I, he inherited the divine right to the sovereign power by obtaining the blessing and approval of his predecessor and great-uncle, Tu'i Kanokupolu Aleamotu'a. Vested with traditional political legitimacy, Tupou I transformed Tonga from her traditional absolute monarchical system to a Western absolute monarchical system where his wish became the Constitution and fundamental law of Tonga. In the traditional political system, the wish of the King was the command of his subjects. History tells of some horrific prerogatives where commoners were put to their deaths for the sheer pleasure of the King. The adoption of the Western monarchical system, with its systems of political processes and procedures, rules and regulations, and regard for international relations and politics, put a stop to arbitrariness and cruelty in the King's rule.
Conclusion
The adopted Western absolute monarchical system may have created a more stable political system and produced less uncertainty in governance but the ultimate political power still resides in the King. The Constitution codifies the essence of Tonga's traditional Divine Kingship and protects monarchical supremacy. It marks a shift in degree but not a transformation from Absolute to Constitutional Monarchy. Tonga, since 'Aho...eitu, has always been, in the traditional form before the Constitution and in the Western form at the ratification of the Constitution, an Absolute Monarchy.
Lisiate Ikaafu
Sydney , Australia