Fiji’s land laws are no longer fit for a modern economy

Fiji today is classified as an upper-middle-income economy. 

Yet our land laws remain anchored in colonial-era thinking. 

This contradiction lies at the heart of many of the economic frustrations faced by indigenous landowners and, ultimately, the nation as a whole.

The State Lands Act 1945 and the Land Use Act 2010 form the backbone of land governance in Fiji. 

Together, they determine who controls land, how it is valued, and how it is used. 

While enacted in different eras, both laws share a fundamental weakness: they treat land as an administrative resource managed by the State rather than as capital held by communities and capable of generating long-term wealth.

Under the current framework, indigenous landowners are largely confined to being passive rent recipients. 

Valuation is driven by bureaucratic convenience instead of economic potential. Decision-making remains highly centralised and detached from the land and its owners. This approach may have suited a colonial administration or a low-income economy. It is wholly inappropriate for Fiji today.

In a modern economy, land is collateral, equity, and a foundation for productivity and intergenerational wealth. 

When land is systematically undervalued, its owners are denied access to finance, excluded from development, and locked out of national growth.

Excessive centralisation and undervaluation

The State Lands Act 1945 vests sweeping discretionary powers in the Minister responsible for lands, with little transparency, no independent valuation requirements, and no decentralised oversight. 

This concentration of authority is outdated and inconsistent with good governance. Land administration must be devolved to regional or divisional bodies with statutory authority, bringing decision-making closer to local realities and reducing political discretion.

Equally troubling is the absence of a statutory valuation framework. State land is frequently leased at artificially low administrative rates, which then become market benchmarks that suppress the value of indigenous land across the economy. 

This distortion entrenches inequality and undermines national productivity. 

Fiji urgently needs valuation standards based on highest and best use, independent professional assessment, and regular revaluation aligned with infrastructure and economic growth.

Crown land with no remaining public purpose

Across Fiji, large areas of Crown land were acquired for specific public purposes that have long since ceased. 

Many of these lands now lie idle or have been converted into commercial leases, yet the law provides no mechanism to review or return them once their original purpose has expired.

This reflects a colonial doctrine of permanent Crown ownership that has no place in a modern democracy. 

Land should not remain indefinitely under State control simply for administrative convenience or revenue generation. 

Where public purpose has lapsed, there must be a transparent process to return land to the relevant indigenous landowning units, with clear safeguards and dispute-resolution mechanisms.

Addressing historical injustice

Neither the State Lands Act nor the Land Use Act provides an independent forum to examine colonial land acquisition, administrative dispossession, or prolonged State retention of land beyond its original justification. As a result, legitimate grievances persist, trust in institutions erodes, and disputes are displaced into political processes ill-suited to deliver justice.

Fiji requires an independent National Land Tribunal Commission empowered to investigate historical land matters, hear claims using documentary and customary evidence, and recommend binding remedies—whether reversion, compensation, or lease revision. 

Correcting historical land injustice is not retrospective charity; it is an act of governance maturity. Legality without legitimacy cannot endure.

The need for one parent law for all land leases

A further structural failure in Fiji’s land system is the fragmentation of land lease laws. 

Leasing arrangements are currently governed by multiple statutes and administrative regimes that overlap, contradict one another, and apply inconsistent valuation and consent standards.

This fragmented framework suppresses land value, creates uncertainty, and allows regulatory arbitrage—where the most convenient legal pathway is chosen rather than the most equitable or economically sound one.

To correct this, the Land Use Act must be reviewed and elevated to become the single parent law governing all land leases in Fiji, regardless of land classification.

Under such a reform:

• The Land Use Act would establish uniform national principles for leasing, valuation, consent, revenue-sharing, and dispute resolution;
• All other statutory provisions governing land leases would be repealed or rendered subordinate where inconsistent; and
• No land lease would be valid unless compliant with the Land Use Act as the supreme leasing framework.

This does not abolish customary ownership or State ownership. Rather, it creates a coherent legal hierarchy that treats land consistently as economic capital while protecting landowner rights and providing certainty for investors.

A single parent leasing law would prevent systematic undervaluation, standardise consent and escalation mechanisms, strengthen accountability, and ensure landowners participate meaningfully in economic growth.

Decentralisation and real  economic participation

The Land Use Act 2010, particularly through the Land Use Bank, has further entrenched centralised control. 

While iTaukei ownership is formally retained, real authority over leasing, pricing, and development is transferred to the State. 

Undeveloped land is valued on present use rather than future potential, and lease structures prioritise investor certainty while confining landowners to fixed returns.

If Fiji is serious about development, landowners must move beyond fixed rent. Profit-sharing, equity participation, and growth-linked lease models should be standard options. 

 Legal immunities that shield valuation and consent processes from scrutiny must also be narrowed to allow judicial review.

At its core, land reform must be guided by decentralisation. 

Decision-making must move closer to landowning communities and provincial institutions. 

This is not merely administrative—it is essential if land is to function as productive capital rather than dormant acreage.

Conclusion

If Fiji’s upper-middle-income status is to mean anything in real terms, indigenous land must appreciate in value, landowners must share in economic growth, and land must be recognised as a driver of national prosperity.

The current legal framework fails these tests.

Without decentralisation, modern valuation, the return of unused Crown land, a credible mechanism for historical redress, and a single parent law governing land leases, Fiji’s land regime will continue to constrain indigenous wealth creation and undermine genuine economic progress.

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in the article are of the author alone and not of Fiji Sun and/or its employees.