Prime Minister John Key has left New Zealand for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in the republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

Predictably, Australians for Constitutional Monarchy backs Fijian dictator Commodore Frank Bainimarama's call for the restoration of the Queen as Fiji's head of State. They also go further, calling for a Royal mediator to help with Fiji's transition back to democracy. Once gain, the monarchists have made a poor attempt at backing monarchy as a form of government, and in ignorance of the situation in Fiji. For starters, the ACM also doesn't know its history very well:

Fijian was declared a republic during the first coup in 1987, but as Her Majesty herself observed, this was done without reference to the Fijian people. Her Majesty said she was "sad to think that the ending of the Fijian allegiance to the Crown should have been brought about without the people of Fiji being given an opportunity to express their opinion on the proposal."

In actual fact, the Queen wasn't removed as Fiji's head of State until the second coup of 1987. The first coup overthrew Fiji's Parliament and executive government. This is important because, following the first coup which overthrew the Fijian Labour government of Timoci Bavadra, the Governor-General of Fiji Penaia Ganilau fired Bavadra and appointed the leader of the opposition as Prime Minister (Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara). The Governor-General attempted to negotiate with the coup plotters (despite the Fijian Court of Appeal declaring the coup illegal), led by New Zealand-trained Colonel Rabuka. When Rabuka couldn't get what he wanted - that is, Fiji's constitution annulled by the Queen's representative - he overthrew the Governor-General and the monarchy (Ganilau was later made Fiji's first President, however).

In this setting it was never likely the Fijian people would be asked if they wanted to keep the monarchy or become a republic. It is ironic then that the latest self-installed leader of Fiji is arguing for a reversal of another self-installed leaders' decision. Either way, the people of Fiji have never had a say.

Secondly, they claim that Fiji would vote to restore the monarchy if given the chance:

An intensely loyal people, there is no doubt that in a free vote, the monarchy would be restored.

This is nonsense. It's well known to anyone who understands the nature of the conflict in Fiji that most Indo-Fijians do not favour the monarchy. To them, it was the British who enslaved their ancestors and trapped them in squalid conditions through indentured labour schemes. Generally, indigenous Fijians like the Commodore do support returning to the monarchy (although a number of more educated Fijians I met at university did not support the monarchy either). While the Commodore states he has good intentions in creating a non-racial constitution for Fiji with free elections, his desire to restore the Queen belies this.

Therein lies the problem: because of its history in Fiji, the monarchy was a racially divisive institution (as indeed it arguably is in New Zealand - most surveys show Maori do not support the monarchy nearly as much as their fellow New Zealanders). It makes no sense for any advocate of a democratic Fiji to support the monarchy.

The Age writes that recent comments by the incoming Governor of Victoria on climate change and the Governor-General of Australia's view that Australia will become a republic show the way for how a head of State in a Australian republic will act.

The Prime Minister has announced that the President of the Republic of Korea is to visit New Zealand on 3 - 4 March.

Korea's government is a Semi-presidential republic, where the President and Prime Minister share executive power. This model is also used in France, Russia and Taiwan. It causes a lot of confusion for monarchists, who often don't understand the difference between a Parliamentary republic and a Semi-presidential republic. A head of State in a Parliamentary republic usually does not have full executive powers, which they only 'hold' an use on the advice of the Prime Minister.

Jim Hopkins rails against republicanism again today in The New Zealand Herald. This time he takes aim at the expense of President Obama's inauguration, somehow making the connection that republicans in New Zealand want to exactly replicate the United States Presidential system, with all of its expenses:

If anything could convince our malodorous republicans their insistence on abandoning the anachronism of monarchy is a feeble-minded folly and the chorus of fools, it should've been the expensive extravagance of this week's presidential inauguration in Washington.

In 2007, Samoa made the transition from a monarchy to a parliamentary republic with little fuss. The former New Zealand trust territory adopted a new constitution on independence in 1962 (written in part by Victoria University legal academic Alan Robinson), which combined both the Westminster system and Samoan tradition.

Speaking of presidential elections, the United States' is quickly approaching. So it's timely that SSRN have published an article called Can Presidential Systems Be Just? by Tom Donahue. It makes for fascinating reading - comparing Presidential, Semi-Presidential and Parliamentary systems.

The US Presidency is in its 219^th year - and this year, the 56^th election of the office will be held. Politics geeks are watching the Electoral Vote daily, watching as states change their hue from blue to red, red to blue...