There are strong calls from concerned Fijians for the ‘ChatFiji Facebook’ forum to be shut down.
This call follows the death of social influencer Esala Seru Yalewamama, known as ‘Ranadi Kei Viti,’ who passed away yesterday morning.
‘ChatFiji,’ a local Facebook forum, is well-known for unregulated content, often featuring defamatory and derogatory posts about individuals.
Allegations suggest that circumstances surrounding Esala’s death are linked to the ‘ChatFiji Facebook’ forum. Assistant Commissioner of Police – Crime (ACP) Mesake Waqa stated that an investigation is underway.
“At this early stage, we cannot speculate on the circumstances surrounding the victim’s death because that will be part of the investigation process,” ACP Waqa said.
Despite the unprecedented call for the forum’s closure, social media influencer and lawyer Jon Apted believes shutting it down is not a permanent solution.
“While that might deal with the toxic culture on one page, it is not a long-term solution since the bad behavior will merely be transferred to a new or different page,” he told this outlet yesterday.
“The solution lies in changing behavior through education, effective handling of complaints, and where possible, prosecution of serious offenders.
“We ourselves need to take responsibility for keeping online platforms safe and for creating a more respectful online culture. We should stop reacting to or sharing harmful posts. Where possible, we should call out and report more offensive posts.”
From the scale of the problem, he said it appeared many believed that their freedom of speech allowed them to say whatever they liked online.
“Freedom of speech is not an absolute right,” he said. “It allows you the fullest freedom to express your views about issues and political figures but does not include the freedom to say nasty personal things about others or cause harm.”
Apted is calling on the Fiji Human Rights, the Anti-Discrimination Commission, and the Online Safety Commission to educate the public on what freedom of speech allows and what it doesn’t.
“In view of the increased incidents of cyberbullying, the Government needs to look urgently at increasing the resources available to the Commission,” he said.
Fiji Women’s Rights Movement
The women’s activist group has strongly condemned repeated acts of psychological violence and character attacks. Fiji Women’s Rights Commission Executive Director Nalini Singh urges relevant authorities to devote more effort to monitoring online acts of violence.
“This is not the first time, and it is sad that despite Esala’s death, people continue to post hateful remarks online. When will we learn?” Ms. Singh said.
“Time and again, we continue to speak out against cyberbullying and online harassment and demand justice for those victimized on our online platforms. Many people think that sexist, abusive, and defamatory attacks have no repercussions.”
The movement calls for no impunity for online violence, especially against marginalized communities. Singh urges Fijians to exercise responsible online etiquette by refraining from engaging in hate speech.
Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission
The FHRC echoed similar sentiments.
“The commission is concerned that those managing public-chat forums on social media are failing to moderate and control hate comments on their pages,” Chairperson Pravesh Sharma said. “The culpability lies with the administrators of these public chat-forum Facebook pages and those commenting. They must face the full brunt of the law. Freedom of speech carries ‘responsibility’ and has limitations.”
The 2013 Constitution, under Section 17 (3)(b)(d), states:
– A law may limit or authorize the limitation of free speech to protect reputation, privacy, dignity, rights, or freedoms of other persons, including the right to be free from hate speech, whether directed against individuals or groups.
– Protection or maintenance of the reputation, privacy, dignity, rights, or freedoms of other persons includes the right to be free from hate speech, whether directed against individuals or groups.
– Preventing attacks on the dignity of individuals, groups of individuals, or respected offices or institutions in a manner likely to promote ill will between ethnic or religious groups, or the oppression of, or discrimination against, any person or group of persons.
– Hate speech means an expression in whatever form that encourages or has the effect of encouraging discrimination on a ground listed or prescribed under section 26.
Every person is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection, treatment, and benefit of the law. Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms recognized in this Chapter or any other written law. A person must not be unfairly discriminated against directly or indirectly on the grounds of his or her actual or supposed personal characteristics or circumstances, including race, culture, ethnic or social origin, color, place of origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, birth, primary language, economic or social or health status, disability, age, religion, conscience, marital status, or pregnancy, or opinions or beliefs, except to the extent that those opinions or beliefs involve harm to others or diminish the rights or freedoms of others.