The former Attorney-General has expressed strong criticism regarding Justice Minister Siromi Turaga’s recent decision to place Corrections Commissioner Dr. Jalesi Nakarawa on leave. He refers to the action as another instance of constitutional mismanagement.
In a post on social media, Sayed-Khaiyum, who previously held the Justice Minister’s position in the Bainimarama administration, cited section 130(4) of the Fijian Constitution. This section stipulates that the Commissioner of the Fiji Corrections Service is appointed by the President based on the advice of the Constitutional Offices Commission (COC) and after consultation with the relevant Minister. He emphasized that any serious complaints against the Commissioner should be directed to the COC rather than handled through alternative processes.
Sayed-Khaiyum challenged the legitimacy of Turaga’s decision, asserting that only the President has the authority to terminate, suspend, or place the Commissioner on leave. He stated that by bypassing constitutional protocols and prioritizing the Fiji Corrections Service Act, Turaga’s actions undermine the established constitutional framework.
He further argued that constitutional provisions take precedence over subordinate laws, suggesting that the current situation reflects a lack of understanding of legal principles among government officials. Sayed-Khaiyum raised questions regarding the roles of the Attorney-General and the Solicitor General, highlighting their responsibilities to provide sound legal counsel and uphold constitutional integrity.
He lamented that this situation could have been avoided had Minister Turaga chosen to follow the appropriate legal channels for addressing complaints against constitutional officers. Sayed-Khaiyum called for the Prime Minister, acting as the chair of COC, to intervene promptly and rectify what he described as an unfortunate and constitutionally problematic scenario. He concluded by warning that disregard for due process and constitutional compliance could lead to damaging perceptions of the government’s professionalism.
This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to constitutional procedures and the need for transparent governance in maintaining public trust. The hope remains that this situation will prompt necessary reforms and renewed respect for the rule of law among all levels of government.
In summary, the controversy highlights ongoing concerns regarding constitutional adherence in governmental processes, with a call to action for leadership to restore integrity and transparency within the system.
Leave a comment