Constitutional Expert Sounds Alarm on Human Rights Protections

Constitutional lawyer Jon Apted has expressed significant concerns regarding the status of human rights and the separation of powers under the 2013 Constitution, arguing that they appear to be merely symbolic. During a session titled “Where to from here? A Constitution by the people” at the Attorney-General’s Conference, Mr. Apted pointed out specific constitutional provisions that he believes underestimate human rights and grant excessive authority to the government.

One of his primary concerns centered on Section 73, which maintains 400 decrees and promulgations that were established before the Constitution was adopted. According to him, these decrees are exempt from the protections outlined in the Bill of Rights. He explained that individuals have no recourse under the Bill of Rights if entities like the Fijian Competition and Consumer Commission violate their rights, due to this reservation.

Mr. Apted also criticized the omission of a vital safeguard in the 2013 Constitution that previously required any limitations on rights to be “reasonable and justifiable in a democratic society.” Instead, the current Constitution allows for rights to be curtailed as long as the government can argue that the limitations are “necessary” under the law. He warned that this could lead to widespread infringements on rights, as the government could justify actions under the guise of necessity, regardless of specific limitations.

While he acknowledged that recent court interpretations have applied a proportionality test—restricting limitations on rights to what is “no more than necessary”—he raised concerns about the potential for changing judicial perspectives, which could lead to vague constraints on rights protections.

Mr. Apted concluded that a review of the human rights provisions is essential for ensuring a society where individual rights are genuinely safeguarded.

This article highlights the pressing need for constitutional reforms that prioritize and protect human rights more effectively. By addressing these weaknesses, there’s hope for fostering a more just legal framework that can adapt over time to better serve the people’s needs. The active engagement of legal experts like Mr. Apted encourages a dialogue on these critical issues, possibly paving the way for a more equitable legal system in the future.