Dialogue Fiji has warned the Government’s decision to require the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) to complete its work within just five months is unrealistic and risks undermining the credibility of any resulting changes to Fiji’s constitution. Executive Director Nilesh Lal described the compressed timetable, together with an apparent absence of clear Terms of Reference or enabling legislation, as a serious threat to the legitimacy of the review.
“A comprehensive constitutional review cannot be properly undertaken in five months,” Lal said, calling the commission’s task “unenviable.” He urged that the timeframe will place significant constraints on the CRC’s ability to carry out thorough public consultations, careful legal analysis and the drafting work required for durable reform. Dialogue Fiji said it wants to support the commission but has “serious concerns about the process as it currently stands.”
To underline the point, Lal cited local and international precedents that he said showed constitutional change demands time. He noted that Fiji’s own Reeves Commission ran for two years and the later Ghai Commission took around a year. Internationally, Lal pointed to South Africa’s constitution-making process (about two years), Tunisia (about two-and-a-half years) and Kenya (roughly 19 months), and suggested 18 to 24 months is generally considered a realistic timeframe for comprehensive constitutional reform.
Dialogue Fiji also flagged structural weaknesses it sees in the current approach, including the lack of a clear legal framework to guide the CRC’s work. Without enabling legislation or detailed Terms of Reference, the organisation warned, the commission could be constrained in scope, method and transparency — conditions that would make its findings more vulnerable to challenge and reduce public trust in outcomes.
The organisation warned that a rushed review could fail to remedy longstanding questions about democratic legitimacy. “Unless these issues are addressed, this review will not cure the much-criticised democratic deficit. It risks repeating the very problems it seeks to fix,” Lal said, adding that reform must be transparent, inclusive and properly structured to be credible and lasting.
This is the latest development in a broader constitutional debate that has intensified in recent months. A High Court ruling involving the removal of a senior public official earlier this year prompted high-level government discussions and public scrutiny of constitutional processes, and lawyers and jurists have been debating how power to amend the constitution should reflect popular will. Those earlier legal and political developments have heightened the stakes for any formal review, Dialogue Fiji said, increasing the importance of a process seen as legitimate by the public and legal community.
Dialogue Fiji’s intervention signals pressure on the Government to reconsider either the timeframe or the legal foundations for the CRC’s mandate. The civil society group reiterated that while parts of the current constitutional framework may warrant review, meaningful reform requires sufficient time, clear legal architecture and inclusive consultation to produce outcomes the people of Fiji will accept as legitimate.