Reviving Fiji’s 2025 Constitution Amendment Bill could strip Fijians of a say in changes to their fundamental law, a prominent amicus curiae told the Supreme Court in a submission made yesterday. Andrew Butler argued that the defeated Bill, which stalled at its second reading in Parliament, is not merely in limbo but effectively dead. He said the Bill would have to be reintroduced, and stressed that the Cabinet cannot bind Parliament or compel it to enact legislation, reminding the court that any commitment by the executive to a specific reform could not be enforced if Parliament later passed a different amendment bill.
Butler also warned that constitutional reform is too weighty a matter to push forward without broad public consultation. He pointed out the irony of reviving a process meant to empower citizen participation by advancing it without proper engagement. He emphasized that parliamentary committee processes traditionally involve public input, and that a constitution amendment of such magnitude should invite substantial public discussion.
Justice Isikeli Mataitoga echoed the sentiment, highlighting Pacific traditions like talanoa that foster open dialogue and the expectation that people have a voice in decisions that affect them. He and Butler agreed that international practice often includes referendums or other special procedures for key constitutional provisions.
The discussion comes amid a wider debate over how Fiji should approach constitutional reform, with the government signaling it may pursue clarifications or advisory opinions from the Supreme Court as part of its strategy. The ongoing discourse underscores the public’s interest in a participatory process that reflects the will of all Fijians, rather than a top-down approach.
Summary and outlook
The episode reinforces a central theme in Fiji’s constitutional reform debate: meaningful public engagement is viewed by many as essential to legitimacy. If the government proceeds with reviving the amendments, observers will be looking for clear public consultation mechanisms and transparent processes that align with the will of the people. The path forward remains uncertain, but the emphasis on consultation and separation of powers signals a desire to balance reform with democratic legitimacy.
Additional value notes
– Context: This fits into a broader cycle of discussions following earlier defeats of the Constitution Amendment Bill, with policymakers weighing how to incorporate public input and legal advice into any future attempts.
– What’s next: Watch for whether Parliament reintroduces a revised bill, any Cabinet decisions to seek Supreme Court guidance, and how public consultation is structured should a new iteration be brought forward.
– Positive angle: The emphasis on talanoa and public participation could foster a more inclusive reform process that genuinely reflects diverse Fijian perspectives, potentially strengthening trust in constitutional change over time.
Overall, the article highlights how Fiji’s constitutional reform debate remains active, with legal and civic considerations shaping the next steps toward broader public involvement and democratic governance.
Leave a comment