Fiji’s Supreme Court has delivered a pivotal advisory ruling that reshapes the pathway for constitutional reform. The court affirmed that the 2013 Constitution remains the legally effective framework for the country, while ruling that its amendment provisions are not, in themselves, an insurmountable barrier to change. In a move aimed at balancing legal stability with democratic legitimacy, the court held that amendments can proceed through a two-step process: two-thirds approval in Parliament for the readings, followed by a referendum in which a simple majority of those who vote binds the changes. The decision also reaffirmed that the 1997 Constitution is no longer applicable in Fiji’s current legal order.
The ruling was issued in response to a Cabinet reference under Section 91(5) of the 2013 Constitution, which sought clarity on how Sections 159 and 160—long described as highly restrictive or nearly unamendable—should operate. It marks a clear shift away from the previously entrenched threshold of 75 percent in both Parliament and the electorate and instead introduces a more feasible pathway for meaningful reform that still respects safeguards and public participation.
NFP President and Leader of the opposition-in-waiting, Professor Biman Prasad, welcomed the decision as a turning point in Fiji’s democratic journey. He stressed that the court’s interpretation, while requiring ongoing legal consideration, effectively returns genuine democratic control over the constitution to the people. “We have yet to take legal advice on the full legal implications of the case. However, we believe the outcome is a just one. It returns to Fiji’s people genuine democratic control over their own supreme law,” Prasad said. He urged moving forward with a nationwide constitutional dialogue conducted by a fully representative review commission to ensure all voices are heard and respected.
The prime objective of the court’s guidance, observers say, is to establish a transparent, participatory framework for reform that does not abandon essential safeguards. In Prasad’s words, the next phase should involve a full national dialogue into the constitution the country wants, with a representative constitutional review commission that ensures broad consultation and accountability.
The ruling is widely viewed as a necessary reckoning with Fiji’s political past, including criticisms about the origins of the 2013 Constitution. The judgment underscores that the document still governs laws, elections, and daily governance, even as it acknowledges the controversy surrounding its adoption. By clarifying that amendments require parliamentary consensus plus popular consent through a referendum, the decision aims to bolster public trust in the reform process while preserving stability and the rule of law.
What this means for Fiji’s reform trajectory is significant. The court provides a clearer, more workable route for constitutional change—one that places the onus on both parliamentary majorities and citizen involvement through referenda. It also signals the potential for a renewed push toward public consultation and institutional accountability, including proposals for a Constitution Review Commission to guide a more inclusive reform process. At the same time, debates about the status of the 1997 Constitution and whether elements might ever be reconciled with the 2013 framework are likely to continue as reforms proceed.
Public reaction has been largely optimistic among reform advocates, who see the decision as strengthening democratic legitimacy by ensuring that any substantial constitutional changes are both legislatively supported and democratically validated. Analysts suggest that the reform pathway could accelerate constructive changes while maintaining essential checks and balances.
Key takeaways for readers and policymakers are clear: the 2013 Constitution remains the valid framework; the era of a 75 percent double-entrenchment is over; amendments require two-thirds support in Parliament at the second and third readings and, to bind changes, a simple majority of those who vote in a referendum. The emphasis on public participation and transparency is likely to shape how future reforms are discussed, proposed, and validated, including whether a Constitution Review Commission becomes a core feature of Fiji’s reform calendar.
Additional context and value-added notes
– The ruling emphasizes balancing legal stability with democratic legitimacy, ensuring reforms reflect the will of the people while safeguarding governance foundations.
– For readers tracing the evolution of Fiji’s constitutional landscape, monitoring how Parliament navigates proposed amendments and how referenda are planned will provide deeper insight into the country’s commitment to participatory governance.
– Ongoing discussions about the role of the 1997 Constitution, potential revival of elements, and the design of future amendment procedures are likely to shape the political timetable and civil society engagement in the months ahead.
Looking ahead, the court’s guidance is seen as a hopeful development for Fiji’s constitutional evolution. A clearer, more inclusive framework for reform could empower both citizens and lawmakers to shape a constitution that better reflects the people’s will while preserving the safeguards necessary for stability and the rule of law. The journey toward a participatory, transparent reform process appears set to continue, with public dialogue and constitutional review at the center of Fiji’s democratic renewal.
Leave a comment