Chief Justice Salesi Temo has urged the Constitution Review Committee (CRC) to leave intact the immunity provisions in Chapter 10 of the 2013 Constitution, warning yesterday that reopening them would be “disastrous” and could undermine national reconciliation and stability.
Addressing the CRC after committee member Conway Begg referred to a Supreme Court position that Chapter 10 is entrenched and not subject to judicial challenge, Temo said revisiting those clauses risked reversing “hard‑won progress.” “Yes, a lot of our citizens have suffered because of all the unlawful actions since 1987,” he told the committee. “For us to disturb that could create problems. So do you want to move forward or create problems?” He urged prioritising reconciliation, saying “forgive and forget. We must move forward,” while acknowledging the CRC remains free to consider the matter.
Temo’s submission went beyond a defence of the existing immunity provisions. He proposed a targeted constitutional amendment to reduce practical problems judges face when the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is involved in matters later contested in court. Currently, he explained, the membership of the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal on the JSC automatically disqualifies them from hearing challenges to JSC decisions — in effect removing the judiciary’s most senior officers from major disputes. Citing the case involving former FICAC commissioner Barbara Malimali as an example, Temo said this restriction can deprive the public of the benefit of senior judicial experience.
To address that, Temo proposed amending Section 104 to allow the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal to appoint nominees — for example a Supreme Court judge, a Justice of Appeal or a High Court judge — to sit on the JSC in their stead when necessary. “This would allow them to remain eligible to preside over court proceedings that arise from JSC decisions, while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process,” he told the committee.
The Chief Justice also flagged concerns over Section 110, which governs judicial tenure, arguing that current retirement provisions discriminate against local judges. Under the 2013 Constitution, local judges must retire at 75, he said, while foreign judges serving on contract have been permitted to continue beyond that age. Temo suggested this differential treatment is inconsistent with Section 26’s prohibition on discrimination and called for reform so that Fiji’s judiciary does not lose experienced local jurists prematurely.
Temo’s submissions arrive as the CRC conducts public and institutional consultations amid wider debate on constitutional reform. In recent months the Supreme Court has clarified the legal framework for amending the 2013 Constitution, underscoring strict parliamentary and referendum thresholds for certain changes. That jurisprudence — and the political sensitivities around questions of immunity for historical events — frames the environment in which the CRC will deliberate.
By urging the committee not to reopen Chapter 10 while proposing narrowly focused amendments to judicial appointment and tenure rules, the Chief Justice signalled a preference for incremental fixes that preserve national reconciliation and protect the judiciary’s capacity to hear significant cases. How the CRC and, ultimately, Parliament respond will shape whether the immunity provisions remain untouched or whether any change is pursued through the demanding amendment processes the courts have outlined.
Leave a comment