The directive issued by Justice Minister Siromi Turaga to place Fiji Corrections Service Commissioner Jalesi Nakarawa on extended leave has ignited a constitutional controversy, with numerous legal experts and Nakarawa himself asserting that the directive is unlawful.
Former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum criticized Minister Turaga’s actions as a “constitutional debacle.” He emphasized that according to section 130(4) of the Fijian Constitution, the Commissioner of Fiji Corrections Service is appointed by the President based on the advice of the Constitutional Offices Commission (COC) after consultations with the relevant Minister. Sayed-Khaiyum stressed that any grievances that are not frivolous should be addressed through the COC rather than unilaterally by the Minister.
Commissioner Nakarawa has expressed similar concerns, arguing that he cannot be placed on leave by the Minister based on the section being cited. He pointed out that the Corrections Act specifies that an inquiry committee can be appointed, but this does not extend to the Minister having the authority to send a constitutional office holder on leave. “If there are serious allegations, they must come through the COC via the President,” he remarked.
Nakarawa, who recently returned to his role after a pre-planned leave, noted he had not been informed of the specific allegations against him. He highlighted that he had written to Minister Turaga seeking clarification but had yet to receive concrete details about any complaints.
In response, Minister Turaga asserted that Nakarawa had not officially returned to his post and mentioned that the allegations would be made public “in due course.” Sayed-Khaiyum cautioned that the Minister’s actions could undermine the constitutional framework and the authority of the President.
This situation underlines the critical importance of adhering to constitutional procedures in governance. As the matter unfolds, it remains pivotal for all parties to engage in transparent communication in order to uphold the integrity of the legal and administrative framework within Fiji.
In summary, this incident raises significant questions about the boundaries of authority within governmental structures in Fiji, while also stressing the need for adherence to procedural norms and the rule of law. There is hope that through this dialogue, clarity and constitutional integrity can be restored.
Leave a comment