The Fiji Law Society has taken a strong stance against Justice David Ashton-Lewis, urging him to resign from the Supreme Court or face disciplinary actions in accordance with Section 112 of the Fiji Constitution of 2013. This section outlines the procedures for removing judges due to misconduct, emphasizing the need for thorough and impartial processes. Wylie Clarke, President of the Fiji Law Society, expressed concerns that the integrity of the judiciary must be maintained, especially at the highest court, which has seen significant progress in judicial independence since 2022.
Clarke highlighted that Justice Ashton-Lewis has made questionable claims about his past, asserting he held a position as a “constitutional judge” during the 1990s, a title that did not exist. He urged that Ashton-Lewis should refrain from making politically charged comments, particularly given his role as a Supreme Court judge. In an interview on May 29, Ashton-Lewis purportedly compromised the ongoing Commission of Inquiry (COI) by discussing sensitive matters and expressing his views on the integrity of various officials, including the Prime Minister.
The situation recalls previous controversies surrounding the appointments and conduct of judicial officers. For instance, prior reports detailed ongoing investigations concerning Barbara Malimali’s appointment as the Commissioner of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). Justice Ashton-Lewis’s assertions during media engagements have raised alarm about potentially compromising the fairness of the COI and eroding public confidence in judicial processes.
Justice Ashton-Lewis’s recent comments and actions—suggesting political affiliations and undermining other officials—have led to serious allegations that he may be prejudicing the inquiries he is supposed to oversee. They bring into focus the ongoing efforts to ensure integrity and accountability within Fiji’s governance.
In light of these allegations and the Law Society’s call for action, it is crucial for Fiji’s judicial system to uphold its standards and maintain public trust. The hope remains that these inquiries will serve as catalysts for meaningful reforms, reinforcing ethical conduct in governance and restoring confidence in the nation’s political institutions.
This ongoing inquiry reflects significant moments for potential reforms within Fiji’s governance landscape, emphasizing the collective desire for transparency and accountability. As these developments unfold, there remains hope that they will lead to a stronger, more ethical framework for public service and judicial conduct.
Leave a comment