Minister for Women, Children and Social Protection Lynda Tabuya’s recent call for the implementation of the death penalty for large-scale drug traffickers has faced significant backlash. Shadow Minister for Justice Ketan Lal, representing the Group of 16 (G16), criticized this proposal, arguing that Fiji should focus on life sentences for rapists and develop laws that support justice for victims, rather than advocating for capital punishment.
Mr. Lal expressed disappointment with Ms. Tabuya, highlighting that her role should prioritize the protection and empowerment of society’s most vulnerable members, especially survivors of severe crimes like rape. He emphasized that rape inflicts deep and lasting harm and called for a critical response to such offenses.
He further stressed that Fiji should concentrate on building a legal framework that guarantees swift justice for victims of sexual violence while safeguarding the rights of all individuals. “Our efforts and resources should target the struggles of those who have faced the worst injustices,” he stated.
While acknowledging the pressing need to combat drug trafficking, Mr. Lal insisted that this fight must align with the country’s constitutional commitments and human rights principles. He warned against letting fear drive the adoption of unconstitutional measures that may prove ineffective.
Additionally, he pointed out that although drug trafficking is a severe crime that necessitates strong legal responses, proposing the death penalty contradicts Fiji’s constitutional values and international responsibilities. He referenced Article 8 of Fiji’s Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and protection from cruel treatment.
Reinstating the death penalty would infringe upon these fundamental rights and tarnish the integrity of Fiji’s justice system, which is built on human dignity and the rule of law. Mr. Lal also noted that Fiji’s adherence to international treaties opposing the death penalty reflects its commitment to human rights globally. He cautioned that any attempt to revert to such a harsh measure would undermine the nation’s international reputation and moral standing.