Professor Shaista Shameem, a lawyer specializing in constitutional and human rights, emphasizes the importance of considering the provisions for reviewing the 2013 Constitution. According to her, any such review must take into account that these provisions have been acknowledged since 2014.
She argues that a referendum reflecting the opinions of the people should not be dismissed, as doing so undermines democratic governance. The perspective of the populace is vital, and ignoring it could lead to unpopularity among those in power.
In her view, the 2013 Constitution contains many beneficial elements, as well as aspects that warrant reassessment after a decade of implementation. Those advocating for a review should embrace the idea of a referendum, as it would demonstrate respect for public opinion. If the current leadership engages effectively with citizens, it could alleviate fears that achieving the necessary majority for change is insurmountable.
Professor Shameem points out that while significant majorities are required for constitutional amendments, persuasion is key to overcoming this hurdle. She suggests that some who wish to dismantle the 2013 Constitution may lack confidence in their ability to persuade others, hence their inclination to pursue changes outside constitutional provisions, which she considers illegal.
Reflecting on the past decade, she warns that it might be too late to revisit certain discussions about the Constitution. Professor Shameem also addresses misconceptions regarding the limitations inherent in the Bill of Rights, clarifying that even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes limitations. No rights are without restrictions anywhere in international law, and those advocating for unrestricted rights could benefit from examining the 1997 Constitution, which had detailed limitations supported by civil society.
Before any amendments to the 2013 Constitution are considered, she advises proponents to proceed with caution and thoughtfulness.
This discourse highlights the ongoing conversation about constitutional governance and the importance of public engagement in revising foundational legal documents. Emphasizing the need for respect and understanding of the people’s rights could lead to a more inclusive governance framework.
In summary, Professor Shameem advocates for a thorough and respectful approach to reviewing the Constitution, highlighting the significance of public opinion and the need for persuasive dialogue in navigating constitutional reforms. This approach fosters hope for a collaborative future in governance, prioritizing the will of the people and the rule of law.
Leave a comment