A colonial-era resource doctrine is stripping Fiji’s traditional landowners of economic justice and driving severe human rights violations, a recent submission to the Constitution Review Commission said.
The Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission (FHRADC) commissioner Alefina Vuki pointed to Section 37 of the Constitution, which enforces the three feet below rule.
“What this means is when there are minerals, the State has some surface rights — and when there are no minerals, the indigenous people have some surface rights,” Ms Vuki explained.
She highlighted five critical human rights violations driven by this system, one of which was that landowners could not deny mining leases — they were merely informed about operations. This limits the ability of communities to say no at the outset of projects that may harm their land, their environment, and their livelihoods, says Ms Vuki. She added that returns were microscopic.
While a 2018 Act gives landowners 80 per cent of mineral royalties, total royalties represent a meager three to five per cent of the mineral’s actual value. Ms Vuki said past mining in Namosi caused toxic environmental devastation because landowners could not deny consent during exploration. She stressed that the state negotiates directly with mining companies, reducing traditional custodians to passive recipients of state determined outcomes, rather than recognising them as equal partners.
“By maintaining this colonial construct, the state not only deprives indigenous communities of economic justice, but also weakens traditional systems of governance, denying the holistic relationship between the people and their ancestral territory. Finally, separating surface land from minerals violates the iTaukei concept of vanua, that land, people, and resources are one.” FHRADC suggested Section 30 be amended to vest mineral rights in customary landowners or constitutionally guarantee Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and equitable benefit-sharing.
