A Constitution should not be treated as a political party manifesto or used as a test of loyalty to a particular political camp, says Dialogue Fiji Executive Director Nilesh Lal.
Speaking at the launch of two constitutional literacy publications in Suva, Lal said Fiji needed to move away from highly politicised constitutional debates and towards examining what constitutional provisions actually say.
“A Constitution should not be treated like a political party manifesto. It should not become a tribal badge or a test of loyalty to one political camp,” Lal said.
“It belongs to the entire country, including those who disagree with the government of the day and those who may never support the political actors responsible for producing it.”
Lal said while the process through which a Constitution was developed remained extremely important, its history and authorship should not replace proper scrutiny of its contents.
He said questions should instead focus on how a Constitution distributes power, protects rights, establishes Parliament, appoints independent institutions, controls the Executive and can be amended.
Lal said Fijians often held strong opinions about different constitutions without necessarily knowing what those documents actually contained.
“People will very staunchly tell you that a particular Constitution is good or that another Constitution is bad,” he said.
“Yet when you turn around and ask them what exactly in the Constitution is good, or which particular provisions are bad, they often have no clue.”
He said political allegiance was consequently influencing how some people viewed Fiji’s constitutional frameworks.
“Whatever the politicians they support tell them about a constitution shapes their opinion of it. If their preferred political leaders say a Constitution is good, then it is good. If those political leaders say it is bad, then it is bad.”
“People judge a Constitution according to who produced it, rather than examining what the document actually provides.”
Dialogue Fiji has launched two publications comparing Fiji’s recent constitutional frameworks and explaining constitutional issues in simpler language.
The first, Fiji’s Recent Constitutional Frameworks: Comparing the 1997 Constitution, the Ghai Draft, and the 2013 Constitution, places the major provisions of the three frameworks side by side.
It compares areas including Bills of Rights, electoral systems, Parliament, the Executive, Judiciary, accountability institutions and constitutional amendment procedures.
The second publication, Understanding Fiji’s Recent Constitutions: A Citizen’s Illustrated Guide, is designed for ordinary citizens and uses illustrations, comparative tables and plain-language explanations.
Lal stressed that the publications do not endorse one constitutional framework over another but are intended to allow people to assess individual provisions themselves.
He said Fiji needed constitutional discussions based on knowledge rather than political division.
“We need people to debate constitutional provisions from a place of knowledge, rather than from the current toxic, highly politicised and highly polarising discourse surrounding the Constitution,” Lal said.
He said disagreement was expected and healthy in a democracy, but it should be based on what constitutional texts actually provide rather than “political slogans, misinformation and blind loyalty to particular political leaders”.
Lal said improving constitutional literacy was particularly important for Fiji because of its history of coups, political instability, authoritarian governance and the abrogation and rewriting of constitutions.
“For Fiji, constitutional literacy is not simply an academic exercise. It is essential to the protection and survival of our democracy,” he said.
Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica formally launched the publications in Suva.
