Parliament should avoid making significant changes to electoral laws within a year of an election.
Centre for Democracy and Dialogue (CDD) chief executive officer Nilesh Lal made the submission to the Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights as it considers four electoral Bills.
Mr Lal said the Bills presented Parliament with an opportunity for meaningful electoral reform but warned that the timing of changes was important to ensure stability and certainty in the electoral process.
“The Venice Commission’s code of good practice on electoral matters states that the fundamental elements of electoral law particularly the electoral system membership of electoral commissions and constituency boundaries should not normally be changed less than one year before an election,” Mr Lal said.
“Its interpretive guideline goes further and states more generally that electoral reforms intended to apply at an election should be sufficiently early to be genuinely implementable at that election.”
Mr Lal said the principle was particularly relevant as Fiji was now within the constitutional window for an election to be called, with the timing of the election ultimately determined by the Prime Minister.
He said the proposed changes covered areas including campaigning, polling, offences, counting, results and voter assistance.
While acknowledging that the Bills did not substantially change Fiji’s electoral formula or constituency boundaries, Mr Lal said Parliament should still consider the implications of changing the rules close to an election.
“Election officials needed time to develop procedures and train staff, while political parties, candidates, civil society, the media and voters needed clarity about the new rules.”
Mr Lal said voters needed confidence that electoral changes were not being made for short-term political convenience or political agendas.
He said electoral rules should be settled sufficiently early to allow all stakeholders to prepare for the election.
