Expecting employees to consent to mandatory drug testing as a condition of their employment is not an unreasonable demand.
Constitution Review Commission (CRC) commissioner Dr John Fatiaki shared this recently, indicating that concerns raised by police over consent and constitutional rights could be addressed through internal policy, rather than changes to the Constitution itself.
Dr Fatiaki suggested that the issue of consent to drug testing could be incorporated into employment conditions, particularly at the point of recruitment.
Police had earlier argued that directing their employees to undergo drug testing was a violation of their rights in Section 11(3) of the 2013 Constitution, which guarantees every person “the right to freedom from scientific or medical treatment or procedures without an order of the court or without his or her informed consent”.
However, Dr Fatiaki said this challenge could be resolved by requiring prospective employees to agree to such conditions before joining the force.
“It is a policy direction that you can use to ensure that we are in line with what is required,” he said.
“But again, the concept is the issue. I understand the commissioner doesn’t have power to direct.”
Drawing on practical examples, Dr Fatiaki pointed to international practices in industries such as cruise operations and Fiji Airways, where employees are required to undergo mandatory drug testing as part of their contractual obligations.
“When people apply, they must consent to a mandatory drug test.
“If you refuse to undergo the test, you get off the boat.”
He said a similar approach could be applied within the force, where refusal to comply with agreed employment conditions could carry consequences, including termination.
“What I’m saying is, yes, it’s a consent, but if a policeman were to refuse a consent, I’m sure that the police have within its powers the ability to terminate his employment.
“Part of the contract, it could require that in the nature of the profession, mandatory drug testing may be required, and we require that all candidates for employment as police officers sign it.”
He further cautioned against expanding constitutional provisions to address operational matters, arguing that the Constitution should remain broad and principles based.
