Opposition MP Premila Kumar has questioned why the Fiji National University Bill does not clearly outline procedures for suspending, disciplining or removing the university’s Vice-Chancellor, despite granting the position significant powers.
Speaking in Parliament on Monday, Mrs Kumar said Clause 39 of the Bill gave the Vice-Chancellor extensive responsibilities, including managing staff, chairing the Senate and overseeing university operations.
However, she warned that such authority must be accompanied by accountability.
“Authority must always be accompanied by accountability,” she said.
Mrs Kumar highlighted that Clause 29 of the Bill established detailed procedures for removing university council members, including written notice, a 14-day period to respond and an opportunity to be heard.
She said these provisions were important safeguards of natural justice but questioned why similar statutory protections and accountability mechanisms were not clearly provided for the Vice-Chancellor.
“However, the Bill does not clearly establish an equivalent statutory process for suspending, disciplining, or removing the Vice-Chancellor,” she said.
“I wonder why, why there is a gap, and this gap should be addressed.”
Mrs Kumar stressed that accountability should apply equally to everyone holding significant public responsibilities, regardless of their position.
“The principle should be simple. Every person entrusted with significant public responsibility must be accountable regardless of their position.”
She said the Vice-Chancellor and university council should work together within a governance framework that ensured proper oversight.
“A strong vice-chancellor and a strong independent council should complement each other. Neither should operate without proper checks and balances.”
The Fiji National University Bill was subsequently referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights for further scrutiny.
