Parliament has cleared the way for the Counter Narcotics Bill 2026 to be debated and voted today, despite Opposition protests over the limited time available to examine the 200-page legislation.
The motion to have the Bill considered without delay, bypass committee scrutiny and pass through a single sitting was approved on Tuesday, with 32 MPs voting in favour, 13 against and eight abstaining.
The decision exposed a central disagreement in Parliament — while both sides acknowledge the seriousness of Fiji’s drug problem, they differ over whether the crisis justifies immediate passage of a major new legal framework or whether the legislation should first undergo detailed parliamentary and public scrutiny.
Timetable challenge
Opposition MPs made it clear that they were not rejecting the need for stronger narcotics laws.
Jone Usamate said there was “no argument” that Fiji needed the Bill and acknowledged the growing threats posed by drug trafficking, organised crime and the exploitation of vulnerable people.
His objection was to the process.
“What this exercise is almost saying is that we do not really need a Parliament,” he said.
He questioned why a Bill of such magnitude had not been brought to Parliament earlier, giving MPs adequate time to study its provisions before debate.
Mr Usamate said Opposition members were already preparing for several other Bills scheduled for consideration and would struggle to properly examine a 200-page Bill within two days.
Alvick Maharaj made a similar argument, saying Parliament had an alternative under Standing Order 51, and that the Bill could be referred to a committee for 30 days before returning to the House for consideration.
“How many of us will be able to read this Bill from A to Z, and prepare to debate it on Thursday,” he asked.
The Opposition maintained that its objection was not to the Bill itself, but to the timetable being imposed on Parliament.
Drug threat cannot wait
Minister for Policing Ioane Naivalurua defended the Government’s decision by pointing to what he described as a rapidly evolving narcotics threat.
He said Fiji’s existing laws, including the Illicit Drugs Control Act 2004 and the Dangerous Drugs Act, were designed for a substantially different environment.
The current threat, he said, involved sophisticated organised criminal networks, transnational trafficking, precursor chemicals, financial crime and money laundering.
“The drug threat has evolved rapidly and continues to do so,” Mr Naivalurua told Parliament.
The Bill proposes the establishment of a Counter-Narcotics Bureau as a dedicated institution to coordinate national efforts against illicit drugs, develop intelligence and investigative capabilities and strengthen cooperation between domestic agencies and international partners.
Mr Naivalurua said delaying the legislation would leave Fiji operating under an outdated framework while the threat continued to develop.
“The illicit drug challenge is no longer solely a law enforcement matter,” he said, describing it as a national crisis and national security concern.
Scrutiny versus urgency
The Opposition’s proposed alternative was not to abandon the legislation but to give Parliament more time to examine it.
MP Premila Kumar said committee scrutiny was important because committees allowed MPs to understand complex legislation, question provisions and consider submissions and consultation before a Bill returned to Parliament.
“With these 200-page Bill … plus eight Bills to be debated on Thursday, I thought I was intelligent, but today I give up,” Mrs Kumar said.
She argued that wider consultation could also have increased public awareness of the legislation and allowed affected communities to contribute.
Independent MP Ketan Lal similarly opposed the motion, saying Opposition MPs did not have the resources available to Government members to analyse a Bill of such size within 48 hours.
“This Bill needs to go to the people, we need to consult them,” he said.
Opposition leader Inia Seruiratu also supported committee consideration, saying several provisions required closer examination. He pointed to sections dealing with accountability and transparency as well as provisions concerning children under 14.
“The world will not collapse if we don’t pass this Bill on Thursday,” Mr Seruiratu said.
Government members rejected the suggestion that the process amounted to abandoning parliamentary scrutiny.
Acting Attorney-General Siromi Turaga defended the legislative drafting process and pushed back against criticism directed at the lawyers responsible for preparing the Bill.
“The drafters are very personal about their work,” Mr Turaga said, arguing that it was unfair to suggest the lawyers involved had simply failed to do their work or had been responsible for delays.
He said the Government had inherited a serious security problem and now had to respond to it.
“We have the ability to look and comment and most of these are not entirely novel,” he said, arguing that many provisions in the proposed legislation built on existing laws and previous work.
He also defended the Government’s decision to move ahead under Standing Order 51, saying the circumstances facing Fiji required action.
The Minister for Policing, he said, was relying on the Bill to establish the necessary security framework and move the proposed Counter-Narcotics Bureau forward.
A wider national crisis
Government MPs also linked the proposed legislation to Fiji’s broader public health, security and economic concerns.
Assistant Minister for Justice Ratu Josaia Niudamu said the country was facing interconnected problems involving marijuana, methamphetamine, HIV/AIDS and other social harms, particularly for families and communities.
Lands Minister Filimoni Vosarogo pointed to the reported disappearance of 31 kilograms of cocaine from a High Court exhibit room as an indication of the challenges confronting the country’s enforcement system.
He said the proposed Counter Narcotics Bureau would provide a standalone institutional framework for coordinating the national response.
He also highlighted the $1.6million allocated in the 2026 budget for the establishment of the Bureau once the legislation provided the necessary legal foundation.
He argued that Standing Order 51 was not being used simply as a matter of convenience but because the Government considered the circumstances to be urgent.
Tourism Minister Viliame Gavoka added that Fiji’s response to drugs and HIV also had implications for the country’s international reputation.
He said Fiji could not hide the problems but needed to demonstrate that it was responding to them.
“This is telling the world that we are doing something about the threat,” Mr Gavoka said.
Despite the Opposition’s objections to the timetable, the Government secured enough support to proceed.
Mr Naivalurua, in his right of reply, said the Government had not taken the decision lightly and pointed to Fiji’s National Drug Strategy 2023–2028 as part of the policy groundwork behind the legislation.
He said the proposed Bill represented the next step in establishing the institutional framework needed to address narcotics.
