THE coups since 1987 have messed up our legal-political processes and the lines of demarcation between the judiciary and politics have been constantly violated, says Distinguished Professor Steven Ratuva.
“New constitutions have tried to redraw these lines, only to be erased by coup-makers,” Prof Ratuva said when asked about the role and independence of the Judicial Services Commission.
“But the 2013 Constitution has created conditions for the current confusion, and the court judgment has put to rest some anxiety but there is going to be an appeal, and the issue could drag on for some time, even to the period after the election.”
He said the High Court ruling declaring the advice by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka to President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu unlawful highlights the importance of strict adherence to constitutional processes in senior public appointments.
“It’s important for senior public officials to adhere to constitutional and legal processes rather than allow for unrestrained political sentiments and interests to drive their agendas.
“Hopefully, the decision can throw light on the need for reinforcing the distinction, both institutionally and behaviourally.
“While some may have different interpretations of the constitutional processes, the decision of the court still need to be respected as it provides the legally enforceable mandate.”
His comments follow the ruling by High Court Judge Justice Dane Tuiqereqere that the termination of Barbara Malimali as FICAC Commission by the President, on the advice of the Prime Minister, was unlawful.
Justice Tuiqereqere’s ruling also reinforced that constitutional and legislative powers given to independent bodies cannot be bypassed without clear legal or constitutional backing.
‘Critical lesson’ The limits of executive power
THE recent High Court ruling declaring that the advice by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka to President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu was unlawful should serve as a critical lesson on the limits of executive power, says Distinguished Professor Steven Ratuva.
“Government legal advisers should be well trained and experienced to provide the PM and Cabinet the right advise that will stand up to scrutiny,” Distinguished Prof Ratuva said.
“That’s an important pre-requisite for an orderly and stable society.
“This should be a great lesson for Fiji in terms of curtailing the excesses of executive power.
“The various organs of the State — the executive, judiciary, civil service, military, parliament — should remain on their constitutional track and there should be respect for the different roles.”
“Unfortunately, because it was framed within a coup-ecosystem, the 2013 Constitution still has footprints of executive excesses here and there.”
His comments come following the Barbara Malimali ruling by High Court Judge Justice Dane Tuiqereqere earlier this week.
In his ruling, Justice Tuiqereqere emphasised that constitutional power must be exercised strictly within the
limits set by law, noting that departures from prescribed legal processes risk undermining the rule of law and public trust in governance systems.
The court also highlighted the importance of preserving the independence of statutory and constitutional bodies, warning that executive actions which bypass or improperly influence mandated processes can
weaken institutional integrity and accountability.
The ruling reinforced that lawful procedure is essential to maintaining confidence in public administration and democratic order.
Public confidence ‘damaged’
PUBLIC confidence in institutions tasked with upholding the rule of law has been severely damaged by a range of social, political and governance challenges, says Distinguished Professor Steven Ratuva.
His comments follow the High Court ruling in the Barbara Malimali matter, where Justice Dane Tuiqereqere ruled that the advice by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka to President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu to revoke Ms Malimali’s contract as Commissioner FICAC was “unlawful”.
“Public confidence in the rule of law has been badly battered by a number of factors, including, the turmoil in the judiciary, scandals and crisis in political governance, increasing impact of drugs and criminal behaviour, deterioration in the health service, power of behind-the-scene-patronage networks,
unfolding human security issues and perception of vanua connections and nepotism,” Distinguished Prof Ratuva said.
He said these issues need to be addressed “in a strategic, smart, innovative, sustainable and honest manner to shift the dial and get the public confidence back”.
“Usually, public confidence rises during elections because people feel empowered that it is their turn to decide the fate of their leaders, whom they thought have failed them.
“The election is hopefully taking place this year.
“The decision by the supreme court will hopefully contribute to the re-democratising of our political culture and keeping in check some remnants of unsavoury coup-based behaviour such as self-proclaimed political entitlement, disdain for institutional order, unilateral decision making and interest group-based thinking and action,” Prof Ratuva said when asked about the broader implications for future conduct by
officeholders.
In the judgment, the court examined whether the Prime Minister had lawful authority to advise the President on the revocation of the FICAC Commissioner’s contract and considered competing interpretations of the Constitution and the FICAC Act, ultimately reinforcing that the exercise of
constitutional power must align with the specific authority granted under law.
