Honorable Speaker Sir today is a special day – not just for the esteemed members of this August house, but for our entire nation. Today holds great significance for our people and the future we are shaping together.
I say this because the outcome of today’s debate on the bill to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Fiji will shape the future of democracy, the future of our land, the destiny of our nation and, with it, the lives of our people.
Honorable Speaker Sir, the constitution is the supreme law of our land, the foundation upon which our democracy stands. Yet, for a constitution to be legitimate, it must demonstrate the will of the people, echo their voices, embody their spirit and aspirations in its content, and reflect their dignity in shaping their own future.
However, the current 2013 constitution lacks this fundamental principle. It was neither formulated nor adopted through a participatory democratic process to secure the people’s mandate.
If a constitution is to reflect the voice of the people, it must be born out of inclusive national dialogue, as seen in successful constitutional democracies worldwide. May I reiterate, Honourable Speaker, “it is the responsibility of the government to ensure the people participate meaningfully in the formulation of laws they’re required to obey. This is fundamental to ensuring their legitimacy.
Honorable Speaker Sir, the bill before the House is not merely a legal exercise – it is a moral and democratic necessity.
The Need for Constitutional Review and Amendment
Honorable Speaker Sir, let us take a moment to reflect on the foundational principles of democracy.
Fiji is still a very young nation – having only gained independence 54 years ago – and like any young nation, we are learning, growing, transitioning and refining our path as we move forward.
Let us remember, Honorable Speaker Sir, the great democracies of the world – those that have endured for centuries – did not impose their constitutions upon their people.
Instead, their founding documents were carefully crafted by the people, for the people, through robust dialogue, consensus, with distinct commitment to freedom and justice.
These nations, with long history of Constitutional rule, have been guided by the principles of political philosophies, social contract theory being one, which reminds us that government derives its legitimacy from the consent of its people.
Honorable Speaker Sir, a nations Constitution must not be forced upon its people—it must be born from the voices of its citizens, shaped by national dialogue, and owned by the people it seeks to serve.
Countries such as South Africa, which engaged in extensive public consultations before adopting its 1996 Constitution, and Kenya, which subjected its 2010 Constitution to a national referendum, offer us valuable lessons.
Their constitutional processes fostered national unity, legitimacy, and long-term stability.
The absence of such a process in our case with our current 2013 Constitution raises a fundamental question: Can a constitution truly serve the people if the people it purports to serve were never given a voice in its making?
Bipartisanship
Honourable Speaker Sir, constitutional reform should not be a partisan issue. Philosophers and ordinary citizens alike believe and have argued that the pathway to national unity is through bipartisanship.
Therefore, it is important Honourable Speaker Sir to understand that constitutional reform is about nation building.
Honourable Speaker Sir, a Dutch Political Scientist (Arend Lijphart) in his work from the 1960s to 1970s analysed how deeply divided societies were, and his main countries of study were Switzerland and Belgium. In his study, he concluded that successfully maintained and stable democracies were through power sharing arrangement.
He emphasised that in deeply divided societies, decision-making should be inclusive, with broad agreement across political lines. This model has been successful in countries like Switzerland and Belgium, where bipartisan approaches have led to stable governments.
In this essence, Honourable Speaker Sir, it is important that we recognise that a strong democracy is built on cooperation and mutual agreement.
It is important to understand that democracy thrives when decisions are made through reasoned debate, inclusive dialogue, and mutual respect.
As representatives of the people, it is our duty to engage in meaningful discussions, to listen to diverse voices, and to ensure that this process is transparent, accountable, and just.
The Amendment to the Bill
The proposed amendments introduce a more efficient and flexible process for constitutional change, ensuring that necessary updates can be made without undue delay.
Section 2 simplifies the language of Chapter 11, allowing for greater clarity and adaptability in governance by removing outdated or restrictive provisions.
Section 3 enhances legislative efficiency by lowering the threshold for constitutional amendments from three-quarters to two-thirds and removing the requirement for a nationwide referendum.
This ensures that amendments can be passed through elected representatives in Parliament, reflecting the democratic mandate while streamlining the decision-making process. By allowing constitutional updates to be made more efficiently, the amendment ensures that governance structures remain responsive to evolving national needs.
Honourable Speaker Sir, the Constitution must therefore be adaptative and able to be moulded to reflect the needs of its people. Through this, we have the assurance that, as a system, it creates the culture that reinstates and sustains our values. Ultimately, the Constitution remains a living document that responds meaningfully to Fiji’s needs.
Lowering the approval threshold strikes a balance between stability and adaptability, ensuring that the Constitution can be improved when needed while still maintaining a strong two-thirds consensus in Parliament. This constitutional reform modernises the constitutional amendment process, making it more effective, democratic and upholds the tenets good government.
Conclusion
Honourable Speaker Sir, history will judge us not by the laws we inherit, but by the laws we shape for future generations.
Let us not be remembered as a Parliament that defended an unrepresentative constitution. Let us be remembered as leaders who put democracy above politics, who embraced dialogue over division, and who gave the people the power to shape their own destiny.
Might I recall the words of Lord Macauley in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835 with regards to enforcing change to the Indian sub-continent:
“I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen anyone who is a beggar, who is a thief, such wealth I have observed in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation which is her spiritual and cultural heritage and therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.”
It is said that we earn respect by, firstly, giving respect. We gain our dignity by giving people theirs. “Do unto to others as you want others do unto you,” the Lord Jesus said. This, is, our moment in history.
Let us rise above party lines, act in the spirit of bipartisanship, and work together to build a Constitution by the people, for the people—one that truly reflects the ideals of democracy, justice, and unity.
I support this motion Honorable Speaker Sir, and I urge all Honourable Members to do the same.
Thank you Sir.