Civil society organization Dialogue Fiji has raised serious concerns regarding the proposed Referendum Bill, warning that its current form could significantly compromise freedom of expression and undermine democratic standards in Fiji. During an oral submission to the Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights, Dialogue Fiji Executive Director Nilesh Lal highlighted critical provisions in the Bill that impose restrictive measures on public discourse surrounding referendum issues, suggesting these measures are inconsistent with contemporary democratic practices.
Lal expressed support for establishing a national referendum framework as mandated by the Constitution but criticized the Bill for having “severe flaws.” He particularly pointed out Sections 22 and 23, which, according to him, impose a blanket ban on public discussions related to referendum topics before, during, and after the voting process. This lack of clarity regarding any restricted period raises concerns that the ban could potentially criminalize informal discussions among citizens well into the future.
Despite reassurances from the Attorney-General’s Office that the Bill is not aimed at stifling public debate, Lal emphasized the importance of legislative wording, arguing that legal language takes precedence over political intentions. He underscored that such restrictions are at odds with international democratic standards, notably referencing the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice on Referendums, a recognized global benchmark for ensuring free and fair referendum processes.
Lal concluded by arguing that if Fiji is committed to alleviating perceptions of a democratic deficit within its 2013 Constitution, any amendments to it must embody elevated democratic standards rather than regress to lower ones. This stance highlights an urgent need for dialogue and reform to ensure that democratic principles are upheld in Fiji’s governance.