[File Photo]

The debate over the 2013 Constitution amendments has intensified in Parliament.

Member of Parliament Sachida Nand defended his recent vote in favor of the Constitutional amendments after being labeled a “snake” for his decision.

He clarified that his vote was based on principles, not personal gain and expressed frustration at accusations of opportunism.

Nand compared his actions to those MP’s who abstained from voting on the Remuneration Bill passed last year only to later accept the benefits of the revised salary.

He stood by his vote, questioning the integrity of those who took advantage of the situation after abstaining.

Nand emphasized that the 2013 Constitution, though foundational, was crafted by a select few and lacked the inclusivity and transparency a national Constitution should embody.

He argued that the Constitution must be flexible, able to evolve with the changing needs of the Fijian people.

Nand pointed out that since Fiji’s independence in 1970, the country has had four different Constitutions, each reflecting the nation’s changing values and political realities.

He also criticized the lack of consultation in the drafting of the 2013 Constitution, noting that the public had only two weeks to provide feedback, which he deemed insufficient.

He also raised concerns over the 75 percent majority vote required in Parliament and a national referendum, calling it a nearly impossible barrier, as no election in Fiji’s history has reached such a voter turnout.

Nand stressed that the proposed amendments aimed at making the Constitution more inclusive and representative, reaffirming his commitment to a democratic process that would involve ex-tensive consultation with the public.

He urged MPs and citizens to support the amendments, hoping they would lead to a more inclusive and dynamic governance system that reflects the true will of the people.

Minister for Rural and Maritime Development and NDMO Sakiasi Ditoka also criticized the current Constitutional amendment process, describing it as undemocratic and nearly impossible to navigate.

Ditoka pointed out that the referendum process, requiring three-quarters of all registered voters’ approval, sets an unattainable barrier, particularly in a diverse democracy with varying voter turnout.

He argued that this provision undermines democratic representation, giving disproportionate power to a minority of registered voters.

Ditoka called for a reform of the amendment process to make it more achievable, ensuring it reflects the will of the majority while maintaining broad public support. He concluded that the cur-rent process hinders democratic progress and urged Parliament to adopt a more accessible approach to Constitutional change.

Government MP Lynda Tabuya echoed concerns about the amendment process, criticizing it as undemocratic and unrealistic.

She emphasized that the 2013 Constitution was imposed after the military regime’s rule without adequate public consultation, contrasting it with the broader participation allowed by the Ashgai Commission of 2012.

Tabuya questioned the opposition’s defense of the high amendment threshold, calling it a defense of an undemocratic system.

She proposed replacing the referendum with a Constitutional review, which would be more consultative, inclusive, and reflective of the people’s will.

As the debate continues, Fiji’s political landscape remains divided over the legitimacy of the current amendment process and the need for reform.

MPs will resume the debate after dinner, with the proposed amendments remaining a central point of contention.

Stream the best of Fiji on VITI+. Anytime. Anywhere.