Dialogue Fiji expresses its grave concern and disbelief over the National Referendum Bill 2025, which contains some of the most far-reaching and undemocratic restrictions on free expression ever proposed in Fiji.
Executive Director, Nilesh Lal says for a government that came into power decrying the draconian laws made by the former government, and posturing as champions of democracy, such a restrictive
referendum law is absolutely shocking.
The Bill bans any referendum-related badge, symbol, banner, poster, advertisement
or material “at any time either before, during, or after” a referendum, and makes it an
offence “by word, message, writing or in any other manner” to attempt to influence
how any person votes.
Lal says the Bill “effectively criminalises all forms of speech or expression on a referendum issue.”
He says under this Bill, civic education, public awareness campaigns, academic commentary,
CSO engagement, media analysis, or even one citizen trying to persuade another would become criminal offences.
Lal says these provisions amount to a total shutdown of public debate on issues of critical national importance, and something as important as the contents of the country’s supreme law.
He says this is about as undemocratic as it gets, and it goes far beyond anything ever imposed
by FijiFirst.
Lal says in fact, it is significantly worse than the restrictions or anything that we saw under the previous government, and it shuts down public participation entirely at the precise moment when open debate is most essential.
Dialogue Fiji notes that no liberal democracy has anything remotely comparable to these provisions.
Lal highlights that in Australia, referendum campaigns are open, competitive and citizen-led.
Campaign materials are permitted, vigorous public debate is expected, and civic education is
encouraged.
He says the Electoral Commission provides neutral information, but private citizens, NGOs, academics and political parties may freely advocate for either outcome.
The only restrictions are a short broadcast advertising pause and rules at polling stations — nothing that resembles Fiji’s blanket criminalisation.
Dialogue Fiji is especially concerned that the Bill constructs a referendum process that
is state-controlled, speech-restricted and structurally biased, with the Supervisor
of Elections becoming the only lawful source of referendum-related expression.
Lal says a referendum can only have legitimacy if citizens are free to hear arguments, discuss
issues, receive civic education and express their views.
He says this Bill prohibits all of that.
Dialogue Fiji urges the Government and Parliament to immediately reconsider this legislation.
It calls for the Bill to be fundamentally redrafted, and for genuine, open public consultation before any referendum framework is adopted.
We have sought comments from Acting Attorney General, Siromi Turaga. He is yet to respond.
