Constitutional lawyer and human rights advocate, Professor Shaista Shameem has stated to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Steering Committee that reconciliation starts with truth and we need to tell the truth first.
While speaking in her personal capacity during the consultation in Lautoka, Professor Shameem says everyone in Fiji has a grievance about something but we need to get to the bottom of things, first is there really a genuine grievance, second, is that about misunderstanding or a misrepresentation or mistake, or is it about self-promotion that creates a false impression.
She also asks the issue about compensation, and who pays and to whom.
Professor Shameem told the people present at the consultation that we all focus on 1987, but 1987 was not the start of the problem, it was the culmination of grievances left unaddressed.
She states that Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s endorsement of the 1997 Constitution should be apology enough as that Constitution had an excellent Bill of Rights.
The constitutional lawyer says it was a document of national reconciliation at the time on which the 2013 Constitution was built.
She says the 1997 Constitution had an immunity clause; and she believes many would not agree if it is to be removed.
Professor Shameem says she worked with the Bill of Rights provisions for 10 years as the Director of the Fiji Human Rights Commission.
She says the Bill of Rights gave Chandrika Prasad his rights back and abolished the death penalty which George Speight faced.
Professor Shameem highlighted that the Bill of Rights delivered rights to them both, one a perpetrator, the other the victim.
Professor Shameem also raised the issue as to how far back do the grievances need to go to achieve effective reconciliation.
She adds that to many it's the signing of the Deed of Cession, considered by them to be a breach of trust.
The constitutional lawyer says Fiji was ceded to Queen Victoria by King Cakobau supported by the chiefs who signed but it was handed over to everyone in 1970 at independence.
She asks if this is a grievance still simmering that may be linked to 1987 and 2000.
Professor Shameem says for some others, the grievance relates to loss of land, confiscation or land grab of the tribes that resisted or disagreed with colonization.
She says we have been informed about the Draunivi and Naseyani people for example, who consider their history to be one of displacement.
She asks who will pay compensation and would it be the taxpayers.
The constitutional lawyer also highlighted that for some others, the significant minority, it was the misrepresentation of indenture that remains a grievance stating that Indians were taken from India under the new system of slavery called indenture.
She asks whether the British Government will be part of the reconciliation process and also, the Indian Government as their principalities were part of the labour trade, because Indians were encouraged if not forced to go elsewhere including Fiji during famines and natural disasters.
She says that for the past 14 years whatever else was wrong, people had security, especially of the minority groups in Fiji.
Professor Shameem adds everyone is now feeling unsettled due to proposed policies, for example the Fiji Development Bank new loan policy which many call discrimination and in violation of the equality provisions of all Constitutions in Fiji since 1970.
She highlighted that on the one hand they feel insecure, on the other hand reconciliation is being proposed; and it doesn't make any sense to many.
Professor Shameem also stressed that gender reconciliation is also important.
She asks why do we have so much violence against women and children reported by the courts.
The lawyer asked how the ministry can look at gender reconciliation adding that it is a priority.
Stay tuned for the latest news on our radio stations
