Prominent Suva lawyer, Richard Naidu says some of the provisions in the National Referendum Bill are a mess, and they seem to have been “cut and pasted” from somewhere else without thinking.
Naidu says in a post that Section 22 makes little sense, and it’s wide enough to allow someone to be prosecuted for publishing a newspaper ad saying “I support the 2013 Constitution, please vote against changing it in the referendum.”
He says Section 23(1) does not seem to stop you from campaigning for one side or other in the referendum.
Naidu says it seems to stop you from persuading someone to vote or not vote in the referendum.
He says that does not make any sense either.
The lawyer says Section 23(2), however, seems to stop you from visiting someone’s home for “any purpose in connection” with the referendum, which could include saying “vote to keep the 2013 Constitution” (or not to).
Naidu says they breach basic free speech provisions in the Constitution, and they need to be fixed.
He adds the Government’s published response to Dialogue Fiji’s concerns about the Bill was hardly encouraging.
Naidu says they do not want anyone to do media or talkback on the Bill without consulting the Attorney General’s Office.
He says this is to “avoid miscommunication and public confusion”, and their drafting seems to have created a lot of that already.
We have sought a response from Acting Attorney General, Siromi Turaga.
