Ritika Pratap 
Arthur Moses
Arthur Moses, representing the Fiji Law Society, in a referral matter before the Supreme Court, argues that the court should not try to change the 2013 Constitution.
Responding to the three questions that arose yesterday, he says that the most authentic way for a country to express self-determination is through a referendum, not by the court picking its own percentages to change the law.
Moses argues that the court’s job is to interpret the law, not to rewrite the Constitution by replacing the required 75% majority with a different figure.
“So we have to be careful not to slip into any preconceived views about percentages in the referendum in order to create an artificial mechanism to do something that you haven’t got the power to do and to draw this court into a controversy. That’s all I’m asking the court, to take a step back and think about what it’s being asked to do in the context in which it’s being asked to do it.”
Moses warns that doing so would be a “radical change” that oversteps the court’s judicial authority and could undermine its credibility.
He concludes by stating that since the Constitution has been accepted through three democratic elections, the court should not now try to partially reject it.
Stream the best of Fiji on VITI+. Anytime. Anywhere.
