Apenisa Waqairadovu 
Unity Fiji has questioned whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to determine a Cabinet referral under the 2013 Constitution.
Appearing before the Court, counsel for the party, Naomi Raikaci, argued that while the Cabinet has referred five questions for interpretation under Section 91(5), including whether the 1997 Constitution remains valid and applicable.
However, the party’s lawyer told the bench that before answering that question, the Court must first determine whether it has jurisdiction.
[Naomi Raikaci]
She submitted that although the Administration of Justice Decree 2009 had initially established Fiji’s superior courts, including the Supreme Court, the 2013 Constitution repealed that decree but did not expressly re-establish the Supreme Court under Section 98.
“The question is, my Lord and my Lady, the establishment of the Supreme Court and the 2013 Constitution. Having examined Section 98 of the 2013 Constitution, it is unclear.”
According to her, while Section 98 grants the Court powers to hear Cabinet referrals, the absence of a clear provision establishing the Court itself raises doubts about whether it can validly entertain such matters.
She told the Court that in Unity Fiji’s view, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Section 91(5) is therefore “questionable” unless the Constitution expressly sets out its establishment.
Unity Fiji is one of nine interveners making submissions in the landmark case, where the Cabinet has sought the Court’s opinion on the interpretation of Sections 159 and 160 of the 2013 Constitution.
Stream the best of Fiji on VITI+. Anytime. Anywhere.
