Fijileaks
  • Home
  • Archive Home
  • In-depth Analysis
    • BOI Report into George Speight and others beatings
  • Documents
  • Opinion
  • CRC Submissions
  • Features
  • Archive

INSULTING OUR INTELLIGENCE: Clear definitions in the Clause 24 of the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Bill will build confidence in people- Director of Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission, Raj

18/5/2017

3 Comments

 

He wants clear definitions of words like demean, defame and undermine to be made simple - its coming from the Grand Master of Gnomic English
Demean: cause a severe loss in the dignity of and respect for (someone or something); do something that is beneath one's dignity
Defame:
damage the good reputation of (someone); slander or libel
Undermine:
lessen the effectiveness, power, or ability of, especially gradually or insidiously

From Fijivillage News
18 May 2017


The Director of the Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission, Ashwin Raj says giving clear definitions of words like demean, defame and undermine in clause 24 of the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Bill will build confidence in people and strengthen the legislation.

Section 24 of the proposed law says that any person whose words or actions defame, demean or undermine the sanctity of parliament, the Speaker or a committee commits an offence and is liable upon conviction in the case of a natural person, to a fine not exceeding $30,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both.

If a body corporate is found guilty of doing the same, they can be fined up to $100,000 or face prison terms for each director and manager not exceeding 5 years, or face both penalties.

While making the commission’s submission on the bill to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights, Raj said that the definitions and the thresholds will assist people.

He says people will then know that they can criticise policies and raise issues that affect them.

Raj also says that the enforcement and adjudicating authority in clause 24 needs to be defined to avoid any conflict of interest.

He says the adjudicating authority needs to develop a legal reasoning that is clear, consistent and transparent with thresholds in establishing the limits of acceptable criticism.

Raj also says that a clear distinction also needs to be made between statements made in relation to an individuals dignity and those that might harm the nation at large.

Meanwhile the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement Executive Director Nalini Singh says they are concerned with section 24 of the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Bill as she says that it is inconsistent with section 17 of the constitution.

Section 17 of the constitution clearly states that every person has the right to freedom of speech, expression, thought, opinion and publication however it does not protect propaganda for war, incitement to violence or insurrection against the constitution, advocacy or hatred that is based on any prohibited ground of discrimination and constitutes incitement to cause harm.

The section further states that a law may limit, or may authorise the limitation of, the rights and freedoms in the interests of national security, public safety, public order, public morality, the protection or maintenance of the reputation, privacy, dignity, rights or freedoms of other persons including the right to be free from hate speech, whether directed against individuals or groups.

FWRM’s Nalini Singh says the words defame, demean or undermine in section 24 are not defined in the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Bill.

She adds by not having these terms clearly defined within the bill suggests potential misuse and a subjective application or interpretation by MPs that take offence to any public utterance.

Singh highlighted that previous submissions show that not only are the terms wide and vague, but it fails to acknowledge that there is an existing Defamation Act.

She says in the interest of the public and in recognition of the substantive efforts that Fiji has made to return to democracy, the FWRM strongly suggests the removal of section 24.

Chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights Ashneel Sudhakar says there is no special protection to Members of Parliament in the section.

Sudhakar has stressed that people can still question and criticise the government and parliamentarians.
He has also stated that all cases will be heard in the High Court.

Ironically, the MP charged with chairing the hearings into the controversial Bill is none other than FFP's Ashneel Sudhakar - 'Mr Mortein' - who had no hesitation in resorting to threats and abuse against his opponents (both political and ordinary citizens) before entering Parliament and is now Aiyaz Khaiyum's Government Whip. He defamed, demeaned, and tried to undermine his opponents; to date, no local journalist has confronted him for his actions, calling those who stood up to him as "COCKROACHES":

Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
Picture
3 Comments
Welcome Home
18/5/2017 05:34:07 pm

Build confidence in the people? Really? Which people? The same who were 'demeaned', 'defamed' and 'undermined' exactly seventeen years ago today 19th May 2000 by a rabble, a mob incited by ...WHOM? Those who insist "NOW THERE ARE THINGS YOU MAY NOT SAY?" That will never happen. Obviously, the anger and betrayal of those 'never-to-be-forgotten' months of anguish, bestiality and depravity are too little grasped even now? Can that be possible? Is it tolerable? The simple answer is no!
There will never be silence on these events because silence is unendurable and The Dead are to be avenged - indefinitely.

Reply
Rajend Naidu
18/5/2017 10:53:06 pm

Editor,
Corrupt Political Elite
We read in CNN article ' Brazilian President Michel Temer, accused of bribery,says he will not resign' ( 18/5 ) that Brazil's highest court opened an investigation into President Michel Temer after one of the country's biggest newspaper O Globo accused him of paying a former Senate colleague ( currently residing in prison! ) hush money.
According to O Globo the information regarding the bribery was revealed when the owners of the meat and chicken conglomerate JBS testified before the Supreme Court behind close doors as part of a massive corruption investigation, dubbed " Operation Car Wash ", which implicates former and current politicians .
The corruption probe has led to the imprisonment of some of Brazil's most prominent politicians and business owners.
If you want to know more read ' Highest Reaches of Power Implicated' in the same article .Also reported in France 24 Live and DW News this morning.
The Brazilian corruption scandal just confirms the bigger the economy, the bigger the money, the bigger the political sharks.
Wonder on the basis of what has been revealed in the Fijileaks and other alternative media if a similar Brazilian style court investigation was opened how many of our " most prominent politicians and business owners " would be sitting in jail, instead of strutting about with an air of pomposity?
Sincerely,
Rajend Naidu

Reply
Rajend Naidu
19/5/2017 12:56:48 am

Editor,
The Corrupt In Our Society
You think you have corrupt people in Fiji as revealed by Fijileaks and others?
You do.
But look at what we got!
We read in ' ATO deputy commissioner Michael Cranston charged with abusing position as public official ' ( abc 18/5 ) that it comes after The Daily Telegraph today revealed Cranston's son , Adam, was charged over his alleged role in a fraud syndicate that police claim stole more than $165m - one of the biggest white-collar crimes in Australia's history...
Assets seized in the past two days by the AFP include 25 motor vehicles - luxury, vintage and racing vehicles - 18 residential properties, 12 motorbikes, more than 100 bank accounts and share trading accounts, two aircrafts, firearms, jewellery, artwork, vintage wines and at least $1m located in a safety deposit box...
How the rich get rich and display their conspicuous wealth... Well, let's just say, not always by honest means.
We have that variety in Australia. It's well known.
We have that variety in Fiji.
Often able to escape justice because Fiji is in Myrdal's conceptualisation a " soft state" with loose democratic accountability and law enforcement.
Sincerely,
Rajend Naidu

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    editor@fijileaks.com

    ARCHIVES

    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    Picture
    Picture