Home » Uncategorized » Our land is NOT protected. Only individual rights/ownership are protected not mataqali ownership. Rebutting accusations in the Fiji Sun.

Our land is NOT protected. Only individual rights/ownership are protected not mataqali ownership. Rebutting accusations in the Fiji Sun.

Land Safe – Fiji Sun May 19, 2013
First, Mr Isireli Koyamaibole  is not the spokesman for the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA) on anything. He is merely speaking on his own accord.
Second, the security and the protection of the iTaukei land is properly entrenched in chapter 13-Group Rights, of the 1997 Constitution. Also entrenched are the Rotuman Land Act, the Banaban Land Act and the Agricultural Landlord and Tenant Act (s.185) and other Acts.
Any move to make any alteration to these Acts of Parliament must fulfill the provisions clearly provided under this section.
Although the 1997 Constitution was abrogated by the illegal regime of Bainimarama, the Fiji Court of Appeal celebrated judgment on 9th April 2009 had declared the regime unlawful. Henceforth, that decision has not been repealed nor challenged by anyone up to now.
Third, a careful study and analysis of the Ghai Constitution Commission Draft Report 2012, will show very close resemblance of the protection of the indigenous land rights with that of the 1997 Constitution. Reference to Article 11- through to Article 17, particularly Article 17, clearly demonstrates the entrenched protection for the iTaukei land.
Compare these two (the 1997 Constitution and Ghai Draft 2012) with the Regime’s Draft 2013, there is a conspicuous absence of any entrenched protection of iTaukei land in the Regime’s Draft.
But Article 27 of the Regime’s Draft has been contemplated as the replacement provision for the protection of the iTaukei land- as widely propagated by the illegal AG and his regime. A very general and non- specific provision amongst the Bill of Rights.
The illegal Prime Minister should try to determine where in that article does it address the “mataqali” or group ownership of land which is customary among the iTaukei. In fact one cannot, because the article has to do with individual rights/ownership only. How can you therefore protect and safeguard iTaukei land when you have not made any specific provision under Group Rights as opposed to individual rights. Land is owned communally in Fijian society.
Fourth, the Regime’s Draft has also removed the provision for Customary Law and Customary Rights (s186) of the 1997 Constitution. So gone also are the recognition for customary law and customary rights that deals with the equitable share of royalties over fishing rights and mineral exploration from the land or seabed.
Illegal PM Voreqe Bainimarama may interpret his draft constitution anyway he wants it, but what is clear to me is that, this is not the way to achieve any political mileage or gain but to raise my strongest objection on what the iTaukei or indigenous Fijian have lost when considering what each of the 1997 Constitution; the Ghai’s Draft, 2012; and the Regime’s  Draft 2013; had to offer.
Let me reiterate that there is no constitutional protection for any law on iTaukei land, Rotuman land and Banaban land under the Regime’s Draft. Therefore Article 157, on Procedure for Amendment, of the Regime’s Draft does not apply in this particular case. Specifically,the claim advanced by Bainimarama that the vote of three-quarters of the members of Parliament and the three-quarters majority in the referendum for all registered voters will not be required.
In fact the entrenched protection for the key Acts namely iTaukei Lands Act, iTaukei Land Trust Act, Rotuman Lands Act, Banaban Lands act, and the Agricultural Landlord and Tenant Act, has been  effectively removed in the Regime’s Draft Constitution.
There is absolutely nothing to hide nor anything sinister to propagate but one thing can be assured now is that these laws regarding indigenous lands can be amended by a simple majority in parliament. This is a major change in weakening the iTaukei land ownership and security in their own country.

I Koyamaibole

9 thoughts on “Our land is NOT protected. Only individual rights/ownership are protected not mataqali ownership. Rebutting accusations in the Fiji Sun.

  1. Vinaka Ratu Sai. O nomu yaca e sa yali tiko. Vaka au raica na nona qavovoka e dua na article ya.

  2. That is the truth as presented here! Me da sa yadra mada nai iTaukei sa kua mada na muriwale tu!

  3. You fijians dont own an inch of land in Fiji. What the fuk you all harping about?

    You are mere CUSTODIANS of the land.

    You cant sell it.

    You cant mortgage it to get a loan from a bank so that you can cultivate it.

    You cant trade/barter it.

    However, you can lease it, like all other leasee, and cultivate it but you will have to pay lease money for it, like many other farmers?

    Full stop.

  4. Koyamaibole, you failed to share Section 169 of the Draft on the Preservation of Laws. That will tell you the existence and continuation of every other law including the Banaban, Rotuman, iTaukei Lands Act, Native Lands and whatnot.

    Otherwise, the promulgation of this draft Constitution will see the closer of the iTLTB. So, I think your interpretation is wrong or based on ignorance or just a straight forward lie.

  5. Kai Moala, Rt Sai, and Anonymous….please take time to read the Draft from start to finish and make your own….your own assessment. Sa rauta mada na lasu tiko.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s