Grave concerns have been raised over proposed constitutional immunity provisions that could extend protection to Fijian state officials, potentially covering unlawful actions against te country's own people.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights recently questioned justifications given for retaining and expanding immunity provisions under a constitutional reform process the Fiji government initiated.
The controversial draft provisions could remain under consideration until 2031.
Under the authority of UN High Commissioner Volker Türk, the office noted both Fiji's current constitution and its proposed replacement contain provisions that may be inconsistent with the nation's obligations under international human rights treaties, emphasising that constitutional reform should be guided by international human rights principles.
"The OHCHR raised concerns about the proposed expansion of immunity to additional (Fijian) state officials, the justification for retaining immunity in a proposal initiated by a democratically elected government and the potential extension of immunity from the period between 2006 and 2014 to the period between 2006 and 2031," the UN Human Rights Pacific's regional office said.
The department of the UN secretariat warned the proposed section 207 of Fiji's constitutional changes could undermine accountability for human rights violations by "entrenching immunity and restricting access to legal remedies".
The changes would provide and limit some Fijian state officials what the law could hold them accountable over their past actions.
"The proposed section 207 entrenches immunity, restricts judicial review and prevents (Fiji's) state compensation for covered harm, potentially denying victims of human rights violations access to justice and accountability," the statement from the regional office noted.
The provisions raised further concerns about the Melanesian nation's obligations under international human rights law, particularly the requirement to provide effective remedies to the victims of violations committed by those state officials acting in an official capacity. This is a reference to an article of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which requires UN nation-states to ensure effective remedies for human rights violations.
Articles 12, 13 and 14 of this UN Convention against Torture, to which UN Human Rights officials specifically referred, requires "prompt and impartial investigations into allegations of torture, accessible complaints procedures, protection for complainants and enforceable rights to redress".
Fiji has previously been handed recommendations concerning constitutional immunity over UN human rights mechanisms, including from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and from the Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review Process, which analyses the records of human rights.
An independent Fijian community movement has also called Sitiveni Rabuka out over concerning human rights issues under the Prime Minister's watch.
Other human rights concerns from Fiji's proposed constitutional changes are set to be addressed in a separate written submission.
The latest intervention adds to concerns raised during the constitutional consultation process about whether immunity provisions should be retained, expanded or removed.
The Office of the UN High Commissioner maintained that Fiji's constitutional reform process must protect victims' rights to justice, accountability and effective remedies.
