The honorable speaker, honorable prime minister, deputy prime ministers, lead of the opposition, members of parliament, ladies and gentlemen, those following the proceedings from home and abroad. The topic this morning is something that closer to heart and close to the people of Fiji. I'll be speaking on the strengthening of it rights and the institutions anchored in the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People. Mr. Mr. Speaker, sir, a law may be written in a matter of days, debated in a matter of hours, and passed in a matter of minutes, but its consequence can be felt for generations. This is why when we speak about the laws that affected the people, we are not simply talking about legislation. We're speaking about land. We're speaking about culture, identity, and tradition. We are speaking about institutions that have carried the voice and the interest for it took people and ultimately we are speaking about confidence. Confidence that law will listen to the people it governs, protect what is entrusted to them and provide a fair foundation for those who come after us. Mr. Mr. Speaker, sir, I rise today to update these officers on a matter that touches the conscious of our nation. Between 2007 and 2022, close to 30 laws were introduced through proclamations, decrees, and subsequently acts of parliament affecting matters of significance for the ATK people. Of those 26 laws that have been specifically identified for review because they bear directly the kay land resource trust funds and traditional institutions. 26 laws may appear at first glance to be simply a number but behind every one of those laws are people. Behind them are land owners, families, villages and institutions. Behind them are questions of land, identity, culture, tradition and representation. And behind them is something even more important. confident in the law and in the institution that make it and administrate. The question before us therefore is not simply how many laws can be repealed, amended or replaced. The more important question is how do we address the legitimate grievances of the past without creating new injustice for the future. Mr. Speaker, sir, that is the responsibility this government has undertaken. It requires us to acknowledge our history honestly, listen to the concerns of it people respectfully and undertake reform with a care and constitutional discipline that matters of land, culture, identity, tradition, institution and fundamental rights demand. The historical context, Mr. Mr. Speaker, sir, the laws introduced during the period of 2007 to22 reach into the areas at the very heart of it life including land, natural resource, trust funds, provincial and traditional institutions and representation in this very parliament. A number of these measures were introduced without the level of consultation that the Bundu expected and considered necessary. We should acknowledge that history but acknowledging history should not be about assigning blame for its own sake. It should be about understanding what happened recognizing the concerns that remain ensuring that the lessons of that period inform the decision we make today. Mr. Speaker sir the Supreme Court's opinion on the 29th of August 2025 provides an important constitutional context for this discussion. The court considered the circumstances surrounding the development of the 2013 constitution, including the comparatively brief consultation process that preceded it adoption following the setting aside of the US guide draft which had emerged from a more extensive nationwide consultation process. The significance of this history is not merely academic. The constitution is the framework within which our institutions operate and through which the rights and responsibilities of people are protected. Well, the process through which laws and constitutional arrangements are developed as rough communities feeling unheard or excluded. Government has a responsibility to listen and consider what can be done to spread the confidence in our democratic institutions. The grievances raised by chiefs provincial counc are real. The Musa Turaga the great cult of thieves and the preminent institutes of it governance was suspended in 2027 2007 and the statute fundraiser was subsequently removed by decree in 2012. The legislative framework governing the land trust board was amended by decree five times between 2009 and 2011 and the dedicated communal representation that had provided for the voice in this parliament was abolished under the electoral decree of 2014. These matters are not simply historical footnotes. They continue to inform how many okay view the relationship between their communities, the institutions and the state. This government therefore believes that they must be addressed with honesty, respect and responsibility. Mr. Speaker, sir, the people's coalition government approach to these matters is firmly anchored in the United Nations declaration of the rights of indigenous people what is commonly known as UN. The declaration recognizes among other things the rights of indigenous people to self-determination to free prior informed consent in decisions affecting their land their territories and resources to maintain their own solutions and to seek read as we appropriate for historical wrongs for this government. These principles are not simply words reserved for international forums. They provide an important standard against which we should consider our own laws and institutions. The implementation of this PR must be take place within the constitutional and legal framework of Fiji. The task before government is therefore not simply to remove legislation to ensure that legal framework we establish fair, workable, constitutionally sound and capable of serving the generations to come. My office has therefore applied this principle in reviewing the 26 laws identified from 2007 to 2022 having a direct bearing on K land resource trust funds and traditional institutions. Where appropriate government has already acted and where work remains that work continues. Mr. Speaker, sir, let me set up clearly what has already been achieved. Since 2023, this government has stable 124 bills and necked 108 108 acts of parliament represent an enactment rate approaching approaching 87%. of the 26 laws at 859 have already been directly repealed, amended or superseded. These are not merely legislative statistics. They represent the concrete steps taken to review and Wednesday change the legal framework inherited by these governments. The media industry development appeal act 2020 repealed in its entirety the decree that had restricted public reporting and debate on matters including it landing and ges concerning the bosanga for well over a decade. The kale land trust amendment act 2023 and the affairs amendment act 2023 restored parliamentary ownership and oversight of the legislative framework governing the kalean trust board the affairs board and provincial administration. The state land amendment act 23 revisited the state lands regime as it had operated for amendments made during the decree period of 2011 to 2013. The high self risk commission act 23 reestablish an institution that had been abolished by dy in 2011 restoring independent mechanism in relation to senior public appointments. The local government amendment act 2023 and the local government act number two of 23 brought multiple governance including matters affecting native land boundaries back under appropriate parliamentary scrutiny. The forestry act 2025 mahogany act 2026 replaced the legislative regimes governing forestry mahogany resources much of which are now grown on it land and restored legislative oversight over these important resources. The sugar industry amendment act 2025 revisited the legislative framework affecting Korean owners who lease land for sugarcane production and the fish amendment act 2025 has strengthened the regulatory framework surrounding customary golingi an issue of long-standing importers to it communities measures demonstrate that government's approach is not one of simply making commitments there's already been tangible legislation action >> the reforms currently underway Mr. Mr. Speaker, sir, we recognize that the work is not complete. The right of indigenous people's bill 2025 is presently before the standing committee on justice, law, and human rights. This bill represent one of the most direct legislative responses to the concerns I've outlined today and seeks to provide a stronger legal framework for recognizing and protecting the rights of indigenous people of Fiji. The traditional knowledge and culture expression bill is also progressing. The alien draft has undergone further review and reconstruction and the minister of is currently providing his feedback on the policy document placed before it April this year. This work is important because traditional knowledge and cultural express are not simply council artifacts. They represent knowledge practices identity and heritage passed from one generation to another. They therefore require legal framework that provides appropriate recognition and protection. Discussions are also actively underway between the sol office and the ministry of it affairs concerning the future legal status of Mosaur to run. This is an important undertaking. The question is not simply whether the institute should have a legal status must also consider its composition, its functions, its relationship with other institutes of the state and its place within a constitutional framework that require careful consideration and engagement with hono a constitutional reform process. Mr. Speaker sir, I also wish to update this house on the work of the constitutional reform commission. The commission established in the wake of the Supreme Court's opinion completed nationwide public consultation on the 10th of July this year and now finalizing it report for submissions to excellency the press on the 31st of August 2026. This is a sign significant national process. It has provided features across the country with opportunity to express their views of the constitution and the constitutional arrangement under which our country is governed. As Mr. Speaker, section 159 and60 provides for a demanding process for constitutional amendment including the required parliamentary majority and approval through referendum. That threshold is important. It means that fundamental changes to a constitutional framework cannot be made simply because one government has the numbers to do so. Constitutional reform must be supported by a broad and considered national consensus. The work of the constitution reform commission is therefore is therefore not a delay to reform. It is part of the process through which the national processes can be built. I dispense that the reasonable question that members of the house and members of parl may ask is why there has been a delay in repealing these decrees. The answer is one of responsibility. Mr. Speaker, these roles do not exist in isolation. They interact with the lander trust administration, licensing arrangements, commercial relationship and other legal rights upon which individuals, families, land owning units, cooperatives and finances have relied for many years. A wholesale repeal without appropriate transitional agreements could create legal uncertaintity. It could affect existing land arrangements, trust distributions, lease licensing arrangement and other rights and obligations that have developed under the existing law. It is important that we recognize who could ultimately bear the consequence of that uncertaintity. It could be the very land owners, families and communities whom this reform have intended to protect. This government will therefore not trade one injustice for another. We must correct what requires correction. But we must do so in a manner that protects legitimate interest and avoids creating new legal difficulties. There is another reason why we must proceed carefully. The very history we are seeking to address privilege provides us with an important lesson. If legislation affecting the rights and interest of institutions of ATK was previously introduced without sufficient consultation, then it would be inconsistent for this government to respond by imposing new reforms without meaningful or prior consultation. We must not repeat that process that contribute to the grievances we are now seeking to address. That is why the rights of indigenous people's bill, the traditional knowledge and cult expressions bill and any future religions concerning are being developed through an engagement with the ministry of affairs learning owning units and the we are not simply seeking to change laws. We are seeking to build confidence in the laws that place them. Mr. Speaker, sir, I want to make a make a point very clear. Deliberate does not mean delayed in a careful process is not an inactive process. The government legislation program provides a clear pathway from policy development to solicit office vetting to ministry consultation to standing committee consideration and ultimately to parliament. That process is underway. The rights of indigenous bill is before the standing committee on justice law and human rights. The traditional knowledge and cult expresses bill is undergoing active ministry consultation. Work concerning the future legal state of Tanga is progressed between general office and the ministry of it and the constitutional reform commission is finalizing it report for submission by the end of this month. These are tangible milestones. They demonstrate that the reform program is progressing the standard we must set. Mr. Speaker, sir, there's sometimes an assumption that the speed at which legislation is passed is the best mesh of a government's commitment to reform. I respectfully suggest that it is not. The better measure is whether the reform is properly considered. Whether the people affected have the opportunity to be heard, where the resulting law is confusingly sound, where it can operate effectively in practice, and perhaps most importantly, whether it will endure because gener legislation that is passed quickly but later creates uncertaintity, division, or the need for future correction cannot necessarily be described as successful reform. Our responsibility is not simply to respond to the grimnesses of today. It is to ensure that the decision we make today do not become the grievances of tomorrow. This is particularly important when we are dealing with land, traditional institutions, cultural knowledge, natural resources and constitutional reason. These matters extend beyond parliament and one government. They affect they affect generations. Mr. Mr. Speaker, this government has inherited a a body close to their laws introduced between 2007 to 22 that affect it people. We have three further areas of significant reform actively progressing. The rights of the people's bill, the digital knowledge bill, cultural expressions bill and the work concerning the future legal status to run. These are important steps. Legislative reform should not be measured simply by the number of act passed should be measured by whether those those laws improve people's lives. This will strengthen the confidence in our institutions and provide a fair, stable and enduring framework for future generations. For it took this means ensuring that their land, their culture, the traditional knowledge and institutions and the legitimate interests are properly recognized and protected within the legal framework of Fiji for every region. It means ensuring that our laws are developed through processes that are transparent, participatory and constitutional and that respects the rights and dignity of all. The government therefore remains committed to completing this work. Mr. Speaker, sir, we'll continue to engage being fully with we will continue to work through the institutions of democracy. We'll continue to uphold the principles reflect the United Nations declaration on the rights of Jesus people. and we will continue to ensure that the reform is undertaken carefully, lawfully and with the objective of delivering outcomes that endure. Mr. Speaker, sir, history give us lessons. The responsibility of this parliament is to learn from them. We cannot change the past, but we can decide what we do with these lessons. We cannot choose consultation over imposition. We can choose inclusion over exclusion. We can choose lasting reform over temporary solutions. And we can choose to build laws, institutions that future generations can inherit with confidence. This is the response it will be for us. This is the work of this government is committed to completing. Mr. Speaker, sir,