[Photo: FILE]
Private control of Cloudbreak was the reason Fiji introduced the Surfing Act, former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has told Parliament.
Sayed-Khaiyum said the law was introduced to stop a private operator from having exclusive control over a nationally important marine resource.
He told the Standing Committee on Justice, Law and Human Rights that Tavarua Island resort had secured a 20-year exclusive licence over Cloudbreak under an arrangement reached with the government in the 1990s.
Sayed-Khaiyum said the arrangement meant even people living in nearby communities could not freely access the surfing area.
He rejected claims that the Surfing Act was an erosion of iTaukei rights.
Instead, he said the law opened up commercial opportunities for communities near the surfing areas.
Sayed-Khaiyum said that after the law was introduced, local people could take surfers to the areas by boat and earn income from the growing surfing industry.
He also said the law did not remove customary fishing rights.
The restrictions, he said, applied specifically to surfing and water sports. Fishing and other rights remained protected.
The law also prohibited activities that could damage reefs, lagoons and marine life and required surfing areas to be kept free of pollution and contamination.
Sayed-Khaiyum said the key safeguard was that no person could claim exclusive use of a surfing area.
He is now questioning how the proposed Commercial Use of Marine Areas Bill will replace that framework and says its impact on access and customary rights must be properly examined.
Sayed-Khaiyum also criticised the explanatory notes accompanying the Bill, saying they did not adequately reflect the circumstances that led to the Surfing Act being introduced.
