The University of the South Pacific yesterday sought the court’s assistance to halt further strike action in support of their demand that the university’s council remove its vice-chancellor, Professor Pal Ahluwalia.

The university’s two unions, the Association of the University of the South Pacific Staff (AUSPS) and the University of the South Pacific Staff Union (USPSU) took strike action on Friday October 18, 2024 although not all members went out on strike. The striking union members returned to work last Friday October 25, 2024 after a week-long strike, but have threatened that their strike ballot mandates allow them to go out on strike again at any time if their demand is not met.

Lawyer Wylie Clarke appeared before Suva judge, Justice Chaitanya Lakshman, asking the civil court to grant an injunction to stop any further strike action amidst the examination period.

Mr Clarke said the university was very concerned about the disruptive effects a further strike might have on students.

He informed the court that the strike ballot mandates from members under the Employment Relations Act was in relation only to the removal of Professor Pal Ahluwalia.

However, instead of only striking only on that issue, striking union members were also demanding the reinstatement of biology lecturer and AUSPS president Dr Tamara Osborne-Naikatini.

Dr Osborne-Naikatini was dismissed after reportedly revealing in an interview with Islands Business magazine, confidential details regarding Prof Ahluwalia’s contract renewal review.

Dr Osborne-Naikatini had been a staff representative on the university committee that had decided by a majority to recommend the renewal of the vice-chancellor’s contract.

According to Mr Clarke, any further strike would be outside of the legal mandates given by AUSPS and USPSU members in the strike ballots.

Lawyer Siddarth Nandan, who represented the two unions, countered this by saying any further strike would be lawful and the claims by the university that further strike action would disrupt students’ examinations was “exaggerated”.

He said under the law an injunction to stop a strike can only be granted if the strike involved an essential service and only if it was in the public interest for the court to grant the injunction.

Justice Lakshman said those involved should be reasonable because with every right there were limitations and obligations.

Mr Nandan has been granted 14 days to file his submissions and Mr Clarke to file his response seven days after.

The matter will be called again on November 21.