Devanesh Sharma, a lawyer based in Suva, has contested the inclusion of an affidavit from Jolie Ann Lee, who recently left Fiji. He argues that incorporating her statement is unnecessary because the issue is still under police investigation. This dispute arose during a court session concerning six individuals associated with the Grace Road Group of Companies.
The case focuses on a judicial review regarding the decision made by Immigration Minister Pio Tikoduadua to classify several Korean nationals as prohibited immigrants. The individuals involved include Sung Jun Lee, Nam Suk Choi, Byeongjoon Lee, Beoseop Shin, Jung Yong Kim, and Jinsook Yoon.
Sharma presented his arguments before Justice Anare Tuilevuka, who was overseeing the judicial review application and a request for new evidence. The Attorney-General’s Office had submitted an application on November 21 to introduce new evidence, supported by an affidavit from Interim Director of Immigration, Amelia Koromaisavai.
While Sharma filed a response affidavit, he raised objections to the inclusion of Lee’s statement. He highlighted that Lee, a dual citizen of the United States and South Korea, is currently in the U.S. and thus cannot be subjected to cross-examination. He pointed out that an unsigned statement attributed to Lee is present, but the ongoing investigations render it premature to include her affidavit. He reiterated that the evidence should be confined to that of Ms. Koromaisavai.
Lee’s affidavit alleges poor living and working conditions enforced by church elders on its members. In light of this, Justice Tuilevuka instructed Sharma to present arguments concerning both the judicial review and the new evidence by January 15, 2025. The Attorney-General’s Office is required to respond within 14 days after that, and the hearing is set for January 20, 2025, with a ruling expected on January 28, 2025.
This situation reflects the complexities of legal proceedings involving immigration and human rights issues, and the court’s careful approach indicates a commitment to thoroughness and fair consideration of all evidence. As the case continues, it highlights the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring that allegations are treated with the seriousness they deserve while respecting legal protocols. There is hope that the outcome will bring clarity and promote justice for all parties involved.
Leave a comment