The motion to appeal the convictions and pending bail for former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho was addressed in court yesterday. The two defendants appeared before Justice Chandana Prematilaka at the Veiuto Complex in Suva, with Bainimarama’s wife, Mary, present to observe the proceedings.
During the session, the appellants’ attorney, Fatima Gul, noted that the notice of motion concerning their convictions and sentencing was submitted to the Fiji Courts of Appeal on April 23, followed by the bail application on July 23. She requested the court’s permission to add further grounds of appeal to those already filed.
Regarding the appeal against the conviction, the defense argues that the presiding judge made a legal error by convicting the two defendants immediately after declaring them guilty without following the stipulations outlined in Section 16 (1)(a), (b), and (c) of the Sentencing and Penalties Act 2009. Alternatively, they seek to pause the State’s appeal in the High Court regarding sentencing until the Supreme Court reviews the legality of John Rabuku’s appointment as acting Director of Public Prosecution.
Additionally, the defense contends that the State’s appeal against the sentence should be stayed until the Court of Appeal resolves their appeal against the conviction, asserting that proceeding with the State’s appeal first would severely prejudice their case.
In terms of the bail pending appeal, the defense claims a strong likelihood of success. They argue that the High Court properly allowed the appeal concerning ground (c) of the Director of Public Prosecutions’ grounds for appeal. The appellants assert that the sentence issued by the Magistrate’s Court was valid and that acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo made a mistake by not recusing himself after expressing views on the Appeal against Sentence on April 3.
Furthermore, they emphasize that actions sanctioned by former acting DPP Rabuku violated Section 105 (2) of the 2013 Constitution, rendering those actions null and void. The appellants have until November 5 to submit their affidavits regarding the bail matter, while the State is required to file theirs by December 3, with the case set to be heard around that time. Justice Prematilaka indicated that a hearing date will be established in the next session.