The ongoing process of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) has encountered significant delays, as highlighted by Counsel Assistant to the Commission, Janet Mason. This setback stems from a series of unresolved issues, notably a dispute between the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) and the COI regarding the potential suspension of Malimali. The JSC has indicated that it believes it does not possess the authority to suspend Malimali, contrary to interpretations of the constitutional powers the JSC holds.
Mason emphasized the necessity for the COI to address the pressing questions in front of them, indicating that these delays have been anticipated but nonetheless unhelpful. In a statement made to the media outside the court, she referenced ongoing concerns regarding the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC), noting that the institution has faced criticism about being manipulated for the advantage of those in power.
Despite the challenges, Mason expressed her desire for the COI to proceed, even if it involves navigating difficult discussions and decisions. She mentioned that if conflicts persist between the JSC and COI, seeking legal guidance from a King’s Counsel may be necessary.
Currently, the inquiry processes are ongoing, with former FICAC Deputy Commissioner Francis Puleiwai under examination. The FICAC Commissioner is also slated to testify following Puleiwai. Future testimonies are expected from Solicitor-General Ropate Green, Alexander Forwood (the complainant), High Court Judge Justice Josaia Waqaivolavola, as well as several senior government officials.
In summary, while the COI is experiencing delays largely due to jurisdictional disagreements with the JSC, the willingness of the COI to seek legal clarity and continue proceedings offers hope that significant progress may be made moving forward. Journalistic focus on the transparency of this process could potentially restore confidence in the effectiveness of the oversight bodies involved.
Leave a comment