Court Dismisses Former MP’s Redress Appeal, Orders $2,000 Payment

The Suva High Court has dismissed the constitutional redress application filed by former FijiFirst MP Vijendra Prakash, requiring him to pay $2,000 to the Attorney General’s Office. Prakash sought this redress on the grounds that his right to a fair trial, as protected under Section 15 of the 2013 Constitution, was allegedly infringed upon.

In his application, Prakash named the Chief Registrar as the first respondent, the Attorney General as the second respondent, and the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) as an interested party. He contended that Justice Thusara Kumarage’s ruling from October 2022 impeded his rights by making his ability to present evidence during the trial conditional on waiving his right to remain silent.

Prakash was previously charged and convicted for providing false information to a public servant and for unlawfully obtaining a financial advantage of $33,679. In February 2023, he received a 36-month prison sentence, with a requirement to serve 28 months and eight months suspended for five years. Following his conviction, he filed an appeal, which was dismissed by Justice Isikeli Mataitoga on July 26, 2024.

Justice Pita Bulamainavalu ruled the constitutional redress application was an abuse of process, emphasizing that suitable alternative remedies were available under Section 44(4) of the Constitution and the High Court Rules of 1988. However, the court did not impose costs on FICAC.

This ruling highlights the judiciary’s commitment to uphold legal procedures while maintaining the integrity of the judicial system. Although the decision may be disappointing for Prakash, it reinforces the importance of following lawful channels for redress rather than resorting to constitutional battles that have already been addressed in courts.

In summary, while Vijendra Prakash’s attempt for constitutional redress was denied, this reinforces the understanding that legal frameworks are established to support due process. Moving forward, it could encourage individuals in similar situations to focus on legitimate legal avenues for resolving grievances.