A lawyer representing the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC), Lavinia Ravuikadavu, and the attorney for Sarika Devi Raj, a former finance officer of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF), have been granted additional time to address issues regarding further disclosures in the ongoing legal matter.
Raj appeared in front of Magistrate Pulekeria Low at the Suva Magistrate’s Court, seeking a ruling concerning a variation of her bail conditions. Raj’s lawyer, Mohammed Saneem, requested that the condition mandating her regular reporting to the FICAC office be removed.
The case involves allegations that between September 20, 2019, and June 19, 2020, Raj engaged in actions resulting in an improper gain of $182,404.99. It is claimed that she did not disclose her status as the sole proprietor of Maleka Investment, a vendor for the RFMF, which purportedly harmed RFMF’s interests.
Saneem contended that FICAC had misled the court about executing a search warrant and noted that they were unable to provide certain requested documents directed by RFMF’s Legal director. He challenged Ravuikadavu on whose authority was paramount in this case, questioning whether it was the RFMF or the court itself.
In response, Ravuikadavu refuted the claim of having misled the court. She explained that while she executed the search warrant, RFMF possessed over 150 manuals and instructions, and that specific document requests were needed from Saneem. Ravuikadavu mentioned they had communicated the situation in a letter dated December 17, 2024.
Magistrate Low emphasized the importance of document provision by FICAC, given their role in filing charges against Raj. The court has instructed Saneem to file a further application to FICAC within 14 days, following which FICAC will have another 14 days to supply the requested documents. Both parties are set to reconvene in court on January 23.
This ongoing case highlights the complexities of legal proceedings involving corruption allegations and emphasizes the judiciary’s role in ensuring fairness and transparency throughout the process. It also reflects the commitment to due process as both parties work to clarify and resolve the issues at hand.
Leave a comment