Suspended Director of Public Prosecutions, Christopher Pryde, has communicated with the Chairman of the Constitutional Tribunal, Justice Anare Tuilevuka, expressing his inability to take part in the upcoming tribunal hearing next week. In his correspondence, Pryde raised concerns regarding the fairness of the proceedings, emphasizing that he has been deprived of the necessary means to defend himself adequately.
Pryde argues that continuing with the hearing under such conditions constitutes a breach of the President’s directive for the Tribunal to administer justice impartially. He referenced potential violations of International Labour Organisation conventions that Fiji has ratified as a further basis for his position.
He holds that the responsibility for the situation lies with the acting Chief Justice, who is also the chair of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC). According to Pryde, the JSC’s decision to suspend his salary and privileges prior to the hearing undermines his right to a fair trial, resulting in interference with the Tribunal’s proceedings.
Moreover, Pryde highlighted public support from the Prime Minister regarding his call for salary reinstatement, suggesting that a reasonable observer would understand the validity of his request. He firmly stated that he refuses to resign under pressure from the JSC and will not engage in the hearing without the ability to defend his position fully.
Pryde made a strong plea for the Tribunal to refer the issue of his salary back to the President for reconsideration, arguing that a resolution on this matter is essential for a fair and just hearing. He remains open to resuming participation in the tribunal if his salary and entitlements are restored, indicating readiness to re-engage with his legal counsel.
This scenario highlights the ongoing conflicts within the judicial system and raises significant questions about the principles of justice and fairness in legal proceedings. As this case unfolds, it can be hoped that a resolution will emerge that upholds the rights of individuals while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
Leave a comment