Mohammed Saneem, the former Supervisor of Elections, appeared in court yesterday, detailing claims that his rights were infringed upon during his earlier arrest and remand. This testimony took place at the Suva Magistrate’s Court presided over by Magistrate Yogesh Prasad.
Saneem asserted that his human rights were violated from March 8 to March 11 of this year amidst his arrest. He is facing allegations of unlawfully soliciting and receiving over $50,000 in tax relief benefits while in office, during the period from June 1, 2022, to July 31, 2022. The court was reviewing the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions’ (ODPP) request to consolidate charges against him and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, along with Saneem’s own plea to have the charges dismissed based on the alleged rights violations.
During the hearing, Saneem recounted the incident of his arrest, claiming that two police officers entered his law firm pretending to need legal advice, only to take him into custody instead. He expressed concerns over the timing of his charge, insisting it was too late in the day for such actions, to which he alleges the police responded, “Lock him up.”
Saneem reported that he did not receive any formal explanation for his detention, only vague references to “orders from above.” During his three days at the Totogo Police Station, he described harsh conditions and the stress of his previous election oversight role.
In an unexpected turn, when questioned about the alleged undue influence connected to a FijiFirst party banner, Saneem produced a letter from Mukesh Chand, the former chair of the Electoral Commission, affirming that he had acted to remove the banner, which he argued reflected his dedication to impartiality.
Co-defendant Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum faces charges of abuse of office, reportedly for improperly approving a payment that benefited Saneem. The case has been adjourned until December 17, when a ruling is expected.
This ongoing legal battle highlights significant issues regarding transparency and accountability in governmental roles. As both parties await a ruling, it underscores the importance of due process and the protection of individual rights in the legal system.
In summary, this situation sees a former election supervisor contesting serious accusations while claiming his rights were violated during the judicial process. As the case proceeds, it remains a crucial intersection of law, ethics, and public service that could lead to greater scrutiny and reforms in election oversight practices.
Leave a comment