Former Police Commissioner asserts constitutional authority to review acting commissioner’s rulings in Fiji case
The Suva High Court heard that former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho says he had constitutional powers under section 7 of Fiji’s Police Act to review decisions made by the then Acting Commissioner Rusiate Tudravu. He told the court he believed Tudravu’s disciplinary rulings were too lenient and that certain offences had been downplayed.
Qiliho is charged with two counts of abuse of office, while former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama faces one count of making unwarranted demands as a public official. It is alleged that they used their powers unlawfully to terminate two police officers in 2021.
According to Qiliho, he resumed authority as Commissioner after returning from study leave in the United Kingdom and while in quarantine, attending official meetings via Skype. He argued that after reassuming his position, the disciplinary decision concerning the two officers who had circulated photographs of the former Prime Minister’s brother in Viber groups should have been his to decide, not Tudravu’s.
He said, upon reviewing the penalties, the officers’ actions amounted to gross misconduct, leading to the termination of their employment. Recruits are taught about such matters during basic training, and he noted that advice from the Solicitor-General’s Office confirmed he had powers to review the case. He added that he was later advised to settle the matter out of court and was prepared to reinstate the officers without discrimination.
During cross-examination, Qiliho denied endorsing the use of Viber for police surveillance work and described his relationship with the former Prime Minister as professional in most settings.
Context and significance
– The charges revolve around the May–August 2021 period, with Bainimarama accused of pressuring Tudravu to dismiss the two officers or resign, while Qiliho is accused of overriding Tudravu’s disciplinary decisions and unlawfully terminating the officers.
– A notable point in the testimony is the disclosure that Tudravu’s appointment letter was not known to Qiliho until it was produced during the trial, highlighting questions about authority and chain-of-command in disciplinary matters.
– The case continues to feed ongoing debates about governance ethics, police independence, and the balance between political oversight and due process for public servants in Fiji.
What to watch for next
– How the court weighs Qiliho’s asserted powers against Tudravu’s disciplinary authority and the alleged timeline of decisions.
– Whether further witnesses and documentary evidence clarify who ordered the terminations, and whether due process requirements were observed.
– The potential implications for reforms in oversight and disciplinary procedures within Fiji’s public service, depending on the outcome.
Added value and commentary
– This proceeding underscores the tension between political leadership and professional policing, with wide implications for civil-service protections and the independence of public institutions.
– A clear, evidence-based ruling could bolster public confidence in governance and the integrity of policing practices, while also clarifying the limits of executive influence over internal disciplinary processes.
Short summary
– Qiliho claims authority to review Tudravu’s disciplinary decisions under the Police Act.
– Bainimarama is charged with unwarranted demands; Qiliho with abuse of office for allegedly overruling Tudravu and terminating two officers.
– The case centers on the May–August 2021 period, with ongoing testimony about authority, procedure, and the handling of officer terminations.
Hopeful takeaway
– The ongoing court process presents an opportunity to reinforce accountability and due process in Fiji’s public service. If the proceedings establish clear, lawful boundaries between political leadership and police independence, it could strengthen institutional integrity and public trust.
Leave a comment