The High Court in Suva will hand down its ruling on May 6 in Suva lawyer Tanya Waqanika’s bid for a permanent stay of criminal proceedings after a hearing that concluded today before Justice Siainiu Fa’alogo Bull. Waqanika is asking the court to permanently halt a charge brought by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) in the Suva Magistrates Court, arguing the prosecution was instituted without lawful authority because of defects in the appointment of the Acting FICAC Commissioner.
The charge against Waqanika alleges she publicly indicated opposition to a political party in breach of section 14(7), read with section 14(1)(d), of the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013. FICAC’s case says that on April 19 last year Waqanika, then a board member of Investment Fiji and Telecom Fiji Ltd, posted comments on her Facebook account opposing the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA). The matter is currently before Magistrate Yogesh Prasad in the lower court.
Central to Waqanika’s stay application is a legal challenge to the validity of Lavi Rokoika’s appointment as Acting FICAC Commissioner. Her legal team contends that if Rokoika’s appointment was invalid, any decisions or prosecutions taken in his name—including the charge against her—are similarly tainted. The court heard full submissions on that question during the hearing that concluded today.
Waqanika was represented in the High Court by lawyers Barbara Malimali and Samuela Savu. Prosecution submissions were led by Rokoika himself, alongside Senior Prosecutor Joseph Work. The hearing focused on jurisdictional and procedural arguments rather than the underlying factual dispute about the Facebook post, with both sides making legal submissions on whether the state had lawful authority to bring the charge.
The stay application follows earlier appearances in the Magistrates Court, when Waqanika’s lawyers signalled they would seek a permanent stay. The challenge to the acting commissioner’s appointment comes amid a wider cluster of litigation and controversy over FICAC leadership that has featured in recent months, including earlier High Court arguments about the Prime Minister’s authority to remove or advise on FICAC appointments.
Justice Fa’alogo Bull’s decision on May 6 will determine whether the matter proceeds back to the Magistrates Court for trial or is halted permanently. If the stay is granted the prosecution will be stopped; if it is refused, the case will return to Magistrate Prasad for further lower-court processes. The forthcoming ruling is likely to be closely watched for its potential implications on FICAC’s prosecutorial authority and the legality of administrative appointments within the commission.
Leave a comment