The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) is now tasked with addressing the implications of a High Court ruling regarding the removal of Barbara Malimali from her position as Commissioner of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption. Justice Dane Tuiqereqere determined that the Prime Minister’s advice to revoke Malimali’s appointment was unlawful. However, he did not issue any mandates for her reinstatement or any damage awards at this time.
In his judgment, Justice Tuiqereqere emphasized that the decision about Malimali’s reinstatement is solely within the purview of the JSC. The Commission must also consider the interim appointment of Lavi Rokoika as Acting Commissioner. He indicated that the JSC’s eventual decision on Malimali’s position will influence any potential loss of income she may have incurred since June 2, 2025. Additionally, the court ordered the respondents to pay Malimali $7,500 in costs within the next 28 days.
Malimali’s removal in June of the previous year occurred following advice from the Prime Minister to revoke her post, which was prompted by findings from a Commission of Inquiry. This inquiry concluded that she was deemed unsuitable for her role amid ongoing investigations into her conduct, including serious concerns regarding an inappropriate incident in Tuvalu in 2016 that ultimately led to her being denied a practicing certificate in 2017.
The inquiry revealed that Malimali failed to adequately disclose that she had been barred from practicing overseas and suggested her appointment had been influenced by political considerations. Justice Tuiqereqere ruled in favor of Malimali, stating that the JSC has the capacity to assess the Commission of Inquiry’s findings and to recommend either the revocation of her appointment or other actions it deems necessary.
The judge noted that the JSC’s composition, consisting of five members, allows it to tackle the inquiry’s criticisms effectively. Although two members faced critique, three were not called into question. Justice Tuiqereqere pointed out that the JSC could have mitigated any conflicts of interest by convening a meeting to review the inquiry findings and allowing any implicated members to recuse themselves from the discussions. Malimali contended that the Prime Minister’s reliance on the inquiry’s results was unreasonable.
This ruling may provide an opportunity for reflection and growth within the JSC as it navigates these complex issues, ensuring that due process and fairness are upheld in the adjudication of its members and appointments.
Leave a comment