Fiji’s suspended chief prosecutor, Christopher Pryde, has disclosed that the government secretly proposed a NZ$150,000 settlement to persuade him to resign and circumvent an investigation into claims of “misbehavior.” Denying any wrongdoing, the 59-year-old New Zealander declined the offer and did not attend a recent hearing, citing financial constraints as the reason for his absence.
Pryde alleges that the government’s motivations are rooted in an “ethno-national agenda,” claiming that foreign and Indo-Fijian individuals are being systematically replaced by iTaukei, the indigenous Fijians. He expressed concerns over the hiring practices in Fiji, suggesting they prioritize ethnic identity over qualifications and merit.
Two months prior to Pryde’s disclosure, the Judicial Services Committee (JSC) had reached out to him with the proposed settlement, which would require his immediate resignation as part of the agreement, blocking any potential legal action from Pryde against the JSC. Despite contemplating resignation, Pryde maintains his innocence and desires a formal acknowledgment from the government clearing him of any allegations.
Pryde was initially appointed as the director of public prosecutions in November 2011 but was suspended in April 2023 based on advice from the JSC. His suspension followed an incident where he conversed with former Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, raising questions regarding whether he had accessed a police file before their discussion—an assertion Pryde refutes. Additionally, he faces a new charge related to improperly receiving superannuation payments.
The Fiji Law Society has raised concerns about the fairness of the inquiry process, stating that it should not proceed in Pryde’s absence. They believe that he deserves the right to procedural fairness, in line with constitutional provisions.
Looking ahead, the tribunal is set to deliver its final recommendations to President Naiqama Lalabalavu by December 23. While Pryde anticipates being replaced by acting chief prosecutor Nancy Tikoisuva, he lamented the lack of viable options for appealing the potential decision, fearing that legal proceedings could stall for years.
This situation highlights significant ongoing tensions and concerns regarding governance, fairness, and procedural integrity in Fiji’s legal framework. As the inquiry unfolds, there remains hope for a resolution that prioritizes justice and the rule of law while ensuring that all parties receive a fair and impartial hearing.
Leave a comment