The State has asked the High Court for an extra 21 days to file information and documents in the high-profile firearms prosecution involving former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed‑Khaiyum, admitting in court that it failed to meet a March deadline for lodging the material. The application was made when the matter was called before Justice Aruna Aluthge in the Lautoka High Court on April 14.
Sayed‑Khaiyum is charged alongside former Fiji Airways executive Shaenaz Voss, Fiji Airways safety, security and quality general manager Sharun Ali, and Fiji Airlines Ltd trading as Fiji Link. The four face allegations of breaching civil aviation laws that regulate the carriage of handguns on aircraft. The case initially progressed through the magistrate’s court, where some disclosures were already served to the defence.
At yesterday’s hearing the State told the court the volume of disclosures it needed to file was substantial and sought leave to lodge those documents in the High Court for the court’s benefit, while the defence would continue to rely on the disclosures already provided in the magistrate’s court. The prosecution acknowledged it had not complied with the March deadline for filing the information and asked the High Court for an additional 21 days to complete its filings.
Justice Aluthge said he would transfer the matter out of his court, citing a conflict of interest after noting that his daughter attends the same primary school as the daughter of the third accused, Sharun Ali. The judge ordered the transfer to avoid any appearance of bias and to preserve the integrity of the proceedings.
Counsel for the accused who were present included Devanesh Sharma and Gul Fatima for Mr Sayed‑Khaiyum and Shaenaz Voss, Wasu Pillay for Sharun Ali and Fiji Link, and Preeti Verma for Fiji Airlines trading as Fiji Link. No substantive arguments on the merits of the charges were heard at the brief procedural appearance.
The matter has been adjourned to May 19 and will be heard before Justice Sekonaia Vodokisolomone. The State’s request for the additional filing period and the judge’s recusal mark the latest procedural developments in a case that has drawn public attention because of the high-profile figures involved and the safety and regulatory issues at its core.
Leave a comment