The former Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem, appeared in court yesterday, asserting that his rights were violated during his arrest and subsequent remand earlier this year. In his testimony at the Suva Magistrate’s Court before Magistrate Yogesh Prasad, Saneem spoke about the application from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) to consolidate charges against him and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, while also seeking to have the charges against him declared null and void.
Saneem alleged that from March 8 to March 11, his human rights were breached during his arrest, wherein he faces accusations of unlawfully soliciting and receiving over $50,000 in deductible tax relief for personal gain while serving as Supervisor of Elections between June and July 2022. Describing the circumstances of his arrest, Saneem claimed that two police officers, posing as clients, lured him before taking him into custody. Despite his preferred lawyer being unavailable, he hoped to find temporary legal representation; however, he was charged later that day without any justification.
His testimony highlighted the hardships he faced during his three-day confinement at Totogo Police Station, which included inadequate communication and poor conditions. He cited the lingering stress from his previous responsibilities supervising multiple elections, which was compounded by the conditions of his remand.
The case took another turn when Saneem addressed allegations of undue influence surrounding a FijiFirst party banner at the Suva Civic car park. He presented a letter from the former head of the Electoral Commission, Mukesh Chand, confirming Saneem’s actions in removing the banner, which he claimed demonstrated his commitment to impartiality in his role.
Co-defendant Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum faces separate charges of abuse of office, related to alleged improper payment arrangements benefiting Saneem while acting as Prime Minister. The legal proceedings will continue, with the next court session scheduled for December 17, when a ruling is expected.
This case underscores the complexities of governance and the legal framework that oversees electoral processes. While it highlights serious allegations, it also acts as a reminder of the importance of due process and the protection of individuals’ rights within the judicial system. The upcoming ruling may provide clarity and hope for a resolution to these significant issues.
Leave a comment