A lawyer has contested the inclusion of Tender Evaluation Committee (TEC) documents as evidence in the ongoing High Court case against three former government ministers, asserting that “hearsay remains hearsay.” Wylie Clarke, representing former health minister Dr. Neil Sharma, argued that the documents lack support from original source material, which he believes is crucial for the information to hold up in court.
Dr. Sharma faces charges alongside former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum for allegations of abuse of office, obstructing justice, and breach of trust from incidents that occurred in 2011. Clarke pointed out that without the original tender documents, the defense team cannot verify the accuracy of summarized information presented, limiting the court’s ability to evaluate its validity.
He insisted that for the tender details to be admissible, each tenderer must be called in to authenticate their original submissions, emphasizing that no TEC member can vouch for the content of the tenders as only the respective tenderers possess that knowledge.
In response, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Laisani Tabuakuro contended that objections related to hearsay are premature, noting that the State’s case is not reliant solely on documentary evidence. She highlighted that hearsay does not apply if a witness has personal knowledge of the matters discussed in the documents. Tabuakuro asserted that the High Court has yet to hear oral evidence, and dismissing the documents at this stage would hinder the State’s ability to prove their admissibility through witness testimony.
A ruling on this legal matter is expected to be delivered tomorrow. The case illustrates the challenges of ensuring fair trial practices, particularly in complex legal proceedings involving high-profile individuals, and highlights the importance of thorough evidentiary support in criminal cases.
Leave a comment