High Court Denies Return of Key Evidence in Major Murder Case

The High Court in Suva recently denied a request from the State prosecution for the return of three satellite beacons currently held as evidence in the murder trial of Tevita Kapawale. Kapawale is accused of killing five individuals aboard the MV Tiro II in Fiji waters in 2021.

State prosecutor Triveshni Sharma argued that the beacons, owned by Green Tuna Fisheries Company Limited, should be returned since the company had acquired a new fishing vessel for operational use. The beacons cost approximately $700 each and come with a monthly airtime charge of about $12. Sharma pointed out that since the beacons are stored in the exhibition room, returning them for practical use would be more beneficial, citing that the court has photographs of the beacons that could be presented during the trial.

In contrast, Kapawale’s defense attorney, Tobia Ravuniwa, emphasized the importance of fairness for both the accused and the vessel’s owners, suggesting that although the company may have the financial means to purchase new beacons, the upcoming trial—scheduled for January—complicates matters. He argued that waiting for the trial while still holding the beacons could be perceived as excessive.

Justice Tuiqereqere ultimately favored the accused, recognizing the trial’s proximity and underscoring that while the delay may slightly inconvenience the company, it was crucial to uphold the rights of the accused. Consequently, the proceedings have been adjourned until December 13, with the trial dates set for January 14 to 16 and then January 27 to 31.

In a system where justice and fairness must prevail, the court’s decision highlights the balance between operational needs of businesses and the rights of defendants in serious criminal cases. This case serves as a reminder of the judicial system’s role in ensuring that all parties involved receive their due process, upholding justice for both the accused and the victim’s families.

Overall, though a challenging situation for all parties, it highlights the court’s commitment to fairness—a hopeful indicator of the legal system’s functioning during such sensitive trials.