A High Court session highlighted potential legal missteps in the case against former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and his co-defendants, addressing the actions of State prosecutor Laisani Tabuakuro. During the proceedings, concerns were raised regarding Ms. Tabuakuro swearing an affidavit while directly involved in the prosecution, which could contravene fundamental litigation rules.
Defense attorney Devanesh Sharma argued that an essential principle in litigation prohibits a lawyer from deposing an affidavit in a case they are actively prosecuting. He referenced the High Court Civil Rules, which state that attorneys who depose to affidavits must retract from their role in the case, and requested clarification on whether this rule also applies within the criminal context.
Additionally, Mr. Sharma objected to proposed amendments to certain charges, specifically relating to alterations in the dates associated with alleged offenses, calling the amendment an “embarrassment.” He pointed out that one of the charges, considered a summary offense, should have been filed within 12 months of the mid-2012 timeline, rather than 13 years later, raising questions about the timeliness and validity of the prosecution’s claims.
The accusations that the trio, which includes former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum and former Health Minister Neil Sharma, face include abuse of office, obstructing justice, and breach of trust for transactions alleged to have occurred in 2011. A hearing to further delve into the emerging legal concerns is set for February 25, and the defendants’ bail has been extended, excusing their presence for that date.
This ongoing case underscores the complex interplay between legal protocols and the responsibilities of prosecutors, highlighting the importance of adhering to procedural rules to ensure justice is served fairly. As the legal proceedings continue, all eyes will be on how these issues are resolved and what implications they may hold for the involved parties.
Leave a comment