The High Court in Suva examined the legality of evidence obtained against former Fisheries Minister Kalaveti Ravu and the ministry’s northern regional manager, Tekata Toaisi, during a recent session. The case centers on allegations that Ravu interfered with a ministerial investigation into the illegal trade of a banned beche-de-mer species.
Defense attorney Tevita Vakalalabure asserted that the prosecution, which is now under the oversight of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), failed to secure a proper search warrant in compliance with the Cybercrime Act when extracting data from the defendants’ mobile phones. Both individuals had previously been acquitted of the charges in February, with the magistrate ruling that there was “no case to answer.”
In the High Court, Vakalalabure contended that the evidence should not be admitted as the required warrant was not provided in a timely fashion, as constitutionally mandated. He argued that the magistrate’s decision was justified based on the lack of admissible evidence presented by the prosecution.
Responding to this, acting DPP Nancy Tikoisuva claimed that both Ravu and Toaisi had consented to the extraction of their data. She highlighted that critical pieces of evidence had not been presented, which she believed could potentially bolster the prosecution’s case.
Justice Goundar, who presided over the hearing, is set to issue a ruling on August 25, which could have significant implications for public accountability in Fiji’s governance.
The ongoing discussions in court highlight vital issues surrounding digital evidence and the evolving legal frameworks that govern such matters, showcasing a commitment to ensure lawful conduct within government operations. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining integrity and transparency in public service, offering hope for reinstating public confidence in governance.
Leave a comment