Former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho are scheduled to appear again in the Suva Magistrates Court later this month for a pretrial conference concerning serious charges of abuse of office. Their previous court appearance took place before Magistrate Jeremaiah Savou, where the allegations against them were meticulously outlined.
Bainimarama is facing one count of making unwarranted demands as a public official, with accusations that he pressured the former Acting Commissioner of Police, Rusiate Tudravu, into terminating the employment of two police officers—Sergeant Penieli Ratei and Constable Tomasi Naulu—or resigning himself if he did not comply. This incident allegedly occurred between May 21 and August 18, 2021, and is linked to Bainimarama’s official capacity as the Prime Minister of Fiji.
On the other hand, Qiliho faces two counts of abuse of office. He is alleged to have intervened in Tudravu’s disciplinary actions during the same timeframe, which originally involved minor penalties of five paid working days. Instead of respecting these initial decisions, Qiliho reportedly terminated the employment of Ratei and Naulu, which has been viewed as an arbitrary act that infringed upon their rights.
The trial is set to commence from June 2 to July 11, 2025, and is expected to last for six weeks, involving approximately 30 witnesses. Both defendants have pleaded not guilty to their respective charges.
This case is attracting significant public attention as it raises important discussions surrounding accountability, transparency, and ethical governance within Fiji’s public service sector. Many citizens and observers hope for a fair and just trial that not only upholds the rule of law but also enhances trust in governmental institutions. The outcomes of this high-profile case could set critical precedents regarding ethical responsibilities for public officials in Fiji.
The scheduled court proceedings are seen as an opportunity to reinforce the principles of integrity and ethics in public service, and many remain optimistic that this case may contribute positively to the ongoing discourse about accountability in governance.
Leave a comment