Lawyers representing former Prime Minister Josaia Bainimarama and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum have submitted a notice of motion requesting orders and a declaration concerning the charges against them. The two individuals are each facing one count of abuse of office and appeared before Magistrate Sufia Hamza at the Suva Magistrate’s Court yesterday.
Former Minister for Health Neil Sharma is also involved in this case but was not present during the last sitting. The defense team’s motion includes several requests:
– A declaration that the human rights of Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum were violated
– An order declaring counts 5, 6, and 7 null and void due to being sanctioned by an illegally appointed former acting Director of Public Prosecutions
– An order confirming that Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum were not employed in the public or civil service
– An order contesting that count 7 was improperly brought against Sayed-Khaiyum and is outdated
– A request for the charges against them to be dismissed
Additionally, they are seeking reimbursement for court costs.
During the proceedings, State Prosecutor Nancy Tikoisuva informed the court that Section 290 of the Criminal Procedure Act allows the court to address the matter, although the defense was presenting constitutional issues. Defense attorney Devanesh Sharma asserted that under Section 100, subsection 7 of the 2013 Constitution, the Magistrate Court possesses the authority to hear the case. Magistrate Hamza noted that neither party had provided written arguments on these points.
The court has set a deadline of January 8 for both parties to file submissions before a hearing scheduled for January 23, 2025.
Regarding Sharma’s request for specific documents from the State, Prosecutor Tikoisuva stated that all relevant documents had been submitted to the court, with additional documents promised to be delivered to Sharma’s legal team by the end of the week. Sharma’s lawyer, Krisheel Cheng, highlighted that they had been seeking this information since September 9. The requested list includes:
– The State’s list of witnesses
– Disclosure contents, specifically whether the DPP or Police have filed evidence beyond what has already been submitted
– The FICAC file related to the case
Tikoisuva explained that they would not disclose the list of witnesses until a hearing was scheduled. Before adjourning, Sharma requested that all individuals listed as affidavits be made available for cross-examination at the next session. All accused parties are required to be present at the upcoming sitting.