Chief Justice Salesi Temo has provided his reasoning for rejecting the recusal application from former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho. The dismissal of their request came during their appeal sentencing case, which took place on May 2 of last year.
Bainimarama faced a conviction for attempting to pervert the course of justice concerning the University of the South Pacific, while Qiliho was guilty of abuse of office. The men sought Justice Temo’s recusal, believing his prior comments suggested bias against their case, particularly his labeling of the initial sentence from Magistrate Seini Puamau as “an invalid sentence.”
Justice Temo’s ruling concluded that the recusal application indicated a misunderstanding of appellate judges’ processes, affirming that judges approach their rulings without bias until all submissions have been considered and analyzed, often through extensive drafting.
Previous articles indicate that Bainimarama and Qiliho’s legal team is set to appeal their convictions on multiple legal grounds, including issues surrounding the interpretation of the Sentencing and Penalties Act and concerns regarding the conduct of the Chief Justice. The courts are set to engage with these appeals, reflecting a commitment to uphold the rule of law and account for actions taken by high-ranking officials.
This legal battle has sparked significant public interest in Fiji, emphasizing the important interplay between justice and governance. As the appeals proceed, there remains a hopeful outlook for a fair and thorough review of the initial proceedings, which could lead to positive outcomes for the defendants and reinforce public confidence in the judicial process.
Leave a comment