The legal representatives of former Prime Minister Josaia Bainimarama and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum have submitted a notice of motion requesting orders and declarations concerning the charges against them. The two, each facing one count of abuse of office, appeared before Magistrate Sufia Hamza at the Suva Magistrate’s Court yesterday.
Former Minister for Health Neil Sharma is also involved in the case, though he was absent during the last session.
The defence is seeking the following in their motion:
– A declaration that the duo’s human rights were violated.
– A declaration and order stating that counts 5, 6, and 7 are null and void due to being sanctioned by the former acting Director of Public Prosecutions, an illegal appointment.
– An order affirming that Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum were not employed in public or civil service.
– An order indicating that count 7 was improperly brought against Sayed-Khaiyum and is outdated.
– An order striking out the charges against them.
Additionally, they are requesting court costs.
State Prosecutor Nancy Tikoisuva informed the court that Section 290 of the Criminal Procedure Act allows the court to address the matter, but the defence’s claims pertain to constitutional issues. Defence lawyer Devanesh Sharma argued that under Section 100, subsection 7 of the 2013 Constitution, the Magistrate Court has jurisdiction in this case. Magistrate Hamza remarked that neither side had submitted written documentation regarding these issues.
The court has granted both parties until January 8 to file their submissions before the hearing scheduled for January 23, 2025.
Regarding Sharma’s request for certain documents from the State, Tikoisuva stated that all relevant documents had been provided to the court. She assured that Sharma’s lawyers would receive the remaining required documents by week’s end. Sharma’s lawyer, Krisheel Cheng, noted they had been seeking this list since September 9.
The requested list includes:
– The State’s list of witnesses.
– Disclosure contents, including whether DPP or police had filed additional evidence.
– The FICAC file related to the case.
Tikoisuva indicated that the list of witnesses would only be disclosed once a hearing date has been established.
Before adjourning, Sharma raised the need for all individuals listed as affidavits to be present for cross-examination in the next session. All accused individuals are expected to attend the upcoming sitting.