Charges against former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum and former Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem have been deemed valid by Magistrate Yogesh Prasad. The ruling comes as part of a case in which Sayed-Khaiyum faces one count of abuse of office, while Saneem is charged with receiving a corrupt benefit.
Magistrate Prasad dismissed arguments regarding the validity of the charges initiated by then-Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, John Rabuku, stating that they lacked merit. The magistrate affirmed that all decisions made by Rabuku in his capacity, including charges and staff appointments, hold legal validity. Importantly, Prasad clarified that recent Supreme Court opinions on certain constitutional provisions do not retroactively affect Rabuku’s prior decisions.
The cases of Sayed-Khaiyum and Saneem will be consolidated as pre-trial motions are ruled upon. Saneem has been accused of receiving a corrupt benefit worth $55,944.03 linked to back pay from Sayed-Khaiyum.
The magistrate also addressed whether the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) possessed the authority to investigate and prosecute these charges, determining that it is a procedural issue to be settled during the trial phase. Additionally, Saneem raised concerns regarding his detention conditions, arguing they violated his fundamental human rights. The magistrate noted that Saneem had not admitted to any allegations, rendering a voir dire trial to evaluate the admissibility of his statements unnecessary. Should Saneem wish to seek remedies for alleged mistreatment, the magistrate advised he could pursue a separate civil action in the High Court.
The trial is set to take place from May 26 to May 30 of next year.
This development highlights the ongoing accountability processes within Fiji’s political landscape and assures that legal matters are being addressed in a structured manner. As the case moves towards trial, it will be an important moment for both individuals involved and for public trust in the legal system.
In summary, the magistrate’s ruling reinforces the legal framework regarding charges against high-level officials, while the trial scheduled for next year will provide an opportunity for the accused to present their defense. It’s a crucial step towards transparency and adherence to justice.
Leave a comment