Legal representatives for Kalaveti Ravu, former Minister for Fisheries and Forestry, along with Tekata Toaisi, the ministry’s regional manager for the North, have persistently challenged evidence put forward by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). This dispute arose in court as FICAC lawyer Lavinia Ravuikadavu concluded her examination of the fourth witness, Aporosa Vuinakelo, a senior digital forensic investigator at FICAC.
Ravu faces charges of abuse of office, while Toaisi is charged with aiding and abetting, both linked to alleged interference in an ongoing investigation into the illegal trading of beche-de-mer that occurred on July 25, 2023.
During proceedings, defense lawyers argued that the evidence was unlawfully obtained, stating that it was extracted without a search warrant and without their clients’ consent. Vuinakelo testified that he had extracted information from several witnesses, including principal fisheries officer Tarisi Shaw and fisheries investigation officer Emoni Buatabu. Notably, he mentioned that Ravu voluntarily provided his mobile phone in the presence of his attorney, while Toaisi’s data was extracted using notes from the fisheries investigation officer that revealed how to unlock his phone.
Though Vuinakelo asserted that the devices were seized with a search warrant, the court chose not to address these warrants since they had not been previously disclosed to the defense.
In court, Ravu’s lawyer, Lavi Rokoika, contended that the FICAC Act of 2007 limits investigators to searching and seizing evidence but does not give them the right to extract digital information. She emphasized that the legislation was enacted at a time when Fiji lacked advanced technology, and hence the newer Cybercrime Act of 2021 should be applied to handle digital evidence appropriately. Rokoika also asserted that the devices belonged to the ministry, not the individuals involved.
FICAC’s lawyer, Lilian Mausio, countered that the FICAC Act 2007 is sufficient for making such determinations. She clarified that the Cybercrime Act only pertains to cybercrime-related offenses, while the current charges relate to abuse of office.
Magistrate Jeremaia Savou noted that the bill regarding these issues is under review. The court has reserved its submissions for an upcoming ruling, and Vuinakelo is set to undergo cross-examination by the defense today.
This ongoing legal battle highlights the complexities surrounding digital evidence and the evolving nature of laws in the face of technological advancements. The proceedings reflect a commitment to ensuring that all legal standards and protections are upheld during investigations.
Leave a comment