Former Attorney General Graham Leung has publicly refuted the findings of a Commission of Inquiry that scrutinized his actions while in office. At a recent press conference, he expressed strong objections to the commission’s conclusions regarding his conduct, asserting that his actions adhered to the legal responsibilities set forth under the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption Act of 2007.
Leung clarified that the Judicial Services Commission is responsible for appointing the FICAC Commissioner and that his role was strictly consultative, not requiring his approval. He stated, “Section 5 doesn’t talk about seeking my approval or my concurrence or my agreement. All they needed to do was consult me, which they did.” He maintained that he has always acted with integrity, emphasizing that he has never engaged in actions that would compromise justice or betray his constitutional duties.
Throughout his professional career, Leung has committed himself to upholding integrity and impartiality in his legal obligations. He noted that there exists no credible evidence supporting allegations of criminal conduct that would discredit his tenure or the institutions he represented. “My unwavering commitment to the rule of law is a matter of public record,” he asserted, expressing a belief that his conduct will be properly understood and assessed over time.
Similar articles have previously highlighted Leung’s defense of his integrity amidst political allegations tied to the Commission of Inquiry regarding the appointment of FICAC Commissioner Barbara Malimali. In those instances, he emphasized respect for the commission’s independence and his commitment to its mandate, reinforcing the importance of transparency and accountability in governance.
Leung’s strong rebuttal comes at a time of heightened scrutiny over governmental appointments and ethical accountability in Fiji, which underscores the ongoing struggle between political pressures and the pursuit of truth in public office. While these circumstances may seem tumultuous, they also represent an opportunity for strengthening the frameworks that ensure responsible governance and public trust.
There is a sense of hope that this situation may galvanize efforts towards greater vigilance in the ethical standards expected from public officials, ultimately fostering a more transparent political environment.
Leave a comment