Opposition MP Alvick Maharaj passionately defended former Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem during his address in Parliament yesterday, asserting that the numerous attempts to undermine Saneem’s reputation are baseless and unsupported by evidence. Maharaj emphasized Saneem’s significant contributions to the electoral process in Fiji, highlighting that under his leadership, the country successfully conducted three elections that were widely recognized as free and fair.
Maharaj commended Saneem for his integrity, stating, “I want to acknowledge the work of the former Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem, under whose leadership we had three successful free and fair elections in Fiji.” He criticized the current government for its ongoing allegations surrounding a supposed “glitch” in the 2022 election, questioning the lack of follow-up or reporting on the matter. “This government was all over the place talking about the investigation — but where is the report? What happened to it?” he asked, reflecting concerns regarding accountability.
The MP’s remarks underscored the absence of any charges against Saneem, positing this as a clear indication of his fair and honest conduct in office. Maharaj stated, “I have not seen or heard of the former Supervisor of Elections being charged with anything to do with the glitch or rigging. That tells you he did his job with honesty and fairness.”
He expressed his disappointment at Saneem’s departure from the Fiji Elections Office, describing it as a significant loss for the institution. Maharaj noted Saneem’s extensive experience, which was instrumental in guiding the nation through three national elections. He also rejected allegations from the Coalition that previous elections were manipulated, reinforcing his support for Saneem’s legacy in ensuring a transparent electoral process in Fiji.
This defense by Maharaj highlights the complexities surrounding Fiji’s electoral integrity and the ongoing discourse about past elections, reaffirming the importance of fair leadership in maintaining public trust in democratic processes.
Leave a comment