The Acting Chief Justice and Chairperson of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), Salesi Temo, has labeled the US$1000 monthly superannuation payment received by suspended Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), Christopher Pryde, as “theft.” Temo provided this statement during the third day of Pryde’s tribunal hearing held at the Veiuto Court Complex.
The tribunal is investigating two main allegations against Pryde: one concerning a photograph of him with former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum at a diplomatic event on February 28, 2023, and the other regarding the unauthorized superannuation payments amounting to US$1000 (FJ$2277.45) per month, which have reportedly totaled over FJ$288,000 since 2012.
Justice Temo countered media narratives that suggested the payments could be seen as over-compensation, firmly asserting that the lack of any record of authorization rendered the payments as outright theft. He revealed that investigations conducted by the JSC found no evidence that the payments were discussed with the Attorney-General’s office or approved by the President, a requirement mandated for such transactions. The payments were halted in July 2023, coinciding with the onset of investigations.
Additionally, Justice Temo criticized Pryde for his choice to be photographed with Sayed-Khaiyum, emphasizing that it was imprudent to be associated with individuals involved in political controversies. He noted, “Even without evidence of their conversation, a photograph can tell a thousand stories,” highlighting the importance of perceived impartiality for those in judicial positions.
In response to Pryde’s claims of financial troubles stemming from his salary suspension, Justice Temo dismissed these concerns as unfounded, pointing out that the Constitution allows for legal aid or self-representation.
The tribunal is scheduled to continue today, as it seeks to address the allegations against Pryde.
This situation underscores the importance of transparency and accountability within public service positions. The potential repercussions of such high-profile cases can serve as a reminder of the ethical standards expected of individuals in the judiciary. As investigations progress, it offers a window for reinforcing the integrity of public offices, which could ultimately lead to stronger governance and public trust in the legal system.
Leave a comment