Christopher Pryde, the suspended Director of Public Prosecutions, has made it clear that he will neither resign nor attend the upcoming tribunal hearing scheduled for December 2. He argues that the suspension of his salary has severely limited his ability to afford legal representation, labeling this situation as “unfair.”
Pryde expressed his concerns regarding the tribunal’s ability to ensure a just process, noting, “How can a hearing be just and fair when I have been deprived of the means to adequately defend myself?” He claims that proceeding with the hearing under these circumstances breaches both natural justice principles and international labor rights conventions that Fiji has ratified.
In his criticisms, Pryde has called out the Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) for supporting the suspension of his pay in July, deeming their actions as interference and contempt regarding the tribunal proceedings. He highlighted that Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has publicly backed his claim for salary reinstatement, and many would agree that his stance is reasonable.
Pryde remains resolute against any attempts at intimidation from the JSC, asserting his right to a fair defense. He stated that unless his salary and benefits are restored, he cannot attend the hearing, reiterating his belief that he should be properly compensated to adequately represent himself.
In response, JSC chairperson Mr. Temo acknowledged the tribunal’s upcoming proceedings but refrained from providing further comments due to the sensitive nature of the matter.
This situation underscores the importance of fair representation and due process in legal proceedings. As discussions continue, it is hoped that an equitable resolution will be reached that will allow Pryde to defend himself effectively during the tribunal.
In summary, Christopher Pryde’s ongoing dispute over salary suspension raises significant questions about justice and due process in legal tribunes, highlighting the necessity for fair treatment within judicial processes.
Leave a comment