Counsels representing former Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem, have been directed to address three key aspects in their submission and to present legal provisions for transferring the matter to the High Court.
Saneem has lodged an application under section 290 of the Criminal Procedure Act, challenging the legitimacy of the charges and the proceedings based on alleged violations of his fundamental human rights, as well as the treatment he received during police interactions.
There is ongoing debate regarding whether the charge against Saneem is an electoral matter that falls under the jurisdiction of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) for investigation and prosecution.
Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Nancy Tikoisuva, asserts that the Magistrates Court lacks jurisdiction and that the case should be moved to the High Court. Conversely, Defence Counsel Devanesh Sharma argues that the Magistrates Court has the authority to either transfer the application to the High Court as specified in Section 276 of the Criminal Procedure Act or under Section 44(5) of the Constitution, which pertains to issues related to the Bill of Rights.
Sharma also highlighted that Section 100(7) of the Constitution could play a role in the court’s decision-making process. This provision states that if a question concerning the Constitution’s interpretation arises in a Magistrates or subordinate court, that court may make a ruling, which can be appealed to the High Court.
In this case, Saneem faces charges for receiving a corrupt benefit. Magistrate Prasad has requested that counsels also prepare submissions regarding the Director of Public Prosecutions’ (DPP) application to consolidate charges. The State has proposed consolidating the charges against Saneem and former Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, who is alleged to have authorized government payments of taxes for Saneem without the necessary approvals from the Constitutional Offices Commission and the President.
Sayed-Khaiyum was not present in court today. The next hearing for this matter is scheduled for the 4th of next month.