Suspended DPP’s Superannuation Payments Under Scrutiny: What We Know So Far

The Assistant Secretary of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), Zarina Bi, testified in court that there are no records of authorization for the US$1,000 monthly superannuation payment to Christopher Pryde, the suspended Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). During her statement, Bi emphasized that Pryde’s employment contract did not specify an amount for superannuation, raising concerns about the payment’s legitimacy.

Bi explained that the JSC had reached out to Pryde to clarify who authorized the payments, with a letter sent by Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo, who is also Chairperson of the JSC. According to her testimony, Pryde’s base salary is $250,000, and the JSC is responsible for any payments, which must be recommended by the Office of the Attorney-General and approved by the President as stipulated by the Constitution.

The Fiji Law Society’s Laurel Vaurasi sought clarification regarding the absence of records when Bi was appointed to her position in 2013, to which Bi confirmed that the only missing authorization was for the US$1,000 monthly payment. Justice Tuilevuka noted that the payment to Pryde dates back to when he was appointed as Solicitor-General in 2007 and questioned whether its approval originated from that appointment.

While the records at the JSC are said to be well maintained, Bi reiterated that Pryde has been asked to provide the necessary documentation to the Commission. Amid an ongoing tribunal deliberating on allegations of misbehavior, there are recommendations for Pryde’s removal from the DPP position.

Key points include:
– Evidence of Pryde meeting with Sayed-Khaiyum while an investigation was underway.
– The absence of proper authorization for Pryde’s monthly payment of US$1,000.

As the trial continues, this case underscores the critical importance of accountability and transparency in governmental appointments and financial disbursements. The ongoing legal proceedings may lead to a more profound examination of the protocols surrounding governmental authorizations and strengthen compliance moving forward.

Overall, while the circumstances appear serious, they highlight an opportunity for the institution to reinforce its governance mechanisms, ensuring such situations do not occur again in the future.