The trial of former Health Minister Neil Sharma and former Prime Minister and Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum moved forward in the Suva High Court on Wednesday as a key witness, former Fiji Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Services director Apolosi Vosaniabola, gave detailed testimony about procurement activity surrounding two major 2011 tenders for laboratory equipment.
Vosaniabola told the court he attended senior management meetings in 2011 that included Dr Sharma and that he was directly involved in procurement matters relating to Tender 66 and Tender 153, both for laboratory machinery and supplies. He said he received and replied to emails from businessman Vasu Devan concerning Tender 66 after the tender had closed — a practice the prosecution highlights as contrary to procurement norms, which generally discourage bidder contact following tender closure to preserve fairness and transparency.
The witness also confirmed he signed a memorandum linked to Tender 153 that flagged concerns over a potential monopoly supplier and unusually high reagent prices affecting the Ministry of Health’s laboratory services. Vosaniabola insisted he did not draft the document himself and that he signed it on the instructions of then-health minister Dr Sharma. The memorandum has been central to prosecution assertions that procurement processes were improperly influenced.
Under cross-examination, defence lawyers pressed Vosaniabola on the state of laboratory services before the 2011 procurement exercises. He acknowledged a contemporaneous report that highlighted ageing laboratory machines, frequent reagent wastage in rural health facilities and systemic supply issues. Vosaniabola said those findings informed efforts to centralise procurement and improve management in order to reduce waste and address strained capacity across rural clinics.
The defence also emphasised the practical outcomes of the tenders, arguing the purchased equipment provided tangible benefits to rural health facilities and continued operating effectively for years after installation. Vosaniabola agreed that some of the machines installed under the contracts remained in use, a point the defence used to counter allegations that the procurements caused harm or were wholly improper.
The testimony deepens the factual record about who attended high-level meetings and how procurement correspondence was handled around the two contested tenders. Prosecutors have been seeking to establish whether proper procedures were followed and whether any communications or directives amounted to undue influence or breaches of procurement rules. Defence counsel is attempting to frame the actions as part of a remediation effort to upgrade dilapidated laboratory services.
The matter remains before the Suva High Court, with further witnesses and submissions expected as the trial continues.