The Suva High Court is set to announce its ruling on the settlement terms concerning the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), the President, and the Prime Minister in March. This comes following an application filed by the JSC against a Commission of Inquiry regarding the appointment of former Commissioner Barbara Malimali at the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC).
The JSC had previously sought to invalidate the findings and recommendations of this inquiry, requesting various declarations from the court. Judge Justice Dane Tuiqereqere has mandated that the involved parties submit an executed term of settlement by February 27. This will allow him to consider the confidentiality issues tied to this case.
Justice Tuiqereqere emphasized that without the actual terms of settlement, he would be unable to rule on confidentiality matters. He also indicated that the JSC must provide the court with documents addressing its powers concerning confidentiality following the submission deadline. Following this, the counsels for both the first and second respondents will have two weeks to submit their responses.
The third respondent will also be permitted to contribute to discussions about the court’s power to adjudicate on the confidentiality of the terms of settlement. Additionally, the JSC has called for the release of the third respondent, citing concerns about delays in proceedings and settlement due to ongoing harassment from this party. Counsel for the JSC, Isireli Fa, noted a cost offer of $5,000 that had gone unanswered by the third respondent.
Concerns about the enforceability of certain terms have been raised by Solicitor General Ropate Green, representing the Attorney General’s office for the President and Prime Minister, while Hemendra Nagin represents Justice David Ashton Lewis. The matter will again be on the court’s agenda on March 23, keeping a focus on advancing resolution amid the ongoing complexities of the case.
This development highlights the judiciary’s role in navigating disputes at the highest levels of government, with potential implications for public trust in the judicial system and its processes.
Leave a comment