Bainimarama and Qiliho have a case to answer

Suva Magistrate Seini Puamau has ruled that former Prime Minister, Voreqe Bainimarama and suspended Police Commissioner, Brigadier General Sitiveni Qiliho have a case to answer.

This means the case will now continue and Bainimarama and Qiliho’s counsel will present their case.

While delivering her ruling, Magistrate Puamau says there was relevant and admissible evidence regarding the elements.

Magistrate Puamau says that on 17th September, 2020 Bainimarama told the then Acting Commissioner Rusiate Tudravu that he suggested to Tuks to stay away from the investigation.

She says she finds that this is relevant and admissible evidence capable of implicating Bainimarama.

Magistrate Puamau says she finds that there is relevant and admissible evidence to prove that when Bainimarama as the Prime Minister and Chair of the National Security Council made a suggestion, the members took it as a directive and obeyed.

She says that was certainly the evidence of Tudravu, a very senior and experienced member of the Fiji Police Force, a man who though physically bigger than Bainimarama was lower to him in rank and standing.

The Magistrate says if only his moral courage matches his size when he heard what the then Prime Minister had suggested to the Commissioner, despite his knowledge that there were investigations afoot , that were potentially meritorious, nearing finality and could potentially invoke the jurisdiction of the court, he turned and directed the CID to stop the investigation.

She says that is enough at this point to indicate that a suggestion by Bainimarama to stay away from investigation has the tendency during his time as the Prime Minister to deflect senior police officers and thereafter the men and women under their command from investigating matters that could ultimately invoke the jurisdiction of the court.

She further says prosecution witness, Reshmi Dass testified that she was shocked when she received the directive of 15th July because it was the first time in her 25 year career that she had ever received such a directive from a Police Commissioner and usually directives relating to an investigation come through the Directer CID.

Magistrate Puamau says she finds that there exists relevant and admissible evidence capable of implicating Qiliho.

She says Qiliho as Police Commissioner knew what the ambits of his authority was and logically then the inference can legitimately be drawn that if he knew what was permissible and the right thing to do, then he also knew what was permissible and the wrong thing to do.

The Magistrate says that is enough at this stage for a case to answer in respect of these elements.

Magistrate Puamau says Bainimarama and Qiliho’s lawyer Devanesh Sharma argues that no right was prejudiced because despite the directive to stop investigations, it did not stop but there is relevant and admissible evidence to indicate that investigations stopped from 15th July, 2020 to 15th October, 2020 and they stopped for no other reason than a senior officer did not know enough about the facts of a particular course of investigations to be able to sensibly prepare for a potential briefing to a politician.

She says the State alleges Bainimarama attempted to pervert the course of justice by suggesting to Qiliho, a person he had been instrumental in appointing to the position of Police Commissioner and a man he knew to be Commissioner to stay away from the USP investigation.

Magistrate Puamau says the allegation is that his objective was to ensure that these investigations never made their way to a court of law, and that by virtue of his position of leadership he was aware of or ought to have been aware of the power his words held, that a suggestion from him did not prefer a certain course could have the tendency to cause those in State service under him to divert from a particular course of action, and that he was aware or ought to have been aware by virtue of his position that investigations were underway, that they had merit and if left to continue unabated, they could result to some charge in court.

She says the State alleges Qiliho abused the authority of his office as Police Commissioner by intentionally directing to subordinate officers to do an act which he knew was arbitrary and in abuse of the authority of his office, namely to stop investigation into the allegations arising from activities at USP, which act was prejudicial to the rights of USP, intending, or at least being aware that prejudice could result thereby, or perhaps being reckless as to whether prejudice would occur as a result.

Magistrate Puamau further says Bainimarama and Qiliho, each have a right to remain silent.

She says she promises that she will not think they are guilty because they have chosen to remain silent.

She says she undertakes to carefully review the evidence to determine if the State has proven beyond reasonable doubt each element of the offence they are charged with.

Magistrate Puamau says Bainimarama and Qiliho also have the right to testify in open court and she indicated that if they choose to exercise this option, they can and very likely will be cross-examined by State Counsel.

The case has been adjourned to 28th September for continuation of the trial.

Bainimarama is charged with a count of attempt to pervert the course of justice while Qiliho is charged with a count of abuse of office.

It is alleged that Bainimarama sometime in July 2020 as the Prime Minister directed the Police Commissioner to stop the investigation into a police complaint, in the abuse of the authority of his office, which was an arbitrary act prejudicial to the rights of the University of the South Pacific which is the complainant.

It is alleged that Qiliho on the 15th of July, 2020 as the Police Commissioner directed the Director of the Criminal Investigations Department, Serupepeli Neiko and Inspector Reshmi Dass to stop investigations into the police complaint by the USP, in the abuse of the authority of his office, which was arbitrary act of prejudicial to the rights to USP.