Judgement day for Bainimarama and Qiliho either on 12th or 26th September

High Court Judge Justice Thushara Rajasinghe is expected to deliver his judgement on 12th September in the case where former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho are charged with allegedly making an unwarranted demand on the then Acting Police Commissioner Rusiate Tudravu.

Justice Rajasinghe said he will try his best to deliver the judgement on 12th September, but if it is not ready, it will be delivered on 26th September.

Defence counsel Devanesh Sharma also confirmed that Qiliho, who is serving a two-year sentence, will be released on Monday.

While making his closing submission, Sharma argued that Tudravu fabricated allegations that he was pressured by Bainimarama.

He questioned why Tudravu did not take screenshots of the alleged Viber messages from Bainimarama and why he waited over 570 days before going to the CID.

Sharma says the reluctance was not because it happened but because Tudravu had fabricated it.

He stresses that Tudravu knew exactly what he was doing and it was convenient that the Viber messages were deleted.

The defence counsel also urged the court to consider Tudravu’s demeanor in court and asked whether it was of a frightened man.

Sharma also says that those are hollow words that Tudravu was under pressure as he is the senior most police officer and Bainimarama had no teeth to make demands and that he did not have to listen to him as the fines imposed on the two police officers were of his own choice.

He also says that Qiliho harbours no ill-will against Tudravu as he had appointed him as Acting Police Commissioner, relied on him and allowed him to resign on his own terms which is evidenced by his resignation letter where he said he resigned at the pinnacle of his career.

Sharma says Tudravu’s statement is not credible as he was reluctant to give evidence and only spoke after Qiliho was suspended.

He further submitted that there is no evidence that Bainimarama and Tudravu had any conversation on 4th August, 2021 regarding the alleged threats.

Sharma highlighted that when Tudravu resigned on 11th August 2021, no harm was shown, his annual leave was approved, government quarters were granted and he left on his own terms.

He says there is a possibility that Tudravu resigned because he did not like his decisions being reviewed by Qiliho.

The defence counsel maintained that the State has not proven its case beyond reasonable doubt.

He says it was reasonable that when Qiliho returned on 28th July 2021, he resumed the position of Commissioner.

Sharma argued that as the Commissioner, he could review Tudravu’s decision however, after questions from Justice Rajasinghe, Sharma conceded that the decision of one Commissioner cannot be reviewed again by another Commissioner just as a judge’s decision cannot be reviewed by another judge just because that decision was not made by him.

Meanwhile, the Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, Laisani Tabuakuro, while responding to Sharma, says Tudravu had said that he did not take any screenshots of the Viber messages as it was immediately deleted.

She says it was a shock to him that it had happened.

Tabuakuro says new speculation is now being introduced by the defence that Tudravu wanted to be the Commission but this inference cannot be made.

She says the pinnacle of Tudravu’s career was not as Acting Commissioner but he is at his pinnacle now.

The Assistant DPP submitted that the State has proven its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Tabuakuro says they did not rely on just one witness but called 20 witnesses.

She says that Bainimarama made unwarranted demands as Prime Minister to the then Police Commissioner, which were improper and influenced Tudravu’s duties.

She says there was no legal basis to make the demand.

Tabuakuro further says that Opposition MP Inia Seruiratu also gave evidence that he does not have the power to terminate police officers, as it would be unlawful.

The State Counsel adds that Qiliho acted in bad faith.

They have urged the Court to consider different version of Qiliho’s statement during the caution interview and while taking the stand.

Suva High Court Judge Justice Thushara Rajasinghe questioned what evidence exists of any allegiance from Qiliho to Bainimarama.

Tabuakuro admitted there is no evidence that Bainimarama and Qiliho were in contact during the time of the alleged incident.

Justice Rajasinghe stressed that he wanted everything clarified before delivering his judgment.

Bainimarama faces one count of making an unwarranted demand as a public official, while Qiliho faces two counts of abuse of office for sacking two police officers in 2021.

It is alleged that Bainimarama, between the 21st of May 2021 to the 18th of August 2021 in Suva, as the Prime Minister of Fiji made an unwarranted demand with menance to the then Acting Commissioner of Police, Rusiate Tudravu, by threatening his employment to influence the Acting COMPOL to comply with his unwarranted demand for the termination of the employment of Sergeant Penieli Ratei and Police Constable Tomasi Naulu who came under the supervision and authority of the Commissioner of Police.

It is alleged that between the 5th to the 18th of August 2021 in Suva whilst being employed as the Commissioner of Police, Qiliho directed the termination of employment of Sergeant Penieli Ratei and Police Constable Tomasi Naulu without due process which was an abuse of office of his authority as the Commissioner of Police and the termination was prejudicial to the rights Ratei and Naulu.