The Fijian Elections Office confirms that its legal representative, Shailend Krishna of Krishna & Co Lawyers have formally responded to, and rejected in its entirety, the $2 million demand issued by former Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem on 29th June this year alleging malicious prosecution in public office against the Supervisor of Elections, four officers, and the FEO.
They stress that should proceedings be commenced, the FEO and the officers concerned will defend the matter through the proper legal process while continuing to discharge their statutory responsibilities in accordance with the law.
The FEO's response rejects the allegations as being without legal or factual basis and advises that the proposed claims are unsustainable in law.
The FEO maintains that its officers have, at all times, acted in good faith and in accordance with their statutory responsibilities.
The legal response states that the demand fails to establish the legal requirements necessary to sustain claims of malicious prosecution or misfeasance in public office.
It also makes clear that an acquittal in criminal proceedings does not, as a matter of law, give rise to automatic civil liability against public officers carrying out their official duties.
The FEO's response further notes that decisions relating to criminal investigations and prosecutions are made independently by the Fiji Police Force and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in accordance with Fiji’s constitutional framework.
It also refers to the statutory protections afforded to officers of the FEO under section 3(3) of the Electoral Act 2014 for acts undertaken in the bona fide exercise, or attempted exercise, of their statutory powers, functions and duties.
