The ODPP received a total of twelve files from the Fiji Police Force for review last year.
Of these, one file was closed and returned earlier last year with the decision not to charge in the
matter of State v Barbara Malimali, due to insufficient evidence to support any prosecution.
The remaining eleven files have also been reviewed, and the outcomes together with the
summaries of each file will be returned to the Fiji Police Force later this week.
The complaints stemmed primarily from allegations against Barbara Malimali arising out of
the COI, which in turn led to several other complaints and cross-complaints involving a number
of public officers and well-known senior legal practitioners.
The ODPP says due to the sensitivity of the matters and the significant public interest generated by the COI, the files were assessed by multiple senior prosecutors who had no prior involvement or
connection with any of the parties named in the complaints.
The initial assessments conducted by these senior prosecutors were subsequently subjected to
an independent review by a senior consultant engaged by the ODPP.
The ODPP says it was privileged to obtain the services of Ian Lloyd KC, who concurred with the initial assessments and provided further recommendations on the analysis of the evidence.
They say each matter was examined individually and collectively within the ambit of the law.
The assessments were guided by relevant legislation, including but not limited to the FICAC Act, the
Electoral Act, and the Crimes Act, as well as applicable Court of Appeal authorities and the
supreme law of Fiji, the Constitution.
In considering the evidence, the ODPP took into account several critical factors, including the
sufficiency of evidence to meet the criminal standard of proof, reasonable prospects of
conviction, public interest considerations, statutory limitation periods, applicable immunity
provisions, and the distinction between criminal and civil liability.
