The High Court has postponed the Judicial Services Commission’s (JSC) attempt to nullify the conclusions and suggestions of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) concerning the appointment of Barbara Malimali as FICAC Commissioner, until November 7. This delay is necessary to inform a respondent who resides abroad.
Justice Dane Tuiqereqere of the High Court hinted at the possibility of scheduling a hearing date for the judicial review application by the end of the year. This application, filed on September 17, is seeking an Order of Certiorari along with several declarations. During a recent court session, Justice Tuiqereqere inquired about the service to other respondents, to which Isireli Fa from FA & Company, representing the JSC, confirmed service had occurred. Affidavits for the JSC have been filed with the Office of the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General’s Chambers, and a copy has been sent to the Office of the President. However, serving another overseas-based respondent, Justice David Ashton-Lewis, has posed a challenge, with an indication that his address is on the Gold Coast.
Justice Tuiqereqere determined that service to the first two respondents was adequate but emphasized that the third respondent, residing outside of Fiji’s jurisdiction, required the court to address an expedited application. When Mr. Fa suggested using a courier for service, Justice Tuiqereqere recommended employing a lawyer due to the uncertainties of courier deliveries. He approved the ex parte application, mandating personal service by an agent.
FA & Company has previously criticized the COI’s findings as “perverse,” arguing that key legal provisions, specifically Section 82 of the 2013 Constitution and Section 5(1) of the FICAC Act 2007, were misinterpreted. The JSC worries that the COI’s interpretations could result in a constitutional crisis, as they believe these conclusions interfere with Fiji’s governance structure and their advisory role to the President concerning crucial appointments.
This situation highlights the ongoing legal and governance challenges Fiji faces, particularly concerning judicial administration and constitutional interpretation. There is sustained debate around the separation of powers and the need for clarity within legislative and constitutional mandates. The case presents an opportunity to address these issues, potentially leading to reforms that could bolster the integrity and transparency of governance structures in Fiji. As such, these proceedings hold significant importance for maintaining public trust and the democratic principles that underpin Fiji’s institutions.