The High Court has deferred the Judicial Services Commission’s (JSC) effort to challenge the findings and recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) concerning Barbara Malimali’s appointment as FICAC Commissioner to November 7. This delay is due to the necessity of notifying a respondent residing overseas.
Justice Dane Tuiqereqere indicated the potential for setting a hearing date for the judicial review application by year-end. The application, submitted on September 17, seeks an Order of Certiorari along with several declarations. During a recent court session, Justice Tuiqereqere questioned the service to other respondents, and Isireli Fa from FA & Company, representing the JSC, confirmed service had been completed. Affidavits for the JSC have been filed with the Office of the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General’s Chambers, and a copy was also sent to the Office of the President. However, serving Justice David Ashton-Lewis, who resides abroad, specifically on the Gold Coast, remains a challenge.
Justice Tuiqereqere found the service to two respondents within Fiji acceptable but stressed the need to address the third respondent’s service through expedited court application due to his overseas location. When Mr. Fa proposed using a courier, Justice Tuiqereqere advised employing a lawyer because of delivery uncertainties. He approved the ex parte application, requiring personal service by an agent.
FA & Company has previously labeled the COI’s conclusions as “perverse,” alleging a misinterpretation of critical legal provisions, including Section 82 of the 2013 Constitution and Section 5(1) of the FICAC Act 2007. The JSC is concerned the COI’s perspectives could lead to a constitutional issue, as they argue these conclusions disrupt Fiji’s governance framework and their advisory capacity to the President on pivotal appointments.
This situation underscores the ongoing legal and governance challenges faced by Fiji, especially concerning judicial administration and constitutional interpretation. The debate revolves around clarifying the separation of powers and adhering to legislative and constitutional directives. The case presents an opportunity to tackle these matters, potentially prompting reforms that could enhance the integrity and transparency of Fiji’s governance structures. These proceedings play a crucial role in sustaining public faith and the democratic values that support Fiji’s institutions.