[Photo: Nikhil Kumar]

The second day of the stay applications filed by the former Deputy Prime Ministers Manoa Kamikamica and Professor Biman Prasad regarding the validity of the Acting Fiji Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Commissioner Lavi Rokoika’s appointment and her ability to lay charges against them in criminal proceedings.

Rokoika, while responding to the validity submission made by King’s Counsel Martin Daubney, told the court that the position taken by the applicant is that the egregious conduct of the executive does not touch on the abuse of process and this is a public law challenge brought into the wrong forum.

The KC moved on to the other point of their submission, the abuse of process, which was quickly objected to by Rokoika, stating that the main issues in the notice of motion for Kamikamica were on the validity and the lack of evidence and not the conflict of interest.

She added that according to the rules of the High Court, the applicants should have properly placed that issue in their notice of motion, which is the correct procedure to do it and not to sneak it in.

Daubney countered by saying that this point is clearly raised in Kamikamica’s affidavits and that the respondents, namely the commission, have responded to the conflict of issues in their submissions.

Judge Justice Siainiu Fa’alogo Bull ruled that it was unfair and should have been made clear in the applicant’s notice of motion.

The KC sought leave to make amendments or add the conflict of issue in their notice of motion.

Daubney added that the conflict of issue was expressly advertised in their affidavits, and the respondents have directly and comprehensively engaged in the affidavits.

The main purpose, the KC said, was to tidy up the court records to ensure the Notice of Motion does not suffer from deficiencies as identified by Justice Bull in her earlier ruling and also that the applicants would suffer prejudice if the amendments were not allowed.

Rokoika objected to leave being granted by saying that there is no explanation as to why this has come in so late when the applicant is being represented by senior and experienced counsel.

She countered that the reason why they addressed the conflict of interest in their submissions is because they had to respond to the applicants’ submissions.

Justice Bull granted leave for the amendment to the applicant’s Notice of Motion to include the conflict of interest argument.

The stay application proceedings continue this afternoon.

Stream the best of Fiji on VITI+. Anytime. Anywhere.