Deputy Solicitor-General Eliesa Tuiloma outside court today.

The State has accepted that people affected by the Commission of Inquiry findings should have been given prior notice, the High Court heard. However, it says it cannot confirm if that was done.

Deputy Solicitor-General Eliesa Tuiloma, appearing for the Attorney-General’s Office, said the State agrees with the principles of natural justice. These include the right to be notified of adverse findings and to respond. But he said the State cannot say whether those steps were followed in this case.

Tuiloma told the court the State remains neutral on the issue of fairness. He said key documents are missing. Only transcripts and the final report are available. There is no full record to show if notice was given.

High Court judge Justice Tuiqereqere questioned why all documents were not disclosed. He said the records should exist and be easy to access. The inquiry, he stated ended less than a year ago.

The court heard the documents were likely held by the COI Secretariat. Some may also be with the Prime Minister’s Office. Tuiloma said the State has not been able to obtain a complete set.

Justice Tuiqereqere raised concerns about the missing records. He said they may have been poorly kept or withheld. He added there was no clear reason for the gaps.

Tuiloma also confirmed the State did not contact the Commissioner of Inquiry. He said the Commissioner would be key to explaining whether fair process was followed.

On the law, the State relied on a House of Lords case. It argued that even if there was unfairness, relief may be refused if the outcome would be the same.

The court also heard the COI no longer exists as a legal body. Counsel said this may affect what remedies the court can grant.

Tuiloma said some findings were adverse and damaging. However, the State is limited in how far it can challenge them because the report is already public.

He suggested one option could be removing names from the report. That would depend on the court’s decision.