Government MP Professor Biman Prasad has pleaded not guilty to the amended Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption charge.

He is accused of failing to declare his directorship in Platinum Hotels and Resorts PTE Limited.

The trial date for his case has been set for September 1 to September 4.

Professor Prasad appeared before Magistrate Yogesh Prasad in the Suva Magistrates’ Court as FICAC amended the charge against him.

The amended charge alleges that between December 30, 2015 and January 31, 2016, Prasad, as an officeholder of the National Federation Party, failed to comply with statutory disclosure requirements by not declaring his directorship in Platinum Hotels and Resorts PTE Limited.

FICAC alleges he provided the Registrar of Political Parties with his declaration of assets, liabilities and income as at December 31, 2015, without disclosing the directorship.

Professor Prasad also faces an alternative charge alleging that he recklessly provided false information in a statutory declaration.

FICAC alleges that on January 28, 2016, he declared that the details in his declaration were true and complete, while the declaration omitted his directorship in Platinum Hotels and Resorts PTE Limited.

The allegations are brought under the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013.

Professor Prasad pleaded not guilty to both the substantive and alternative allegations.

The amended charge then triggered a lengthy discussion between the court, FICAC and the defence over whether the trial could proceed.

Senior Defence Counsel Richard Naidu made it clear that his side had been ready to proceed with the case.

However, he said the amended charge had introduced a new provision of the law which the defence needed to consider.

Naidu told the court the defence was disappointed by the development and said the effect of the new provision needed to be properly considered in fairness to his client.

He said the defence needed an opportunity to go through the amended charge and prepare before the trial began.

FICAC counsel Joseph Work told the court the prosecution had witnesses available for the hearing, but some had already been excused after the matter did not proceed.

The Magistrate considered whether the trial could be moved ahead despite the amendment.

The court ultimately ruled that the defence should have sufficient time to consider the new charge and prepare the case afresh.

Naidu, however, also pressed the need for the matter to move quickly.

He referred to the priority given to such cases under Section 18A of the Electoral Act and stressed that Prasad was entitled to have the matter dealt with speedily.

The court then fixed the trial for September 1 to September 4.

As the discussion ended, Naidu made the defence position clear that there should be no more surprises before the trial.

The prosecution is now expected to be ready to proceed for trial when the case returns to court.