[Photo: File]

A dispute over the admissibility of a National Federation Party document has emerged in the trial involving former Deputy Prime Minister Professor Biman Prasad.

The prosecution questioned its final witness, Fijian Elections Office manager Mesake Dawai, about records held by the Registrar of Political Parties.

Dawai told the court the records include political party registration documents, membership lists, correspondence and financial disclosures.

He confirmed the National Federation Party was registered around 2013, with its application for registration dated 13 February that year.

Dawai also told the court the Registrar received updates from the NFP on changes to its office bearers.

He said, based on records in his custody, Professor Prasad was the party leader between 2014 and 2016.

Dawai also identified other office bearers, including Roko Tukombe Mundalu as president and Dalip Chand as secretary.

The prosecution then sought to rely on an NFP document which it says supports the allegation concerning the appointment and position of the political party leader.

However, defence counsel Richard Naidu objected to the document, questioning its relevance and the basis on which it could be admitted into evidence.

Naidu argued the document amounts to hearsay because the person who made it is not being called to give evidence.

He told the court the defence should have the opportunity to question the maker of the document about its contents.

FICAC Legal Manager Joseph Work argued the document is relevant to an element of the charge and should be considered alongside the evidence already presented.

Work said FICAC would provide submissions addressing the defence objection and whether any exception to the hearsay rule applies.

Magistrate Yogesh Prasad said the issue was important and required proper consideration, particularly given the accused’s constitutional rights to a fair hearing.

The Magistrate directed FICAC to file its submissions by four this afternoon, with the defence to respond.

Oral submissions on the admissibility of the document will be heard tomorrow.

The court will rule on whether the document can be admitted into evidence.