Strict procurement and approval processes within Telecom Fiji Limited have been highlighted in court as the trial of Houng Lee Kaba Jacobs Managing Director and former TFL Director, Sanjay Kaba continued in the Suva Magistrates Court today.

State witness and TFL Financial Controller Ashika Nandani told the court that all major purchases must go through clearly defined authority levels, including board approval where required.

While giving evidence, Nandani said her role involves supporting the board’s executive team with financial reporting, projections, and board meetings.

She stressed that documents provided to investigators are consistent with TFL’s internal reports.

The court heard that TFL uses a structured online tender system, allowing registered companies to submit bids before closing deadlines.

Nandani said tenders are only opened by an authorized committee made up of representatives from key departments, including human resources and supply chain.

She explained that bids are assessed separately on technical and commercial criteria by designated teams before a final recommendation is made.

According to Nandani, vendors must meet strict compliance requirements, and projects go through several stages, from evaluation and approval to contract signing and ongoing management.

She also confirmed details of a specific tender, revealing that submissions closed on 29th December 2018 with nine companies participating, before shortlisted bidders moved on to presentations.

Three state witnesses took the stand today.

The fourth and final witness is expected to testify tomorrow.

The prosecution has so far called 11 witnesses.

Kaba is charged with one count of obtaining a financial advantage.

It is alleged that between January 2017 and January 2019, while serving as a board member of Telecom Fiji Limited and Amalgamated Telecom Holdings Limited, Kaba used his position and influence to facilitate a tender submission through Houng Lee Kaba Jacobs Limited, a company in which he was a director and shareholder.

The prosecution alleges this led to a financial advantage of over $766,000, despite the company not being eligible.

The trial continues tomorrow.