Fiji PM to appeal court ruling on corruption inquiry, vows to resign if unsuccessful

Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka announced he will appeal a High Court ruling that invalidated a Commission of Inquiry (COI) report concerning the dismissal of the former head of the country's anti-corruption agency. The months-long inquiry, which incurred costs of approximately FJ$2 million, had become a significant political issue for Rabuka's coalition government.

“

I'm appealing the part that implies my activities and touch on my name [regarding] what I had done

The COI, led by Australian judge Justice David Ashton-Lewis, initially recommended the dismissal of Barbara Malimali, the then-commissioner of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). Malimali contested her suspension and subsequent sacking, initiating a judicial review against Rabuka and the President. Fiji's High Court had previously ruled Malimali's dismissal unlawful in February, a decision Rabuka appealed. In June, the court rejected Rabuka's attempt to delay the ruling on Malimali's illegal sacking.

“

I'm not the author of the COI. I made the recommendations and it's up to the Attorney-General when he advised me and Solicitor-General.

In a further legal setback last Friday, the High Court declared the entire inquiry report null and void. The court found that the commission's work after January 31, 2025, was unlawful due to an improperly extended term, and that the president lacked the authority to grant such an extension. The judgment stated that the commission's activities from February 1, 2025, and the subsequent report dated May 1, 2025, were "ultra vires," meaning beyond lawful authority.

“

Correct.

Speaking to local media following the court's decision, Rabuka confirmed his intention to appeal. He declared that he would resign if his appeal is unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal or, if necessary, the Supreme Court. "This is only the High Court. We [will] go to the Court of Appeal, and if [I'm not happy] with the Court of Appeal [decision], then we [will] go to the Supreme Court, and that's the end," he stated. Rabuka clarified that his appeal would focus on the part of the ruling that implicates his actions and name, asserting that he was not the author of the COI but acted on advice from the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General.

“

This is only the High Court. We [will] go to the Court of Appeal, and if [I'm not happy] with the Court of Appeal [decision], then we [will] go to the Supreme Court, and that's the end.