Sharma says prosecution case should end
Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- Lawyer Devanesh Sharma argued in the High Court that former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and ex-AG Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum have no case to answer.
- Sharma contended the state failed to prove key elements of the abuse of office charges against both men.
- He also argued that Sayed-Khaiyum did not obstruct justice, citing evidence that the decision to halt an investigation rested with the investigating officer.
Prominent Suva lawyer Devanesh Sharma urged the High Court to acquit former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, asserting they have no case to answer.
The State has failed to prove key elements of the abuse of office charges, including that either accused acted recklessly or caused prejudice to the rights of other bidders.
Sharma presented arguments challenging the prosecution's case on charges of abuse of office. He stated that the state failed to prove essential elements, such as recklessness or prejudice to other bidders. Sharma emphasized that tenders were formally withdrawn, meaning bidders had no legal right to contract awards. He also argued that waivers were granted under existing procurement regulations, and the constitution prevents declaring those decisions unlawful.
The tenders were formally withdrawn by the Fiji Procurement Office, meaning bidders did not retain a legal right to have the contracts awarded to them.
Regarding the charge of obstructing the course of justice against Sayed-Khaiyum, Sharma disputed the prosecution's claim that he directed an investigation to be shelved. He pointed to state witness testimony indicating the investigating officer, not the Attorney-General, held the authority to continue or stop the investigation. Sharma also cited other reasons for the investigation's incompletion, including the investigating officer's resignation.
The Constitution prevents the court from declaring those decisions unlawful.
After a 17-day trial involving 40 state witnesses and approximately 80 exhibits, Sharma concluded that the prosecution had not produced sufficient evidence of criminality by either accused. He formally requested the court to find that Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum have no case to answer and acquit them.
He pointed to evidence from a State witness who agreed that the decision to continue or stop the investigation rested with the investigating officer, and not the Attorney-General.
Originally published by FBC News. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.