Chief Justice Salesi Temo has confirmed there will be no closed court for Master of the High Court, Preetika Prasad in the trial of Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum and former Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem who face abuse-of-office charges.
The Chief Justice reviewed his earlier decision made during the pre-trial conference.
Defence counsel Devanesh Sharma says that witnesses are witnesses.
Sharma says that Prasad will be giving evidence as the former Acting Solicitor General and Secretary to the Constitutional Offices Commission.
Chief Justice Temo questioned Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Nancy Tikoisuva about what was damaging in Prasad’s evidence.
Tikoisuva says the request for a closed court was to protect the reputation of the judiciary.
She says that witnesses have been victimised as a result of media reports.
Chief Justice Temo responded that people must understand freedom of speech comes with responsibility and said the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions should always encourage public hearings for trials.
He also mentioned that people should be warned they can be taken to task and held in contempt if they unlawfully malign others.
Prasad will be the sixth state witness.
Sayed-Khaiyum and Saneem are charged with abuse of office and receiving a corrupt benefit, respectively, in 2022.
It is alleged that Sayed-Khaiyum between June 30th and July 12th in 2022, whilst being the Acting Prime Minister, signed a Deed of Variation and Addendum between the Government and the then Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem and that the approval for the government to pay the taxes of Mohammed Saneem was done without the proper approval of the Constitutional Offices Commission and the President of Fiji.
It is alleged that between the 1st of June 2022 and the 31st of July 2022, while being employed as the Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem without lawful authority and reasonable excuse, asked for and obtained a benefit for himself, that is the approval and payment/waiver of tax of more than $55,000 that was charged on his back pay as a Supervisor of Elections.
The trial continues.
