All of the focus thus far arising from Justice Dane Tuiqereqere‘s judgment in the Malimali Affair has been his (contested) ruling that her dismissal was unlawful because it was recommended to the President by the Prime Minister and not the Judicial Services Commission headed by the Chief Justice, Salesi Temo.
But dig deeper into the ruling and it is clear that Justice Tuiqereqere has knowingly or unwittingly made it impossible for Barbara Malimali to be reinstated as FICAC Commissioner.
He has also thrown a spotlight on the failure of the Chief Justice to properly vet Malimali in the first place, appointing her when she had been denied a legal practicing certificate in Tuvalu because of professional misconduct and lied about it in successive sworn declarations.
Far from propping up Salesi Temo’s position, Justice Tuiqereqere appears to have placed him under existential threat. While Temo says the JSC will make a decision at the end of March on whether to recommend reinstating Barbara Malimali as FICAC head after submissions from the various parties, he has already been checkmated and so has Malimali herself.
How? Because in his judgment, Justice Tuiqereqere lays out the case against Malimali made by Justice David Ashton-Lewis and his Commission of Inquiry. And while he restates the legal position that the contents of the CoI are not binding on the JSC, the Judge himself refused to make a recommendation as to whether she should be reinstated. Instead he threw it back at the JSC knowing, as he must have, that he was placing the Chief Justice in an impossible position.
Why? Because if Salesi Temo didn’t know about the debacle in Tuvalu and the false declarations when the JSC appointed Barbara Malmali to FICAC, he sure knows about them now. And not only from the CoI Report but from Justice Tuiqereqere’s ruling, which contains a sting in the tale capable of inflicting a lethal wound against not only Malimali but the Chief Justice himself.
Read on and the sting in the tail becomes obvious.
1/ Justice Tuiqereqere leaves open the possibility of the JSC not re-instating Barbara Malimali – as she and her lawyer, Tanya Waqanika , are demanding – but suspending her for misbehaviour for having made false declarations and putting her before a tribunal of three High Court judges to determine her innocence or guilt, as the Constitution stipulates.
2/ That is an open-and-shut case because the evidence that Malimali made false declarations is established fact.
3/ Were the Chief Justice and the JSC as a whole to ignore this evidence and recommend the reinstatement of Malimali at the end of March, it is Salesi Temo who would also be facing the threat of suspension for misbehaviour and a tribunal hearing. Because while he has a record of defying the Constitution, he wouldn’t get away with such a blatant violation of the law.
So take if from Grubsheet, Fiji. Barbara Malimali isn’t coming back. It is all over bar the shouting from her and Tanya Waqanika – a great deal of shouting that isn’t going to make a jot of difference. She is toast and Salesi Temo will be toast if he doesn’t fall into line.
Nor does Malimali deserve any compensation whatsoever – no “settlement” or sweetheart deal – having lied in such an egregious manner in applying for the FICAC job. And if anyone in the JSC or the Attorney General’s office tries to pay her one saqamoli of public money, they should be tried for corruption by any incoming government after the election.
All of which means that Justice Dane Tuiqereqere may be a lot smarter than some of us have given him credit for. Grubsheet has been critical of someone with a career in the law specialising in accident compensation over-riding the opinions of two New Zealand constitutional experts and Kings Counsel – Professor Philip Joseph and Dr Andrew Butler – that the Prime Minister DID have the legal authority to advise the President to suspend Barbara Malimali.
But as an old saying goes, there is more than one way to skin a cat. And on present indications, Justice Tuiqereqere has well and truly skinned “Bad Barbie” and has also created a pathway for his boss, the Chief Justice, to be skinned if he doesn’t set up a tribunal to investigate Malimali for her egregious lies and corruption.
Read on for the relevant extracts from Tuiqereqere’s judgment and decide for yourself what is likely to happen at the end of March.
—————————–
——————————–
—————————————
——————————-
So what will the JSC decide? Justice Tuiqereqere has presented Salesi Temo with a poisoned chalice. Recommend to the President that Barbara Malmali’s suspension by the Prime Minister stand and set up a judicial tribunal for try her for misbehaviour. Or reinstate her and face the prospect of being suspended for misbehaviour himself.
What’s it to be Chief Justice?
——————————
UPDATE WEDNESDAY AM:
Once again, the Opposition’s Premila Kumar displays her political skills and potency with yet another stinging rebuke of the chasm between the Prime Minister’s lofty words to a visiting international audience and the reality under his leadership.
With just months to go to Election Day, events are brewing that pose a direct threat to Rabuka and the PAP. At the very least, they must clean up their act and become a much smaller target or be swept from office.
The original decision of the JSC in their appointment of Barbara Malimali as the FICAC Commissioner is now clearly shown to be wrong. The lack of due diligence is appalling and one has to wonder on what premise the decision was made.
Her previous position as Chair of the Electoral Commission is also one to ask questions of as the Constitution at s.75(6) requires the Chair to be a person who is qualified to be or is a judge. So, on what basis did the Constitutional Offices Commission conclude that Ms. Malimali met the criteria? Or did they also not apply due diligence to her appointment?
Then of course we have the issue of Ms. Malimali being the subject of a FICAC investigation into her conduct as Chair of the Electoral Commission by the Deputy Commissioner Francis Puleiwai at the time of her appointment.
The mess called Fiji continues and if the JSC attempt to reappoint Barbara Malmali it will prove it to be so.
Check mate
Oh what a tangled web we weave,
To deceive,
I believe.
Am sure Tanya has something up her sleeve.
Yes, in astronomy, they call it a black hole. Nothing can escape. Not her or her loudmouthed client.
Tuiqereqere has just shown why he would make a better CJ then the current useless gorilla sitting in that role. He knows how to deflect professionally.
The case brought by Big Boobed Malimali was to seek a judicial review and if in her favour, get a ruling to reinstate her to her role. Tuiqereqere dodged a bullet there by leaving this bit of the ruling open-ended and throwing it back at the equally corrupt and inept JSC.
The fact that Big Boobed Malimali lied on several occassions when applying for her practicing certificate to the point where she has been blacklisted from a country is certainly enough to ensure she will not be returning to her former role. For someone who lies for personal gain or to save her skin, she is someone the government would not risk having around as she is likely to lie and/or falsify information to protect herself while sacrificing others.
While Tuiqereqere is correct the procedure for removal of an officer appointed by the JSC shall be the same as the procedure for the removal of Judges, i.e. by way of a tribunal being appointed, etc., the reality is neither the government nor JSC will do this given they have already skipped several legal/constitutional processes in removing her and the bigger fact that elections are around the corner.
Rabuka knows his government will not survive this round and is working out his plan of attack by identifying coalition partners he needs to bed in order to stay in government either as a PM or a minister, depending on the voice of the voters. He may even be considering his future as an opposition member.
Big Boobed Malimali is now a forgotten useless noise like Veronica Malani and will have to go and wave her goods in someone elses face to keep the money flowing into her purse.
I strongly suspect you’d like those big boobs to be waving in your face.
Can you please spare us that imagery? The case itself is disturbing enough.
1. What’s going on in Saleshni’s mind to finalize both the JSC’s position on Malimali’s case and Kaiyum’s case judgement by end of March 2026? Is it Full Moon effect or Julius Caesar’s ides of March prophecy effect or post Valentines Day effect or a preview of April Fools Day drama effect?
2. Saleshni said he was too busy to write Kai’s judgement since November 2025 but now has all the time in this whole world to handle both Malimali and Kai together so promptly. Saleshni has now aligned finalization of date together just like sun, moon and earth aligns to achieve Solar eclipse. I now wonder whether Kai and all will wear sunglasses to court (one final time) to deal with the solar eclipse.
3. Well, whatever it is, the alignment of dates to the end of March gives a pattern of behavior that fully confirms a deal reached between Rumbooka and Saleshni to not to appeal Malimali’s case so that Kai goes to jail.
So no money for mounjaro or wegovy for Tanya and Barbs.
Just go for Sri Lankan cinnamon and Meta.
Justice Tuiqereqere, if you’re reading this, Thank you. Please remain as one of the very few Justices under CJ Temo who still has ethics and integrity.
Malimali had been unfairly scrutinized from day 1. No one is squeaky clean and she is one of the best persons to be head of FICAC. She is not a racist and she is an independent person.
GD needs to leave aside the views of his friend Janet and think independently and strategically.
Malimali as FICAC commissioner is bad news for Rabuka and his corrupt ministers, and good news for those who fight for good governance in this country.
In his blind hate for Malimali, GD is supporting the deeply racist Vakalalabure clan who have made a mockery of FICAC and FSC. He needs to think clearly. Malimali is someone with the courage, conviction and ability to build an independent FICAC that will send dread into the hearts of Rambo’s current ministers and associates. It will provide the counter balance to Rambo’s almost unchecked power…. Something the country desperately needs.
Unfairly scrutinised? Are you kidding? A FICAC Commissioner should be like Caesar’s wife – not only above suspicion but seen to be above suspicion.
Google it: “The phrase is used to highlight the importance of maintaining trust in public figures, and that those in positions of authority should avoid even the implication or appearance of impropriety”.
Does Barbara Malimali pass this test? No. It is established fact that she lied in her application for the FICAC job in having signed a sworn statement that she had never been found guilty of professional misconduct anywhere when she had been barred from practicing in Tuvalu.
That is enough to bar her from public office of any kind, quite apart from the findings against her in the CoI Report and her appalling record of high-handed conduct and racism. Yes racism.
She even expressed the view at the CoI that the “foreigners” conducting the inquiry weren’t fit to pass judgment on her as an iTaukei. This was despite the fact that Janet Mason is a Fiji citizen, her mother is iTaukei and she speaks the Fijian language. Malimali’s conduct in claiming Mason and David Ashton-Lewis had no right to sit in judgment of her when this was a lawfully-constituted commission of inquiry was outrageous.
I am a “friend” of Janet Mason? I wish. What she has produced in the CoI Report is the most impressive document of its kind that I have ever seen emerge from Fiji – a tour de force which I understand she wrote in less than a month. So I can only dream of emulating her skills of expression and analysis. And talk about grace under pressure.
Charlie Charters and others keep targeting Mason for professional issues in New Zealand that have nothing to do with her conduct with the CoI. They are irrelevant. And never once, as far as I can see, have they been able to find fault with anything she as done in relation to the CoI, where also as far as I can see, her professionalism has been faultless.
I am not alone in also being impressed that never once did Janet Mason rise to the bait when she was being taunted by Barbara Malimali for being an outsider. I gather they both went to Jasper Williams School in Lautoka, though clearly at different times.
If I had been Janet Mason, I’d have told Malimali to “eff off” in no uncertain terms. But because she has never made a big deal of it, most people still don’t know that Mason is a part-iTaukei local who lives near Vatukoula and has an office in Tavua as well as in NZ. They think she is a Kiwi but I gather she doesn’t even hold NZ citizenship and apart from her accent, is Fijian to the core. So I am certainly an admirer and hope she has a great deal more to contribute to public life.
I don’t have “blind hate” for Barbara Malimali but I do regard her with distaste. Why? Because her conduct has demonstrated that she is unfit to hold public office of any kind, let alone be the corruption watchdog and pronounce judgment on the conduct of others.
That conduct speaks for itself and I repeat: She will not be returning to FICAC if there is even a skerrick of integrity left in the JSC. And for you to portray her as some kind of paragon of virtue – “something the country desperately needs” – is preposterous. Fiji doesn’t need her or anyone like her, especially guarding against wrongdoing at the top.
I really don’t think there has been ANY integrity in the JSC, so to find the skerrick that you mention, Graham, might be nigh on impossible. That’s the only reason that I predicted her reinstatement in her short-lived role at FICAC.
She is the worst thing that could happen in any public role but I think that every right thinking person in Fiji has seen things happen that they would never have believed possible, under this or any other government, so nothing comes as a surprise now.
The PM makes up the rules as he goes along and there is no-one to appeal to as Temo is part of the conspiracy. Hopefully it is goodbye to Ms M and no compensation to be forthcoming from anywhere.
Barbara building an independent FICAC? May I have some of what you’re smoking/injecting?
Amazing how she went about closing files on coalition of the unwilling supporters within days of taking office – that sent relief and joy to the cabal of corrupt people in places of power.
It’s good you have read Justice Dane’s judgement properly, GD
He has put it down quite simply,that Rabuka’s handling of the Barb situation was quite wrong and has tasked the whole thing squarely back to the JSC
So Rabuka if only he had some patience rather than displaying what he used to display back in the SVT days of the 90s,he would have been spared this embarrassment.
Let’s get this straight. I do NOT agree with Justice Tuiqereqere’s ruling that the Prime Minister did not have a lawful right to sack Barbara Malimali.
Two constitutional experts and Kings Counsel from New Zealand – Professor Philip Joseph and Dr Andrew Butler – fundamentally disagree with Tuiqereqere’s ruling and they frankly know more than he does when his background in the law has been accident compensation, not constitutional practice.
This was a ruling that they advise should have been appealed by the Prime Minister and he would have won. Why he didn’t proceed after having said he would and had hired Dr Butler last week to fight the case hasn’t been explained and is one of the great unanswered mysteries of this government. I guess the story of what happened will eventually emerge.
I hope I have made myself clear.
Hi GD,
With respects, I am totally confused about your articles now. I noticed you were against Justice Tuigeregere’s ruling (earlier article) but now you are praising him? What’s the catch, mate?
Also, the the court ruling said PM was wrong but despite that ruling, your were insistent that PM was correct as per KC’s rulings. At the end of the end of the day, shouldn’t we follow court ruling to articulate final legal positions – irrespective if the judge was dealing with non-constitutional cases in NZ?
With Respects
Please refer to my response to the last comment. But to repeat: The PM was advised by Dr Andrew Butler KC last week that he had grounds to appeal Justice Tuiqereqere’s ruling and was actually engaged to do so, though no-one in the Fijian mainstream media has reported this. That is no surprise because they don’t report a lot of things that they should.
You’ll recall that the Prime Minister said at first that he WAS going to appeal, said further that he would resign if he didn’t win and then suddenly did an about-turn and the government announced that it wasn’t going to appeal the judgment. If both Dr Butler and before him, Professor Philip Joseph – both of them Kings Counsel – say the PM would have won had he proceeded to the appeal, we have to ask why Rabuka didn’t proceed. We don’t yet have an answer for that.
The contents of Tuiqereqere’s ruling relating to Barbara Malimali and her false declarations about not having been found guilty of professional misconduct are entirely separate to the issue of an appeal. That is the subject of this article – pointing out that the JSC can hardly reinstate her when she has lied under oath.
So to make myself entirely clear:
1/ I don’t agree with Tuiqereqere’s ruling that the PM didn’t have the lawful right to terminate Malimali because two NZ Kings Counsel and experts on constitutional practice say he got it wrong and Rabuka would have won an appeal, had he proceeded.
2/ I DO think Tuiqereqere has deftly checkmated Malimali and the JSC by putting the onus on the JSC to decide if she should be reinstated to FICAC while pointing out that she made a false declaration about being found guilty of professional misconduct in Tuvalu. If the JSC does reinstate her, it is guilty of ignoring a criminal act that clearly makes Malimali unfit for public office. Ergo, the JSC will then be in the firing line. Which is why I don’t think the JSC is that stupid.
I hope I have addressed your concerns.
Snake talk with forked tongue.
I don’t believe he said he would resign, rather he would consider resigning.
There is a vast difference.
He would obviously take the position at a later date and say that whilst he had considered it, he will not be resigning.
GD, you support the ridiculous position that the PM should have the powers to hire and fire the head of a judicial institution?
Your dislike of Malimali is clear but this should not lead a person of your calibre to start advocating for a system where the PM should have the powers to appoint the head of the anti- corruption body.
That partisan opinion that Janet Mason managed to acquire from her lawyer friend is absolutely detrimental to the rule of law and good governance in the country.
It is ridiculous for anyone (let alone a good governance crusader such as yourself) to advance such a stance. I can’t believe that you are saying that political actors should be able to hire and fire the head of FICAC. A key function of FICAC is to investigate corruption by politicians. What you’re espousing for is that if the PM should ever come to be investigated by FICAC for corruption, all he has to do is to sack the FICAC chief and install someone of his choice to end that investigation.
The hatred for Malimali is leading normally sane people to advocate for crazy things.
The ruling by justice Dane, whom you have discredited, makes much more sense than the partisan legal opinion of the NZ KC handpicked by Mason.
Oh dear. Ignorance was once something to be ashamed of. Now it is paraded by individuals like you under the cloak of anonymity.
Your claim that Professor Philip Joseph’s is “partisan opinion that Janet Mason managed to acquire from her lawyer friend” is absurd.
It was a legal opinion from a Kings Counsel and New Zealand’s foremost constitutional expert who has written the definitive book on NZ constitutional practice. In other words, a genuine expert in constitutional law, as opposed to Justice Dane Tuiqereqere, who is relatively new to the bench and has a legal background in accident compensation cases, not constitutional matters.
Professor Joseph – as far as I know – is not a “friend” of Janet Mason’s. He is NZ’s best constitutional brain and was hired by the CoI to provide it with an opinion to clarify the conflict between the provisions of the FICAC Act and the Constitution in relation to the powers of the Prime Minister and the JSC.
His opinion that it is the Prime Minister who has the power to advise the President to hire or fire a FICAC Commissioner was backed up by another NZ KC, Dr Andrew Butler, who the Prime Minister briefly engaged last week to begin work on his appeal against Justice Tuiqereqere’s ruling. Pardon me but two Kings Counsel and acknowledged constitutional experts carry more weight than you do. But then ignorant pronouncements have long become holy writ in Fiji.
You can believe that Justice Tuiqereqere’s reasoning “makes much more sense than the partisan legal opinion of the NZ KC handpicked by Mason” but it isn’t about “making more sense” to you but a proper interpretation of the law. The Prime Minister chose on reflection to ignore the advice of two constitutional experts and tell Dr Butler 24 hours after he was hired that he wasn’t going to proceed with an appeal, which he was told he was likely to win.
The reason why all this happened hasn’t been officially explained but believe me, the full facts will emerge in due course. Sitiveni Rabuka has failed every test of transparency and accountability but circumstances, including the law and the political cycle, are catching up with him.
Here’s some of what we know so far. I have since had this story confirmed by other sources:
https://www.grubsheet.com.au/bombshell-did-the-chief-justice-threaten-not-to-convict-aiyaz-sayed-khaiyum-if-the-prime-minister-appealed-the-tuiqereqere-judgment-in-the-malimali-affair/
GS-GD provides vital public service information at no charge, freely sharing accurate and timely, transparent information.
Particularly worthy noting GS’s commitment to public service when reliable local media has totally absconded, abandoning the Fijian public of truth and fair and independent reporting of local events.
Readers should recognize and appreciate this blog’s public service and not spread ignorant views and deliberate untruths just for the sake of blindly following.
This blog should remain objective. I noticed some flip flop views being expressed by the author where one article condemns Tuigeregere and the subsequent other one one makes him a saint. The author seems to be hell bent to consistently discredit someone he dislikes by imposing on readers on what is likely to happen. He doesn’t respect others point of views. This will lose many readers in time to come.
Flip-flop views? You are merely displaying your own lack of mental dexterity. Do try to keep up and remember that it is always better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt. (a life lesson from Denis Thatcher, husband of Maggie)
“I will lose many readers in time to come”. You wish. As the election nears, on the contrary. There will be a stampede in my direction, just as there was in 2022. Why? Because Grubsheet reports developments the mainstream media in Fiji won’t touch.
It continues very soon with exclusive and startling information you won’t get from any other source. Stand by…
Oh dear! You resort to personal attacks with unwarranted comments like “You are merely displaying your own lack of mental dexterity.” I merely pointed out inconsistency in your article where in one you condemned Tuigeregere ruling and in the subsequent other you made him a saint. This is an intellectual analysis and not a case of mental dexterity. Nonetheless, I apologize if my pointing out inconsistency in your two articles have affected you.
Plse keep it objective and professional – but I am expecting another personal attack for my reply. This will increase your readership. Apart from this, I enjoy reading your articles.
There is no inconsistency whatsoever in me siding with two New Zealand constitutional experts in saying that the Prime Minister had a good chance of winning an appeal against Justice Tuiqereqere’s ruling while at the same time pointing out that his judgment makes it impossible for Barbara Malimali to be reinstated.
They are two entirely separate issues, as I have patiently tried to explain more than once but which you clearly appear unable to appreciate. This is not a personal attack but a reasonable observation under the circumstances.
I assure you that I am not in the least bit affected by your attempt to demonstrate an inconsistency that doesn’t exist and am pleased that you enjoy my articles. Thank you.
Thank you for the feedback, GD. Really appreciated. Kind Regards
I comment on writers ‘’Corrupt CJS’’ and ‘’Corrupt Charan Jeath’’.
These ‘’cheerleader of corrupt public officials,’’ warped thinking and Malimali supporters is what is ‘’rotten’’ about paradise today, that the Pope on a Fiji visit remarked, ”Fiji The Way The World Should Be.”
When truth is reported they condemn it. When the COI points out Malimali’s professional misconduct with respect to the Tuvalu affair, GD is accused of a personal vendetta against Malimali. Chill and clear your eyes and hearts and study the facts.
Malimali has no business heading FICAC or any public office where integrity, character and independence are critical to the post. She ought to be on the same FICAC investigation list that includes President, PM, CJ, AG, SG, DPP, Registrar, Manoa Kamikamica, Biman Prasad and Wylie Clarke for interference.
Thank you, GD, for being the Voice of Truth, facts and reason.