It has taken two days after Grubsheet broke the story but the sensational sworn statement by the senior ODPP staffer, Susana Vuniani, is finally news in the Fijian mainstream media. It is also now the subject of a formal FICAC investigation homing in on the allegations of wrongdoing by the Chief Justice, Salesi Temo, the Acting DPP, Nancy Tikoisuva and the Deputy DPP, John Rabuku.
First, the extract from Susana Vuniani’s affidavit – sworn in Sydney – that has caused a sensation in legal and political circles and has applied a blowtorch to the most senior officers of state in the criminal justice system.
According to Susana Vuniana, the police had recommended charges against some of the biggest names in Fiji. But any investigation by the ODPP was quashed.
Yesterday, in an astonishing breach of normal practice, John Rabuku – who has been convicted of professional misconduct by the Independent Legal Services Commission – chose to respond to the Grubsheet story on social media.
And then this morning has come a more formal response in this story in the Fiji Sun.
“Material inconsistencies’? What the hell does that mean? They haven’t said. Where is the use of the term “false”? It is conspicuously absent from this statement in relation to the allegations themselves, only used in relation to Vuniani’s employment status.
Whatever the ODPP says publicly, it cannot avoid what is now in train and which Grubsheet can also disclose – that a FICAC investigation is underway into the Vuniani allegations and has been given a case number ( 0027/2026/SU). All of which means that Salesi Temo, Nancy Tikoisuva and John Rabuku are in no position to derail it, as they have allegedly done with the police recommendations arising from the CoI.
There is another intriguing passage in the affidavit relating to the Sydney Kings Counsel, Ian Lloyd, and an allegation that the claim by Nancy Tikoisuva that Lloyd had advised that no grounds existed to prosecute those individuals referred by the police is false.
Two days ago, Grubsheet contacted Ian Lloyd for comment. So did Victor Lal of Fijileaks. And here’s what Ian Lloyd has said in an email to Fijileaks and Grubsheet this morning.
Dear Mr Lal and Mr Davis,
I refer to emails I received from you both earlier this week, concerning assertions made at paragraphs 12 and 13 of Statutory Declaration of a Ms Vuniani. You both asked me for my comments on her assertions.
In response, I can confirm the accuracy of the contents of the ODPP Press Release dated 22 January 2026. In particular as to the purpose of my travel to Fiji and the work I did for the ODPP while there. The assertions made by Ms Vuniani in paragraphs 12 and 13 of her statutory declaration are totally inaccurate. I did no other work than that for the Fiji ODPP during my trip to Fiji at that time.
I will make no other comment on the matter.
Regards,
Ian Lloyd KC
So according to Ian Lloyd KC, the assertions made by Ms Vuniani… are “totally inaccurate”. Again, no use of the term “false”.
What is the truth of what has happened? That will now be investigated by the corruption watchdog.
FICAC is now in the extraordinary position of investigating the Chief Justice, the Acting DPP and her Deputy. And all this just months from an election in which the integrity of the Rabuka-led Coalition and its appointees is destined to be a major issue.
The Vuniani affidavit in full:
UPDATE: Further stories in the mainstream media. Incredibly, none of them mention the FICAC investigation and give prominence not to the explosive allegations in Susana Vuniani’s affidavit but the ODPP’s response.
From CFL-Fiji Village:
And from Mai TV:
The pro-government, pro-establishment bias of the Fijian mainstream media has become even more striking as the months progress and we can hardly expect otherwise. The whole lot of them, after all, are on the government drip.
Their independence has been destroyed in a Faustian pact between media companies and the Coalition that constitutes a direct assault on democracy in Fiji.
Shameless. Just like the Jezebel Minister who presides over the Information portfolio.
233 reasons in herself why this government must go.
As with the Justice Ashton-Lewis and the COI report, the powers that be will simply discredit her…and any investigations will be long, drawn out, and conclude in favour of those named in her affidavit.
What’s intriguing is that FICAC is now investigating the Chief Justice and head of the Judicial Services Commission for alleged corruption just as he he trying to remove the FICAC Commissioner, including advertising her job.
One could argue that Lavi Rokoika has Salesi Temo just where she needs him – checkmated and unable to move against her without triggering a massive constitutional showdown. Is this what the Prime Minister needs to finally suspend Temo and clear the decks for the election? We shall see.
The problem for the CJ and Nancy and John is that Susana Vuniani has had an impeccable work record at the ODPP since 2017 under Christopher Pryde and was trusted enough by the new order to be present at the meeting in question. It will not be easy for them to trash her reputation and they are now going to be subjected to the FICAC blowtorch.
So a perfect storm is brewing and the Prime Minister knows it.
“Any investigations will be long, drawn out, and conclude in favour of those named in her affidavit.”
Wrong and right.
It was the shortest of investigations and concluded in favour of those named in the affidavit.
Ask Ian Lloyd how much did he get paid.
He is hardly likely to tell us that. But “silks” at the Sydney bar – senior counsel or Kings Counsel – can earn 30,000 Aussie dollars (or more) a day.
That’s around $46,000 Fijian a day. Though given that he is now reported to be semi-retired, maybe Ian gave Nancy a discount.
The timing of this is very interesting! I have been following the rumours relating to Khaiyum’s legal case. It was alleged that there was some kind of rift between Rabuka camp and Temo. Basically Temo was going or not going to conflict Khaiyum. Is this matter now the result of that case? Since Temo did not convict Khaiyum, Rabuka indirectly behind this?
I think this may be drawing far too long a bow. But who knows? Anything can happen in Fiji and usually does. We await the Prime Minister’s response. He has the details and is going to have to act one way or another.
It looks to me that Mr Lloyd may have produced a report on the COI, (He’s saying he did) but that it wasn’t disclosed to Miss Vuniani by Nancy and Rabuku. So she had no knowledge of the existence of the report or the recommendations in it that were withheld from her by the two above persons who decided to state that the report said that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any of the people named in it.
Mr Lloyd’s job was done when he finished the report and it was sent directly to Nancy and Rabuku. So he’s holding off disclosing his findings and recommendations that he wrote so as not to disclose what he put in it.
If he was paid to do the report, then Nancy and Rabuku need to be made to produce it to prove what they said the recommendations were. It is possible that they lied as to what was contained in it.
Perish the thought!
Nothing major going to happen with the Monkeys running the circus.
The Prime mMinisters response: “I was not aware”
He then smiles, gets into his landcruiser and trundles off to make videos about him playing the mouth organ.
If Mr Lloyd’s recommendations do indeed exist, they are likely to surface sooner or later. However, the onus rests on the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) to produce evidence that such recommendations exist and that they acted upon them.
This can only be established if the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) carries out its statutory functions diligently, impartially, and comprehensively. A thorough investigation is essential to determine whether the alleged recommendations exist, whether they were considered by the ODPP, and whether the actions taken were consistent with the applicable legal and prosecutorial obligations.
Now that there is formal investigation underway, that will presumably happen. Or not, as the case may be, depending on the diligence and competence of the corruption watchdog.
And just like that FICAC has closed the complaint.