With all eyes in the legal fraternity on whether the judicial Tribunal investigating the allegations of misbehaviour against Christopher Pryde will proceed with its scheduled hearing today without him after he withdrew from the process, another major obstacle has emerged at the last minute to throw the proceedings in doubt.
Grubsheet understands that the Fiji Law Society representing the nation’s lawyers in private practice has told the Tribunal head, Justice Anare Tuilevuka, that it is no longer willing to participate in the proceedings in an advisory capacity.
According to our source, the President of the Law Society, Wylie Clarke, has written to Justice Tuilevuka saying that Christopher Pryde’s withdrawal from the hearing on the grounds that he can no longer afford his defence after his salary was suspended means that it cannot go ahead.
The contents of the letter haven’t been made public. But Wylie Clarke, according to this source, has told the Tribunal Head that it would be unfair to proceed without the DPP and would violate his rights under Section 16 of the Constitution.
The relevant extract says the following:
In relation to Christopher Pryde, the “reasonably prompt” requirement is already highly questionable when it has taken 20 months for his hearing to be scheduled. But is it “procedurally fair” for the Judicial Services Commission to have summarily suspended his salary six months ago so that he no longer has the means to engage counsel to properly defend himself? And would it be “procedurally fair” for Justice Tuilevuka to press ahead with the Tribunal hearing into the allegations of misbehaviour against the DPP without him being present? The Fiji Law Society clearly doesn’t think so.
The scene is now set for a major behind-the-scenes confrontation between the legal profession and the Tribunal judges and above them, the Judicial Services Commission led by the rogue Acting Chief Justice, Salesi Temo. The JSC has not only been willing to put the Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, off side by ignoring his public comments that the DPP should have continued to be paid. But it is now on a course to defy the constitutional requirement for procedural fairness by pressing ahead with the Tribunal hearing without the presence of the accused.
We have yet to hear publicly from Wylie Clarke. But if the Tribunal judges go ahead with their hearing today at 10.00am in the Veiuto court complex, there will obviously be serious repercussions.
This is a case that is being closely watched in both Fiji and New Zealand – Christopher Pryde’s home country. And any suggestion that the Tribunal is a “kangaroo court” in which the accused has not been given the opportunity to adequately defend himself will inflict serious damage on the credibility and reputation of Fiji’s criminal justice system.
So an important day coming up in Suva.
———–
Christopher Pryde’s letter withdrawing from today’s hearing:
Five months after Sitiveni Rabuka’s comments, Christopher Pryde’s salary still hasn’t be restored. And Salesi Temo has made a fool of the Prime Minister.
UPDATE MONDAY AM:
So it appears they are going ahead anyway. Justice Fijian-style.
From Radio NZ News. The Fijian media are ignoring the story.
And all those Aussies and Kiwis considering working or volunteering in Fiji await too.
So Wylie Clarke has finally grown some , , ,
Tomasi you beat me to this comment.
I was going to say Fiji Law Society finally grew some balls.
Where have they been all these time?
Why haven’t they questioned the suspension of Mr. Pryde’s salary?
Natural justice and procedural fairness are whole concepts. Not a selective thing where you only pick some components.
Not only has our judicial system has gone to the dogs because of the clowns running it, it has been made worse by the spineless lawyers who play a major role in ensuring some balance in the system.
The Fiji Law Society should be renamed the Fiji Jellyfish Society.
Not really in my view. Very selective of the FLS to do so. There are so many other pertinent matters that they should be addressing and tackle head on. But what can one expect from the FLS when the President of FLS (flouting legal system) himself is guilty of breaching the law and the system – Malimali case in point.
All their shenanigans clearly on display. The President FLS and their crony executive members turning a blind eye to the glaringly obvious abuse of rule of law principles and actively participating in it.
It is shocking to see how far Fiji has fallen since the government changed. The case between Pryde and the state shows the dangerous path this government is going down where people can be charged on trumped up allegations and the judiciary is no longer deemed impartial by the people.
Without the means to adequately defend himself, and the fact that the goons are hellbent on going ahead to find Pryde guilty, the international community should watch developments very carefully today.
While this government has made it very clear that it does not wish to employ to any executive or senior positions unless they are Fijian/iTaukei, there are some outside Fiji who still wish to help the country; these people should be aware there legal rights and security are not going to be assured or protected.
Avoiding this pariah state and consigning it to the gutter along with other corrupt nations is probably the best thing one can do at this stage.
They still coming despite the CP fiasco. And more arexon their way under the ‘Duavata’ (NZ) and ‘Vuvale’ (Australia) framework.
So what does that tell you ?
It tells me that you, Wacol, have the stupid DNA in your blood and there is nothing you can do about it.
Wyllie and co are a bunch of losers. They knew too well from the start where this could potentially end up, yet they still made the decision to carry on like dumbos.
What Wyllie is doing is to save his own backside. NZ counterparts have obviously been whispering in his ear.
Now we will see if the rule of law has any meaning in Fiji!
If the Tribunal proceeds without the accused being able to appear and defend himself then the law in Fiji is no longer being conducted according to the Constitution or the Internationally accepted practices and procedures.
That would lead to Fiji being seen as not having a legal system that individuals, institutions, or companies and corporations could rely upon, which leads to loss of faith, and with it a reluctance to visit or do business.
A group of crooks have taken over Fiji’s judiciary and the DPP’s office. They do not care about fairness, constitutionalism, and the rule of law. Everything is about politics – and it is a potent and divisive brand of identity politics. I am afraid Fiji is heading towards the kind of radical reset we witnessed Bainimarama lead in 2006 – unless the PM grows a pair, although I am inclined to believe the theory that he may be the puppeteer behind the scenes which, given his reputation for mendacity, is very probable. We were far better off under Fijifirst.
I can already see that some very high standards will be set soon. It would be wise for Justice Tuilevuka to withdraw as well if he has any sense and if he is not part of the lynch mob. We shall see.
It would appear to me that the whole of the ODPP is full of the lynch mob, not to mention the crackpot Acting CJ. Why has he been ‘acting’ for the last two years? Isn’t he good enough?
Is this a very difficult case to challenge on legal grounds, provided the outcome is not already determined?
Why doesn’t the DPP Chris Pryde represent and defend himself in the circumstances that he finds himself in without his salaried income to afford external legal representation. Of course that’s his choice of who he can afford to take on his case, but surely he ys a very competent lawyer himself …just wondering. In a fair minded court I would think even a junior lawyer could do the task.
Because of the old adage – sometimes ascribed to Abraham Lincoln – that “the lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client”.
Christopher Pryde had Adish Narayan – one of the best lawyers in Fiji – while he still had the money to pay for his defence. The JSC has unlawfully cut off his salary presumably to trigger precisely what has happened – to make it impossible for him to mount a proper defence.
Does anyone seriously expect the DPP of Fiji to be reduced to defending himself like Kishore Kumar or someone else acting for themselves because the state has denied him natural justice? It is an outrage.
The (NON)Lawyer who represents himself is a fool. Lawyer vs Layman in this context changes the meaning in this old adage.
Mr Pryde is a very experienced legal professional. However novices who choose to self represent in a court of law with little legal knowledge could end up out of their depth and look like fools.
I don’t consider it demeaning to represent yourself, if you have to as a last resort in unusual circumstances. Especially if you are at the top of your game and it could save you some considerable money. Against these clowns that are the prosecution it would be an opportunity to shine and it presents a great theatre to promote your legal abilities.
Philosophically the conundrum is if a person of means is able to successfully attempt to not attend a hearing to defend himself if he has been curtailed in affording the best lawyer for his defense – when a person of lesser means is not afforded the same privilege if the pauper cannot afford a good lawyer of his choice because of his poorly status and earning ability.
Yes accepted that natural factors making a lawyer unfordable for a poor man vs the state acting illegally to prevent a man getting his salary and not being able to afford a defense lawyer are not fair equivalences. Our level of outrage in both scenarios present a philosophical dilema nevertheless – if some thought is given to the matter of equality.
After all, the saying “all men are created equal ” is attributed to Lincoln as well.
You know very well if you are capable of mounting this argument that it is standard legal practice for lawyers to advise even other lawyers not to represent themselves. It is axiomatic that even the most accomplished lawyers lack the dispassion necessary to objectively examine their own conduct and properly cross-examine witnesses in their own cases.
Christopher Pryde had top level representation until his resources were exhausted in the form of Adish Narayan, who was trained at London’s inns of court. Had the JSC not unlawfully suspended his salary, he would have been present at the Tribunal with Adish Narayan defending him and subjecting the likes of Siromi Turaga to expert cross examination.
So it is without question a denial of natural justice to have cut off Pryde’s ability to properly defend himself and to suggest that he is quite capable of doing it himself is gratuitous and irrelevant. He is the DPP of Fiji, one of the senior independent offices of state, and someone with an unblemished record who clearly deserved proper representation and access to justice.
I doubt the Chrstopher Pryde has the resources to get himself to Fiji and even if he did, knowing this Government, he would either be denied or conversely detained on some trumped-up charge and detained in custody. no doubt to be paraded before the A/CJ (who would nominate himself to hear the charge) and be denied bail.
The lengths that the A/CJ has already gone to in his attempts to thwart Christopher Pryde are clearly outlined in the articles on Grubsheet. So my scenario is more than creditable.
True to form, the Law Society running away with its tail between its legs again. Was a pushover during Bai and Kai reign and now a permanent doormat.