The High Court judge, Justice Anare Tuilevuka, enjoys a reputation for competence and integrity that has long marked him out as an exceptional appointment to the bench. But he faces the biggest test of his career as head of the Tribunal investigating the allegation of misbehaviour against the DPP, Christopher Pryde, which will present its findings to the President, Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu, next Monday December 23.

The Pryde case has been one of the most vexing in many years for any lawyer who believes in fairness and proper access to justice. And the most tangible evidence of that is the advice that the Fiji Law Society – representing the nation’s lawyers in private practice – gave to Justice Tuilevuka that he should not proceed to hear the case against the DPP because his absence from the proceedings violated his constitutional right to fairness.

The issues have been thoroughly canvassed in these columns for the past 18 months – the time it has taken since Christopher Pryde was suspended in April 2023 for the allegation of misbehaviour to be heard by Tuilevuka’s Tribunal after the DPP was secretly photographed in conversation with the former attorney general, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, at a Japanese embassy function. (Just enter “Christopher Pryde” in the search engine on the right to access a large number of stories on the case).

It took almost a year for a second charge to be added to the first – that the DPP had paid himself superannuation to which he was not entitled because it hadn’t been specifically approved by the Judicial Services Commission. And at the same time – in a decision that has never been explained – Christopher Pryde’s salary was suddenly suspended, plunging him into a financial crisis just when he needed his British-trained lawyer, Adish Narayan, to argue the case on his behalf.

Six months on and with his savings depleted, the DPP made the decision to request that the Tribunal hearing be postponed until his salary was reinstated – something that he and most other observers were confident would happen after the Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, made front page news saying that Pryde was entitled to continue to be paid. But the head of the JSC – the Acting Chief Justice, Salesi Temo, was unmoved.

To any reasonable observer, the tactic was clearly to delay any Tribunal hearing into the allegations until such time as Christopher Pryde’s resources were depleted and he gave up and resigned. But the same stubborn determination that Pryde showed in standing up to Frank Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum in insisting that the killers of the torture victim, Vilikesa Soko, be brought to justice kicked in.

As the DPP told Radio New Zealand last week, the state secretly offered him a settlement of $200,000 in October to avoid the Tribunal having to sit. But he said he wasn’t going to accept a “grubby” financial settlement without a letter from the President clearing his name for having “done nothing wrong”. Anyone else might have taken the money and run. But those who know him best know that Christopher Pryde is a man of dogged principle who was never going to yield to the bully-boy tactics of Salesi Temo and his patrons in the Coalition.

He had a seven year contract as an independent officer of state – the second such contract since he moved from being solicitor general to the ODPP in 2011- and expected, perhaps naively, that it would be honoured by the new government. But he didn’t count on the determination of both Siromi Turaga – the former AG – and Salesi Temo to get rid of him. Pryde claims that Turaga set him up by telling him that if he apologised in writing for his conversation with Turaga’s ousted predecessor, that would be the end of the matter. But it was a trap. And the letter was used to nail the “white man” and replace him with an iTaukei.

Pryde has a high-minded notion that judges and magistrates in Fiji are men and women of integrity and justice will always ultimately prevail if right is on the side of any individual charged with an offence. Again, perhaps naively, he was convinced that were he to have the opportunity to appear before a Tribunal examining the charges against him and give his side of the story that he would be exonerated. But the rule of law in Fiji is no longer absolute and the innocent can no longer be guaranteed a proper hearing.

Cutting off Pryde’s ability to adequately defend himself when the state has been so determined to nail him is an astonishing injustice unprecedented in Fijian history. Because this was the first test of a tribunal hearing a case of misbehaviour against a senior officer of state under any constitution. And trying the DPP without his presence and the ability of his counsel to cross examine the witnesses against him is a stain on the criminal justice system that will not be easily erased.

This has been a kangaroo court bereft of fair process and we have the Fiji Law Society to attest to that. Justice Tuilevuka echoed the sentiments of the Acting Chief Justice that it was always open to Christopher Pryde to defend himself or apply for legal aid. Defending himself was never an option because of the old legal adage that a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client. And the notion of the Director of Public Prosecutions for Fiji being represented by a junior lawyer from the Legal Aid Commission was absurd to the point of being insulting. Christopher Pryde wanted the best lawyer he could afford. But the State cut his legs off by unlawfully cutting off his income. And Justice Tuilevuka rejected the DPP’s call to delay the Tribunal hearing until his salary was rightly restored.

And so we had the appalling spectacle of a trial proceeding without the accused and evidence given that wasn’t challenged because there was no-one present to challenge it. It reduced a Fijian court of law to no better than Stalin’s show trials in the Soviet Union in the 1930s – a succession of witnesses for the prosecution and none for the defence. And the blame for that rests squarely with one man – Salesi Temo – who cut off Christopher Pryde’s income irrespective of the public statements of the Prime Minister because Temo has become a law unto himself.

The Acting CJ has been the root cause of successive debacles in the criminal justice system – appointing John Rabuku Acting DPP when the Constitution disallowed it because of Rabuku’s professional misconduct; appointing Tomasi Bainivalu Chief Registrar despite his criminal conviction for drink driving; removing Francis Puleiwai from FICAC and replacing her with the PAP stooge, Barbara Malimali; and hanging Christopher Pryde out to dry by getting the President to suspend him and waiting nine months to convene a tribunal to hear the allegation against him in relation to Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, and then adding another allegation a year later about superannuation.

Much of the legal profession was shocked to the core when the Acting Chief Justice gave evidence to the Tribunal that the DPP had “stolen money from the Fijian people” in taking superannuation payments to which he was not entitled. Casting Christopher Pryde as a common thief was a disgraceful thing for the head of the judiciary to do. Because it was a lie and a deliberate smear by someone who is meant to be committed to the truth yet is totally unfit to sit at the apex of the judiciary and act as head of state in the President’s absence.

Unfortunately for Salesi Temo – who makes a habit of throwing his weight around a courtroom – his mendacity was exposed at the Tribunal hearing by the Permanent Secretary for Finance, Shiri Gounder, who testified that Christopher Pryde had superannuation entitlements written into his two contracts since 2011 that were countersigned by successive presidents on behalf of the State – first Ratu Epeli Nailatikau and then Major General Jioji Konrote. Have they been accessories to theft? The entire notion is perverse.

As usual, Salesi Temo went way too far. He could have said that when Christopher Pryde moved from being solicitor general to the ODPP, he technically should have got permission from the JSC for his superannuation entitlements to continue. Would it constitute “misbehaviour” that he overlooked the requirement? That will be for the Tribunal judges to decide. But for the Acting Chief Justice to cast Christopher Pryde as a common criminal who had ripped off the Fijian people is an outrage. The superannuation was in his contract signed by two heads of state – with the option of the DPP paying into an overseas fund instead of the FNPF. It was not theft but a contractual arrangement that the State had endorsed. And the conduct of the Acting CJ is the real misbehaviour for which Temo should be suspended himself.

Fortunately, Shiri Gounder was there to give the lie to the Acting CJ’s smear. But no-one was there to question an important piece of evidence given by Susana Vuniyani – the person in charge of the ODPP registry. Christopher Pryde has always maintained that a police file on Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum had yet to reach his desk when he had the conversation with him at the Japanese Residence that both men say was purely social in nature and at no time did they discuss the ousted AG’s case.

Susana Vuniyani testified that she had actually sent the DPP the complete police file before Pryde had the conversation with Khaiyum, which if true, is highly damaging to the DPP’s position. But there are a number of things that raise serious doubts about her testimony. She claims she emailed the entire file to Christopher Pryde’s personal gmail account. That would have necessitated her taking screen shots of every page of what must have been a very voluminous document. The DPP claims never to have seen it to this day. But it would have contained all the records of interview with a great many police witnesses in the investigation into the ousted AG and would have been a major exercise if what Susana Vuniyani claimed is true.

But what makes her evidence highly questionable isn’t just the volume of the material she says she emailed the DPP but the fact that it was never the practice of any head of registry to send files directly to the DPP. She would inform him that a file had arrived but it would be first sent to one of the Assistant DPPs for allocation to a legal officer for an opinion before it went to a manager to review that opinion. Only then does it land physically on the DPP’s desk with a recommendation on what course of action should be taken before he makes the final decision whether to prosecute.

Why would Susanna Vuniyani send a complete police file to the DPP if it wasn’t common practice? Christopher Pryde himself says she didn’t. And had he been able to give evidence, Pryde would have given testimony about something else that raises serious questions about the veracity of Susana Vuniyani’s account – evidence about her motive in claiming that she sent the DPP the file when he says she didn’t. Because according to Pryde, he had suspended Susanna Vuniyani as head of registry the morning he was suspended himself because she had told him that no file on the ousted AG had been received by the Registry when it had.

Why would Susanna Vuniyani withhold important information from the DPP on such a sensitive case? Why would she now claim that she had sent him an entire file by email that would have taken a great deal of time to screen shot and that the DPP says he never received? Was she motivated by malice because the DPP had suspended her and was giving false testimony to the Tribunal? All these questions would have been asked of the witness by Adish Narayan – Christopher Pryde’s counsel – had he been present to cross examine her. And yet her evidence is uncontested to this day – a genuinely shocking breach of normal court practice.

There’s another sinister element to the evidence given by Susanna Vuniyani. Because Christopher Pryde suspects that she was part of a clandestine attempt by the Resident Magistrate, Seini Puamau, to recruit informants in the ODPP to spy on him as part of a concerted conspiracy to replace him with an iTaukei appointment. Christopher Pryde issued a memo to his staff exposing the plan and telling them to have nothing more to do with Seini Puamau (see below). He also lodged a formal complaint against Puamau with Salesi Temo. But to this day, nothing has been done about that complaint. And again, Pryde’s counsel wasn’t present to cross examine Susana Vuniyani about whether she was part of a conspiracy to remove the DPP.

According to legal sources in Suva, Justice Tuilevuka and his fellow judges – Justice Chaitanya Lakshman and Justice Samuela Qica – have to make the following decision: Have the two charges against the DPP – the Khaiyum conversation and the supposedly unauthorised superannuation payments – met the test of “misbehaviour” that the Constitution lays down as the sole grounds for the President to terminate the DPP? Is there still a chance that Christopher Pryde will be reinstated? Able to return to Gunu House having been exonerated and with his reputation in tact to “keep calm and carry on”, as the sign says that he took from his wall the day he was suspended?

Incredibly, the answer to that question is “yes”, despite Christopher Pryde telling Radio New Zealand he expects to be removed. Those aware of the evidence given to the tribunal say it almost certainly DOES NOT meet the threshold of a guilty finding of “misbehaviour”. But that, of course, is for the judges headed by Justice Tuilevuka to decide. And a great weight rests on the three of them to deliver justice in the Pryde matter without fear or favour.

Which way will they go? We shall see. But a great deal rests on this judgment – the reputations of Pryde’s accusers and the reputation of the man himself, who in a striking denial of natural justice, will have a judicial finding made either against him or in his favour without ever being able to properly defend himself in court because his accusers removed his means of support.

———

The Fiji Law Society’s letter telling Justice Tuilevuka the Pryde Tribunal should not proceed because not being able to defend himself violated Christopher’s Pryde’s constitutional right to fairness.

Having been present during the hearing anyway, the FLS – at the invitation of the Tribunal – has evidently advised it what constitutes “misbehaviour” in the two allegations against the DPP and whether the evidence given meets the test.

We have yet to sight a copy of that advice.

Is there a chance that Christopher Pryde will be exonerated and return to Gunu House with his “Keep Calm and Carry on” sign?

It is entirely possible, according to senior legal sources in Suva.

Was there a conspiracy within the ODPP even before Christopher Pryde was photographed with Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum to spy on him and gather evidence to trigger his replacement with an iTaukei?

The DPP’s memo to his own staff about the activities of Resident Magistrate Seini Puamau. Was Susana Vuniyani part of this conspiracy?

#PRIME MINISTER DO LITTLE AND BLAME EVERYONE ELSE

The Opposition leader, Inia Seruiratu, has sharpened his criticism of the government over its handling of “Barbara-gate” and the scandal at FICAC, renewing his call for the FICAC Commissioner, Barbara Malimali, to be suspended while the judicial inquiry headed by Justice David Ashton Lewis investigates the “rotten circumstances” of her appointment – the Prime Minister’s description, not mine.

Yet once again, Sitiveni Rabuka passes the buck, claiming impotence to do anything because it is a matter for the Judicial Services Commission and its rogue head, Salesi Temo, who as we’ve reported above, has become a clear and present danger to the integrity and proper conduct of the state.

It was the government which appointed Temo Acting Chief Justice and because he has not been confirmed in the substantive position, he can readily be stood down and replaced. But it seems to suit the Prime Minister to keep saying that there is nothing he can do because the JSC is “independent”.

Rubbish. Sitiveni Rabuka chose Temo and he can un-choose him. The hand that giveth can also taketh away. And in any event, there are now ample grounds for Salesi Temo to be suspended on the grounds of misbehaviour.

Here’s the Prime Minister’s risible response to Inia Seruiratu’s latest call for Barbara Malimali to be stood down. It is a disgrace.

Inia Seruiratu is right. The Barbara Malimali farce has gone on for long enough. And if Christopher Pryde can be suspended on the most tenuous of grounds, so can she. Except that he is a white goose who is fair game and she is a protected black duck.

Malimali is on the front page of the Fiji Times today continuing to insult our intelligence with the claim that FICAC is genuinely independent.

And we laughed and we laughed and we laughed. The woman is utterly shameless.