NOTE TO READERS: The following article has been altered to remove any reference to Martin Daubney KC being a visiting judge of the Fiji Court of Appeal. We have received the following information from lawyers acting for Martin Daubney:
“Our client is not a Judge of the Fiji Court of Appeal and his appearance in the Fiji Courts website’s list of visiting judges was a mistake. If you go to that website now, you will see that the erroneous listing of our client’s name has been rectified. His name does not appear on that list because he is not a Judge of the Fiji Court of Appeal”.
Grubsheet apologises to Martin Daubney for having taken the information we used to describe him as a visiting Judge of the Fiji Court of Appeal from the Fijian Judiciary’s official website. How his name came to be included in the list of judges is a matter for the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Isikeli Mataitoga, to explain. But we have now set the record straight.
There is something decidedly unsettling about the public displays of triumphalism of the lawyers who are trying to derail the FICAC prosecutions of the sidelined deputy prime ministers Manoa Kamikamica and Biman Prasad.
They seem convinced that the judge hearing the case, Justice Siainiu Fa’alogo Bull, is going to grant their applications for a permanent stay on the proceedings. Why else would they be flouting all convention and behaving like prize fighters who’ve scored a knock-out at a country fair?
The disturbing nature of the proceedings themselves outlined in Grubsheet’s previous report have been compounded by the post-hearing conduct of Biman Prasad’s lawyer, Richard Naidu, and Manoa Kamikamica’s lawyer, Wylie Clarke.
First we had Wylie Clarke emerging from the courthouse at Martin Daubney’s side looking to all intents and purposes not as if he were awaiting the Judge’s ruling, but as if he had already won.
And now we have the extraordinary spectacle of Richard Naidu posting a vei beci image of himself with Martin Daubney on Facebook that confirms his satisfaction of a job well done – a job, as it happens, on the reputation of the FICAC Commissioner, Lavi Rokoika.
It’s an image that oozes smugness on Richard Naidu’s part.
Only Richard Naidu would think it appropriate to make such a posting right after they have attempted to derail the prosecutions by the nation’s corruption watchdog of two deputy prime ministers.
But the air of triumphalism is compounded by the comments that accompany the image, which include contributions from Filimoni Vosarogo – the government minister whose legal career was “distinguished” by three findings of professional misconduct against him. And the other great “hero” of these proceedings – Manoa Kamikamica’s counsel, Wylie “Coyote” Clarke.
It’s as if the result is a foregone conclusion. That it is all over bar the shouting. That FICAC’s prosecution of Biman Prasad and Manoa Kamikamica won’t even make it to the courts for them to be tried on the charges laid against them. That the cases against the two second most important ministers in the Coalition will be knocked out before they are tested, with the Judge granting a permanent stay on the proceedings.
As I say, it is all very unsettling (some might say disturbing).
1/ A great play was made about Lavi Rokoika knowing that the Judicial Services Commission didn’t appoint her and her position is unlawful. Yet at no time was it submitted that the proposition is contested and is the subject of an applications by lawyers for the Prime Minister to the Fiji Court of Appeal.
2/ Martin Daubney was reported by the local media as having accused Rokoika of personally “usurping” the role of Acting FICAC Commissioner when she was appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Prime Minister.
Justice Tuiqereqere has ruled that the removal of Barbara Malimali was unlawful. Yet two constitutional experts who are also KCs – Dr Andrew Butler and Professor Philip Joseph – have disputed that ruling and will argue their case on the Prime Minister’s behalf in the Court of Appeal.
3/ How could it possibly be argued that Rokoika herself has “usurped” the position? She remains in place at the discretion of the President after a finding by an accident compensation specialist (Tuiqereqere) that she shouldn’t be there while that ruling is to be contested in the Court of Appeal by two Kings Counsel, including in Professor Joseph’s case – New Zealand’s foremost constitutional expert.
The entire pantomime of the past two days – and that’s what it was, including the false claim about Rokoika’s alleged reference to “grog swipers” which the translation shows she didn’t make – is a sorry reflection on the state of the legal system in Fiji.
For a start, it is all very incestuous, not only given the close personal friendship between Richard Naidu and Wylie Clarke – the President of the Fiji Law Society – but because Martin Daubney is evidently a “close associate of Wylie Clarke”, in the words of a former High Court Judge who contacted Grubsheet. And it is compounded by the conduct of the mainstream media, which in the case of the Fiji Times , is influenced, if not controlled, by Richard Naidu wearing his hat as the paper’s legal advisor.
We can only trust the Judge, in her wisdom, will ensure that justice is served. Yet there’s a lingering question that hovers over the whole episode and it is this:
If there are charges of alleged wrongdoing against Biman Prasad and Manoa Kamikamica, surely they should be tested in court at a proper trial?
Instead of “guilty” or “not guilty”, what we have actually seen this week is the person entrusted by the state to be the accuser, Lavi Rokoika, placed in the dock. And that is the most unsettling aspect of all.
——————————–
Grubsheet isn’t alone in being unsettled. The following from Victor Lal at Fijileaks:
————————–
Some media articles for background:
In the meantime, the Big Lie against Lavi Rokoika is still being peddled in the media – that she call the JSC “grog swipers”.
She didn’t (see our previous story). But the facts don’t matter in what passes for the truth these days in Fiji.
POSTSCRIPT:
The date has also been set for a judgment in the case brought by Tanya Waqanika and Barbara Malmali.
Victor Lal’s word play is a joy to read, laying out the subtle negative implications for our once very civilized court system by the omnipresence of social media.
Victor Lal, I think they are beyond niceties, what with “usurpery” , going on in the Capital. Are they walking around with shouldered arms?
Rokoika, go for the AK 47, tested and proven in jungles and deserts of the world, stay away from AR15’s and Uzi’s.
Big Shots, behave yourselves, or the peasantry will get fed up and match on Suva with mataiva n selekapa. Peoples courts looking better by the day, the whole system turfed out and all given a broom and the sala is waiting.
Ultimately, Richard ‘I have the means’ Naidu is a third grade lawyer in a third world country where the standards have fallen really low. They wouldn’t try to pull off these stupid antics, like the social media commentary and conflict of interest situation, in countries like Australia and New Zealand.
But the bar (pun intended) is really low in Fiji. The law graduates from USP are garbage. FNU and UoF are worse. Take that from a lawyer. And before the trigger happy Shaista Shameem gets her knickers in a twist, you just have to be in court to watch their performance and read some submissions and court documents.
Too many lawyers can’t string together a coherent sentence and too many judges and magistrates can’t write one.
Standards have dropped so much that almost anything passes. This is the climate in which Richard the bitch and Wylie the coyote are thriving. When the bar is on the floor, mediocrity looks like excellence.
I mean read the dumb arse comments of Richard’s fawning and drooling fans. They include trained lawyers like Vosarogo. He might have received a degree but he is certainly as dumb as f*ck, not to mention crooked and greedy.
You would have to be crooked to have 3 misconduct citations and dumb and greedy not learn your lesson from the first time.
So crooked, dumb and greedy rolled in one – that’s Vosarogo, and that in a way epitomizes the pathetic state of our criminal justice system.
Richard Naidu, Vosarogo, Wylie and others like the CJ have shat on our system with their low standards and it stinks to high heaven.
And l haven’t even begun on the DPP’s office, which is yet another stinker!
Well said….and fully agree.
The fact that Wylie got reappointed as President of the Fiji Law Society also demonstrates that the lawyers in Fiji do not have any integrity. They harp on about Rule of Law, democracy and blah blah blah, but fail to practice the basics of the profession – professional conduct, conflict of interest, and being fit and proper for the profession at all times.
The current lawyers led by the self proclaimed “experienced and learned seniors” are very selective on what they speak out about. I guess you only wear what fits you and in the case of the lawyers in Fiji, if it is unfavourable to them then the law does not apply to the privileged few, as they see themselves above the law.
Richard, please decide what you are going to be: a professional lawyer?, social media poser?, political party hack?, journalist?
If you keep pushing the boundaries there will be consequences, and you might not be so lucky next time.
As Victor Lal eloquently explains, using a social media post in this way narrows the distance between the courtroom and the public, and is therefore unacceptable.
One is left wondering whether the problem is a certain superiority complex that allows counsel and likewise too many others in the three arms of government and fourth estate to keep blurring the lines.
The statement ‘oh this is Fiji, we do things differently’ isn’t good enough. Senior counsel set the standards. Fashion show posts like this are unbecoming and ultimately corrosive of the system.
You have to wonder whether Daubney had any idea the image would be used in this manner.
Dicky Naidu is a pretend KC. The reality is most “prominent lawyers” in Fiji are pretending to be KC . The reality is they are more and more a kaisi.
These lawyers celebrating in their tweets and posts before Bull makes judgement- just like Trump says on daily basis for last 4 weeks “we are winning” despite seeking help from everywhere everyday…
In a recent Fiji Court of Appeal full court decision, it was revealed that Judge Daniel Goundar erred in his ruling and evidentiary analysis when he found one Rahiman a Canadian national guilty for possession of drugs.
Fiji court of appeal quashed the conviction and sentence which was 20 years imprisonment and ordered a re trial before another judge.
Luckily Fiji have higher courts to review the decision of lower courts.
This brings semblance of hope for litigants that if they are not happy with decision they can take the matter to upper court to legally and constitutionally to get it reviewed.
Aside from all the shenanigans you rightly point out Graham, I just find it bizarre that a lawyer would use social media to make such comments. Unprofessional and immature.
If the rot in the legal fraternity wasn’t bad enough, the Fiji Sun reports:
The Ministry of iTaukei Affairs has been plunged into turmoil after its Permanent Secretary publicly threatened to expose his Minister to the Prime Minister in an extraordinary online outburst.
Permanent Secretary Jone Navakamocea, in a ‘Facebook’ post on Friday, accused Minister Ifereimi Vasu of damaging his reputation and questioned his leadership, labelling him a “coward”.
Mr Navakamocea also pointed to an alleged connection between Mr Vasu and convicted drug and sex trafficker Jason Zhong.
The last part, at least, isn’t new.
https://www.grubsheet.com.au/a-prime-minister-with-egg-on-his-face/
https://www.grubsheet.com.au/strange-bedfellows-on-the-public-teat/
https://www.grubsheet.com.au/behind-the-times-but-better-late-than-never/
Once a journalist always a journalist…..Clearly lawyers and journalists are very different creatures whose preferred ways of communicating are frequently poles apart. Solicitors are uncomfortable about the fact that journalists are looking for a headline – a single, simple message (facebook, insta..et al ). Where the law is all about detail and precision, the media takes a broad-brush approach.
Essentially, a journalist just wants to know the essence of what’s going on, how it will affect their audience (preferably in a negative way, as this is more likely to grab their attention) and what they need to do as a result. If a lawyer can answer these points concisely in simple language, then everybody is happy. Except, that very often they don’t. Well, not if they haven’t been media trained
Did Richard leave his baggage at the door when he sat the bar….?
Journalists like the fact that lawyers provide factual information and lend extra authority to a report. The media are always looking for commentators and contributors who can add /provide explanations, insights and advice. Solicitors and barristers can do all of these things.
If the media approaches an organization for comment, it’ll probably be for one of three reasons:
You might be promoting something, such as a new product or service
, You could be defending something – you’ve made a mistake, upset a customer or you’ve made a controversial decision.
This is usually a situation that might see a journalist wanting an interview in which you’re commenting or explaining something. We’ve got the facts and now we just need someone to help our audience understand them. Very often solicitors fall into this third category.
There are opportunities in this case to promote your firm and your own expertise. However, as with any media encounter, there are risks. Say the wrong thing and you could find yourself apologizing to a client, defending yourself.(or having to be defended) …..
Hardly a good look if you work for the countries leading law firm !