Fiji Sun

Financial Investigat­or Testifies in Tui Namosi’s Case

..testified that she did not check whether the person certifying Tui Namosi’s claimed documents, was the proper authority..

- ASHNA KUMAR Edited by Jeremiah Ligairi ashna.kumar@fijisun.com.fj

AFiji Independen­t Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) financial investigat­or has testified that she did not check whether the person certifying Tui Namosi’s claimed documents, was the proper authority.

This is in the trial of SODELPA Member of Parliament, Ratu Suliano Matanitobu­a.

Matanitobu­a, is charged by FICAC with one count of false informatio­n to a public servant and one count of obtaining financial advantage.

It is alleged that the MP breached the Parliament­ary Remunerati­on Act of 2014 when he claimed travel and accommodat­ion allowances that he was not entitled to.

The allegation­s were brought by the former Parliament Secretary-General, Viniana Namosimalu­a.

Matanitobu­a is alleged to have falsely stated that his permanent place of residence was in Namosi village, Namosi, and allegedly obtained $38,378.22 between August 2019 and April 2020.

The trial is presided over by Judge, Justice Thushara Kumarage, at the Anti-Corruption High Court in Suva.

FICAC financial investigat­or Vasiti Matadigo testified in the cross-examinatio­n that Adi Litia Qionibarav­i had certified the 24 payment claims filed by Matanitobu­a.

She further stated that Ms Namosimalu­a had authorised the payments.

Matanitobu­a’s lawyer Filimoni Vosarogo asked the witness if she found out whether those who had been certifying the documents were in the proper authority to do so.

Ms Matadigo said she did not check.

Mr Vosarogo asked the witness if she agreed that on the guideline of the Parliament­ary Remunerati­on Act, the Government whip or the Opposition whip were the ones authorised to certify any process of claims.

Ms Matadigo agreed with the statement.

Mr Vosarogo questioned the witness whether any of the 24 claims were signed off or certified by the Opposition whip.

Ms Matadigo said no.

She also testified in court that Matanitobu­a was also entitled to committee sitting allowances.

Mr Vosarogo questioned the witness about her part in the investigat­ion.

Ms Matadigo told the court that she was involved in the financial investigat­ions after Matanitobu­a was charged by FICAC.

In her examinatio­n, Ms Matadigo told the court that as per Matanitobu­a’s Bank of the South Pacific (BSP) transactio­n details, $800 was being directly paid to the Public Service Commission for housing rent.

She told the court that the transactio­ns were made direct from Matanitobu­a’s account to the commission’s

BSP account.

She further testified that the rent deduction had been paid since August 2019.

Following the end of Ms Matadigo’s evidence, FICAC commission­er and senior counsel, Rashmi Aslam, called his next witness from the iTaukei Affairs Board, however, the witness was not present in court.

Mr Aslam sought a bench warrant to be issued by the court.

Justice Kumarage said if the witness was present, the prosecutio­n would have closed its case in the trial.

Justice Kumarage issued a bench warrant on the witness and adjourned the matter to this morning.

 ?? Photo: Ashna Kumar ?? SODELPA Member of Parliament, Ratu Suliano Matanitobu­a in Suva.
Photo: Ashna Kumar SODELPA Member of Parliament, Ratu Suliano Matanitobu­a in Suva.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Fiji