Matanitobua’s Recusal Application Hearing, Trial Starts Monday

The Anti-Corruption High Court Judge Justice Thushara Kumarage will deliver his ruling on Monday on whether he will preside over the trial of SODELPA Member of Parliament, Ratu Suliano Matanitobua.

Matanitobua is charged by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) with one count of giving 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, he were not entitled to.

The allegations were brought by the former Parliament secretarygeneral, 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.

Matanitobua’s trial starts from May 16 to May 20 with a one-week break from May 23 and May 27.

On Friday, the matter of recusal application filed by Matanitobua’s lawyer Filimoni Vosarogo was called for a hearing, however, because Matanitobua was in Parliament, the hearing was postponed on the consent of both parties.

FICAC deputy commissioner and senior counsel Rashmi Aslam said there could only be one of the two outcomes of the application, which was whether the Judge would recuse him or not.

He suggested that because of the time limit before the trial, it would be proper for the Judge to give a verbal ruling on the application and written reasons to be given at a convenient time.

The matter has been adjourned for hearing at 8am on Monday and meantime, Justice Kumarage said he would possibly give a written ruling as well.

In the substantive matter, Mr Aslam told the court that FICAC was amending the particulars relating to the second count in the charge.

He said in the first count, that FICAC alleged that Matanitobua gave false information to Parliament by way of a declaration that he was residing permanently at Namosi Village.

Mr Aslam said in the second count, that FICAC alleged that Matanitobua obtained a financial advantage that he knew he was not entitled to, by virtue of the knowledge that he permanently resided in Suva.

He said the amendment had brought a link between the two counts Matanitobua was charged with.