The Commission of Inquiry into Barbara Malimali’s appointment as FICAC Commissioner has pointed out the need for thorough and unrestricted questioning of witnesses to ensure transparency and fairness.

Justice David Ashton-Lewis, who is leading the inquiry said that the examination process must allow all involved parties the freedom to ask comprehensive questions.

This level of scrutiny, he said was to uncover the full details of how Malima-li’s appointment was handled.

Justice Lewis said Janet Mason, the Senior Counsel who is assisting with the questioning plays a central role in this process.

However, he said she was not working in isolation as several other parties were also actively involved in questioning, ensuring that all aspects of each witness’s testimony were thoroughly explored.

According to Justice Ashton-Lewis, this exhaustive questioning where witnesses are required to provide detailed explanations rather than simple “yes or no” answers has slowed the progress of the inquiry.

The depth of the investigation demands that every answer be fully explained, a process that inevitably takes time.

Despite the delays, Justice Ashton-Lewis has made it clear that the inquiry is proceeding with the necessary diligence.

The goal is to ensure that every angle is covered and that all parties are held accountable.

While 28 witnesses remain to give evidence, the process is proceeding carefully and systematically.

The Supreme High Court judge has reassured the public that at this stage, there are no indications of witnesses being untruthful.

Cross-examination remains a key tool in assessing the credibility of testimonies and the inquiry team is committed to getting to the truth.

The inquiry has also had to address concerns about the behavior inside the proceedings.

Justice Ashton- Lewis dismissed unverified reports of disruptions within the inquiry room, reiterating that the hearings are being held in a closed or “on camera,” environment.

This restriction on public access including for journalists aims to protect the integrity of the process and prevent any misreporting that could skew public perception.

Justice Ashton-Lewis stated that not all reporters are trained to handle legal proceedings and even inadvertent errors in reporting can undermine the inquiry.

Furthermore, to safeguard the investigation from outside influence, witnesses and those involved in the inquiry are prohibited from discussing the evidence until the final report is presented.

This confidentiality rule, he adds is similar to the practices followed in jury trials as it ensures that the integrity of the process remains intact.

This inquiry is to determine whether Malimali’s appointment followed the proper legal processes and met the necessary standards of transparency and fairness.

While the inquiry is not yet complete, Justice Ashton-Lewis has reiterated the need to thoroughly examining all the evidence, no matter how long it takes to ensure a fair and unbiased conclusion.