Former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho’s counsel Devanesh Sharma. [File Photo]

Former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho’s counsel Devanesh Sharma will be filing a motion seeking an interpretation of the term public service and civil service by the High Court.

The application is expected to be heard by the Suva Magistrates Court on the 11th of next month.

In this matter, Bainimarama is charged with one count of unwarranted demands made by a public official while Qiliho is charged with one count of abuse of office.

Former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama. [File Photo]

It is alleged that between the 21st May 2021 to the 18th August 2021, whilst being employed as a public official, he made an unwarranted demand with menaces of a former senior Police officer Rusiate Tudravu when he told him to terminate the employment of Penieli Nayare Ratei and Tomasi Naulu and that if he did not terminate the officers then he was to hand in his resignation.

It is alleged that he used his official capacity as Prime Minister of the Republic of Fiji with the intention of influencing Tudravu.

Former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho. [File Photo]

Former Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho is charged with one count of abuse of office.

It is alleged that between the 5th and 18th days of August 2021, being employed in the civil service, the Commissioner of Police reviewed the disciplinary decision made by Tudravu as the Acting Commissioner of Police against Naulu, which was a fine equivalent to two working days pay, and contrary to this decision, he terminated the employment of the two officers.

Qiliho faces an additional charge of Abuse of Office, contrary to Section 139 of the Crimes Act 2009, as it is alleged that during the same period, he also reviewed the disciplinary decision made by Tudravu, which was a fine equivalent to five working days, and contrary to this decision, he terminated the employment of Ratei.

The Suva Magistrate asked if the parties wished to have the issue of public service interpreted by the High Court as there are conflicting definitions.

The state counsel today indicated that they are not willing to have this matter interpreted by the High Court as it has been determined by Magistrate Seini Puamau in the earlier case of Bainimarama and Qiliho which was appealed and resulted in their imprisonment.

Sharma said that Magistrate Puamau had not looked into the conflict of the terms public and civil service and that it was important for this matter to be decided by the High Court.

The motion will be filed under section 44(5) of the constitution.

Magistrate Jeremaia Savou has asked for the parties to return for hearing on 11 April on this issue.

Stream the best of Fiji on VITI+. Anytime. Anywhere.