Defence lawyer Siddharth Nandan says there is a danger the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) has built a case on conjecture and inference in the trial of former government MP Vijendra Prakash.
He said this while objecting to FICAC exhibiting a passport renewal application filled out by Mr Prakash in the trial of the former FijiFirst MP by FICAC before High Court judge Justice Dr Thushara Kumarage in the Anti-Corruption Division of the High Court yesterday.
Senior immigration officer Border Control Taraivini Savou was called to give evidence for the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) in the trial of the former FijiFirst parliamentarian.
FICAC lawyer Ashish Nand showed immigration officer Passport Section Sanjana Mala Singh a passport renewal application from December 2016, filled out by Mr Prakash where he stated his residential address was at Omkar Rd, Narere, Nasinu. Defence lawyer Mr Nandan objected saying FICAC was piling indirect evidence on top of indirect evidence and running the trial back to front.
Mr Nandan said it was indirect evidence, not currently related to any element in dispute and the prejudicial tendencies of the document outweighed its probative value.
He said the culmination of such documents shifted the burden of proof to the accused. “We are still yet to see a real shred of real direct evidence,” he said. Mr Nand said the application was filled out by Mr Prakash himself and FICAC was establishing how long the address was used by the accused. He said the prosecution had the discretion to run its case as it wished to do so.
“If we are eliciting a series of indirect evidence, it does not mean that just because a piece of evidence is indirect or circumstantial that it is not admissible,” he said.
Mr Nand then showed senior immigration officer Border Control Taraivini Savou a screenshot of a scanned passenger arrival card filled out by Mr Prakash, which she provided to FICAC.
Ms Savou said Mr Prakash had filled out his address, which the Immigration Department expected to be his permanent residence, as his Omkar Rd address. Mr Prakash is on trial charged with one count of giving false information to a civil servant and one count of obtaining a financial advantage. I
t is alleged he falsely stated his place of permanent residence to former acting secretary-general to Parliament Viniana Namosimalua, in a declaration, and by doing caused her to pay him $33,670 in parliamentary allowances.
