News

FICAC NOTES PUBLIC REPORTING OF STAY APPLICATION HEARINGS (18–20 MARCH 2026)

Posted by Media Team 24 March 2026

The Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) notes recent media coverage of the stay applications heard before the High Court in Suva between 18 and 20 March 2026 involving Messrs Kamikamica, Prasad and Ms Waqanika. These proceedings remain before the Court and judgment is reserved.

This statement is issued solely to place on record, in summary form, aspects of the submissions made on behalf of FICAC that may not have been fully reflected in public reporting.

FICAC’s submissions addressed the legal framework applicable to criminal stay applications, including the distinction between stay applications and proceedings brought by way of judicial review.

Reference was made on behalf of FICAC to established authority, including Takiveikata v State, regarding the threshold for granting a stay. FICAC further addressed the circumstances in which allegations of illegality may arise in criminal proceedings, including the availability of alternative remedies under the law.

In relation to the Acting Commissioner’s appointment, FICAC set out the legal characterisation of such issues and identified the appropriate forum in which they properly fall to be determined. Case authorities were also cited on behalf of FICAC concerning the legal effect of acts performed under the cloak of office.

The applicable legal test for conflict of interest in criminal proceedings was outlined, including the requirement for a demonstrated impact on trial fairness. FICAC also addressed the stage at which questions of sufficiency of evidence, as matters to be determined at trial in the Magistrates’ Court

The issue of delay was addressed in its proper legal context, including its relevance to the right to a fair trial and the range of remedies recognised by law. FICAC further addressed aspects of the investigative process, including the circumstances in which caution interviews may arise. FICAC also addressed arguments concerning the interpretation of elements of the relevant offences, as matters properly to be determined at trial.

FICAC opposed the application to cross-examine a deponent on affidavit evidence. The Court upheld that objection in the Waqanika stay proceedings.

FICAC relied on both its written and oral submissions placed before the Court over the course of the 3-day hearing. Those submissions form part of the Court record.

This statement is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to comment on the merits of the applications or to in any way interfere with the Court’s determination, which FICAC respects and awaits.