The prosecution has proven its case against SODELPA Member of Parliament Niko Nawaikula, says Fiji Independ­ent Commission Against Cor­ruption (FICAC) Commis­sioner and senior counsel Rashmi Aslam.

He made the comment while ad­dressing the court on the pros­ecution’s closing submissions fol­lowing 11 days of trial in the case against Nawaikula.

Nawaikula is charged by FICAC with one count each of false in­formation to a public servant and of obtaining financial advantage.

Nawaikula is alleged to have false­ly stated that his permanent place of residence was in Buca Village, Buca Bay, and allegedly obtained $20,201.35 between August 2019 and April 2020.

It is alleged that Nawaikula breached the Parliamentary Re­muneration Act of 2014 when he claimed travel and accommoda­tion allowances, which he alleg­edly was not entitled to.

Mr Aslam told the court that dur­ing the cross-examination by the prosecution, Nawaikula had used a convenient mistake numerous times.

He said it looked like the word convenient was of many con­veniences to Nawaikula.

He also said Nawaikula, with 36 years of legal experience, did not know what the seriousness of dec­larations was and that it could put him in jail.

Mr Aslam told the court that Nawaikula was not entitled to the allowances by virtue of hav­ing permanent residence in Suva, which was 15 kilometres Kings Road, Koronivia.

He said the undisputed evidence showed that Nawaikula’s perma­nent residence and home for all-purpose was Koronivia.

He said Nawaikula never left the Koronivia home permanently.

He also pointed out to the court that when Nawaikula came from Korea in July 2019, he declared his permanent address as 15 KM Kings Road, Koronivia in his dec­laration form.

Mr Aslam also told the court that on the same day when Nawaikula came back, he went to Koronivia through Nausori airport and not to Buca.

He also told the court that as per the evidence, 82 per cent of the time, Nawaikula was based in Ko­ronivia, and only 18 per cent of the time he was in Buca.

However, Nawaikula’s lawyer Sevuloni Valenitabua claimed that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

He said to the court in his submission that the prosecution must prove that Nawaikula knew or ought to believe the informa­tion he gave to the former Parlia­ment Secretary-General Viniana Namosimalua.

He further told the court that the prosecution had to prove that Nawaikula intended that the false information was to cause Ms Na­mosimalua to pay allowances un­der the Parliament Remuneration Act or if he knew that the false in­formation would likely cause Ms Namosimalua to pay him under the Act.

Mr Valenitabua said Nawaikula was being paid accommodation, travelling, committee sitting and meal allowances in accordance with the Parliament Remunera­tion Act 2014.

He also said that the prosecution must also prove to the court that Nawaikula knew or believed that he was not eligible for such pay­ments of allowances he was claim­ing for.

He said Nawaikula was not guilty of both charges he faced and that he must be acquitted by the court.

Feedback: ashna.kumar@fijisun.com.fj