Defence says diary cannot prove allegations against Kamikamica

Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) has to prove its case, or should former Manoa Kamikamica be made to answer the charges against him?

That was the key question posed in the Suva Magistrate Court yesterday as both the defence and prosecution argued over whether the former deputy prime minister had a case to answer.

Charged with perjury and giving false information to a public servant he appeared Magistrate Charles Ratakele yesterday.

Defence lawyer Wylie Clarke argued that FICAC’s case had “already collapsed” after its first witness gave evidence. He said the prosecution had failed to prove the allegations.

He told the court the evidence presented by FICAC, including that of Commission of Inquiry (CoI) counsel Janet Mason, did not establish the key elements of the charges.

Mr Clarke also challenged the prosecution’s reliance on government MP Kalaveti Ravu’s diary, arguing that the entries could not prove where or when the alleged incident took place.

“How can the diary be proof?” he asked the court.

However, FICAC senior lawyer Jossene Pene rejected the defence’s claims.

She argued that Mr Kamikamica’s statement that he had no prior knowledge of Barbara Malimali’s appointment as FICAC Commissioner was false.

Supporting the prosecution’s case, FICAC lawyer Setefano Komaibaba urged the court to treat Mr Kamikamica like any other citizen before the law.

He told the court to put aside public opinion and media reports and focus only on the evidence presented.

Mr Komaibaba argued the prosecution had presented enough evidence to satisfy the legal test at this stage and that it was only fair for Mr Kamikamica to take the stand and respond to the allegations.

“It is only fair to the court and the people of Fiji to hear Mr Kamikamica’s side,” Mr Komaibaba said.

The court will decide on August 3 whether the case proceeds to the defence stage or is dismissed.