Drug accused trio apply for return of vehicles and phones

High Court directs accused to submit a comprehensive list of property sought.

Wednesday 17 June 2026 | 21:00

From left: Viliame Colawailiku, Louie Logaivau and Sakiusa Tuva.

From left: Viliame Colawailiku, Louie Logaivau and Sakiusa Tuva.

Photos: Mereleki Nai

Three accused persons linked to Fiji's largest-ever drug seizure have applied to the High Court for the return of personal property being held by Police.

Viliame Colawailiku, Sakiusa Tuva and Louie Logaivau appeared before Aruna Aluthge in the High Court in Lautoka on Tuesday.

The three men sought the return of personal items, including vehicles and mobile phones, which remain in Police custody.

They are among nine people charged in connection with the seizure of 4.15 tonnes of methamphetamine, valued at approximately $2 billion, at Legalega and Maqalevu in January 2024.

The other accused are Justin Ho, David Heritage, Ratu Aporosa Davelevu, Jale Aukerea, Ratu Osea Levula and Cathy Tuirabe.

The case, involving the alleged importation of methamphetamine, has been described as the largest drug seizure in Fiji's history and one of the largest in the Pacific region.

State lawyer Winny Yee requested additional time to consult with the investigating officer regarding the items listed in the application.

The court was told the exhibits were believed to be held at Nadi Police Station. Tuva told the court that more than three of his personal items remained in Police custody.

During proceedings, the parties discussed amending the application to ensure all relevant property was included. The court directed the applicants to file an amended application containing a comprehensive list of items they are seeking to have returned.

In a separate application, Logaivau requested medical attention. He told the court he underwent surgery last year and wished to consult a doctor at Lautoka Hospital, managed by Aspen Medical.

Justice Aluthge advised him that matters relating to incarceration and medical treatment fell under the authority of the relevant corrections officials rather than the court.

The matter was adjourned to July 29.



Explore more on these topics