Former-A-G denies approving tax waiver for Saneem
Legal wording under scrutiny in Sayed-Khaiyum's abuse of office trial
Monday 06 October 2025 | 04:30
Former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum outside the High Court in Suva.
Photo: Ronald Kumar
The High Court in Suva today heard arguments suggesting that the abuse of office charge against former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum may have been improperly worded.
Sayed-Khaiyum faces one count of abuse of office over allegations that, in 2022, while serving as Prime Minister and Chair of the Constitutional Offices Commission (COC), he executed a second Deed of Variation approving or waiving $55,944 in taxes owed by then Supervisor of Elections Mohammed Saneem, without proper approval from the President or the Commission.
Saneem is also charged with receiving a corrupt benefit, accused of requesting and obtaining tax relief on his back pay. They appeared before Chief Justice Salesi Temo.
Under questioning by his lawyer, Sayed-Khaiyum told the court that no tax waiver was ever approved.
He said the second deed merely replaced the first to clarify provisions and pointed to COC meeting minutes from January 2023, chaired by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, where Saneem’s reappointment and salary increment were confirmed without objections.
He stressed that the $55,944 refund was treated as income and taxed, meaning there was no loss to government. He also noted that the complainant was not the President or the State, but the current Supervisor of Elections, Ana Mataiciwa.
Chief Justice Salesi Temo observed that several legal issues exist within the Deed of Variation clauses.
Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Nancy Tikoisuva argued that Saneem’s appointment was politically motivated to ensure Sayed-Khaiyum’s “survival,” questioning his rapid rise in the civil service despite limited experience.
Sayed-Khaiyum countered that election experience was not a requirement for the role, citing Saneem’s record of managing successful national elections. Tikoisuva dismissed this, saying the issue was his qualifications at the time of appointment.
The trial continues tomorrow.