High Court rules Magistrates can hear Online Safety Act cases

Three criminal cases involving offences under Fiji’s Online Safety Act have been referred back to the Magistrates’ Court after the High Court in Suva ruled that magistrates have jurisdiction to hear such matters.

The ruling was delivered by Justice Thushara Rajasinghe in the High Court in Suva last Friday.

The cases involved Shruti Sonali Chand, Narendran Pillay, also known as Narendra Pillay, and Faizal Parwez Ali.

The three accused face charges under the Online Safety Act, including causing harm through electronic communications and posting intimate visual recordings.

The issue before the High Court was whether offences under the Online Safety Act could only be heard in the High Court or whether the Magistrates’ Court also had jurisdiction.

During submissions, it was argued that Section 2 of the Online Safety Act defines the word “Court” as the High Court of Fiji, leading to the interpretation that only the High Court could hear such offences.

However, Justice Rajasinghe ruled that the law does not clearly state that only the High Court can hear and try offences under the Act.

The judge said the interpretation section of the legislation was intended mainly to define terms used in the Act and did not specifically grant exclusive jurisdiction to the High Court over criminal cases under the law.

Justice Rajasinghe further stated that if Parliament intended for only the High Court to hear such matters, it would have expressly stated so in the legislation.

The court also ruled that under Section 5(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Magistrates’ Court may hear offences created under other laws when no specific court has been identified.

Justice Rajasinghe said bypassing the Magistrates’ Court without proper legal authority could disrupt the judicial system and affect the rights of accused persons.

As a result, the judge ordered all three cases to be returned to their respective Magistrates’ Courts to proceed according to law.