ODPP rejects claims, cites 'material inconsistencies'

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) has strongly rejected allegations made by former senior staff member Susan Vuniani that senior ODPP officials interfered with decisions relating to the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) files.

Ms Vuniani, who is on a visitor's visa in Australia, claimed in her statutory declaration that the Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Nancy Tikoisuva, told senior staff that prosecuting those named in the Col report would be "too embarrassing".

Ms Vunlani also alleged that Chief Justice Salesi Temo influenced prosecutorial decisions and that police recommendations were deliberately set aside.

Her statutory declaration was published in the political blog and commentary website, Grubsheet, and has since been widely shared on social media.

Responding to questions from this masthead, ODPP said Ms Vuniani's statutory declaration contained "material inconsistencies".

The ODPP said it intended to address the allegations directly with the relevant Australian authorities.

It said Ms Vuniani resigned from the ODPP on May 4 while in Australia on a tourist visa and did not provide the notice required under her employment contract.

The ODPP said when Ms Vuniani made her statutory declaration on June 24, she was no longer employed by the office, contrary to statements contained in the declaration.

“We are particularly concerned with the false statement that has been declared by Ms Vuniani regarding her employment status,” the statement said.

ODPP added that there were “material inconsistencies” in the declaration that would be referred to Australian authorities for consideration.

Responding to allegations surrounding the handling of the COI files, the ODPP referred to its Press Release No.1 of 2026, saying the allegations, assessment process and reasons for its decisions had already been publicly explained.

It said legal assessments were conducted by senior prosecutors under the ODPP Prosecution Code and were independently reviewed to ensure the available evidence met the legal threshold before decisions were made.

The office also defended its internal processes, saying prosecution decisions were based solely on the evidence and the public interest, in accordance with the Prosecution Code and Prosecutor’s Handbook.

“The Director of Public Prosecutions does not make unilateral decisions on prosecution files,” the statement said.

Attempts to get a comment from Ms Vuniani in Australia were unsuccessful. Chief Justice Salesi Temo was unavailable when this masthead reached out to him for a comment.

The allegations have sparked widespread public debate questioning the independence of Fiji’s prosecutorial and judicial institutions.