Charters’ Challenge to Acting FICAC Commissioner Appointment Adjourned to November

Listen to this article:

Caption : Lawyer Lavi Rokoika leaves the Suva Magistrate’s Court in 2025. Picture : ANDREW NAIDU.

UK-based sports marketing executive Charlie Cobham Charters’ application challenging the appointment of Acting Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) Commissioner Lavinia Rokoika was called for the first time in the High Court in Suva today. The matter was called before Justice Dane Tuiqereqere and was adjourned to November 4 to fix a date for the substantive hearing. Mr Charters, through Fatiaki Law, filed an application for leave to apply for judicial review on September 21, challenging Ms Rokoika’s appointment and seeking damages for alleged false imprisonment and misfeasance in public office. The respondents are the President of Fiji, the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General, Ms Rokoika and FICAC, while the Judicial Services Commission is named as an interested party. Mr Charters is seeking declarations that the Prime Minister’s advice in May 2025 and the President’s subsequent appointment of Ms Rokoika as acting FICAC Commissioner were unlawful and ultra vires. He contends that the power to recommend an appointment rests with the JSC after consultation with the Attorney-General. Mr Charters claims that because Ms Rokoika was not lawfully appointed, a Stop Departure Order issued against him on February 21, 2026, and her decision to sanction two counts of aiding and abetting against him on February 23 were made without legal authority. He is seeking special, general, vindicatory, aggravated and exemplary damages. Mr Charters also alleges he was falsely imprisoned between February 21 and February 23 before being brought before court. He further alleges Ms Rokoika committed misfeasance in public office, claiming she acted despite knowing she lacked authority and had a personal conflict of interest arising from publications concerning her appointment. The application refers to a July 24 High Court ruling which found that FICAC had violated Mr Charters’ rights to remain silent, consult a legal practitioner and protect journalistic sources.