THE High Court has struck out a constitutional redress application filed by a former inmate who claimed he was unlawfully imprisoned for an additional 149 days beyond his non-parole period.
Rahul Rajan Naidu had sought a declaration that his rights to personal liberty, freedom of movement, and economic participation were violated by the Commissioner of the Fiji Corrections Service (FCS).
He sought compensation calculated at a minimum of $5000 for each day of the alleged unlawful detention.
Naidu was convicted of money laundering and sentenced on September 18, 2018, to six years and nine months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of five years.
Under his calculations, he should have been released on September 18, 2023, however, he remained in custody until February 14, 2024.
FCS applied to strike out the application, arguing it was time-barred and disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
In a ruling delivered on February 4, Justice Mohamed Mackie found that the application was filed well outside the 60-day timeframe mandated by rule 3(2) of the Constitutional Redress Rules 2015.
The court noted that Naidu’s cause of action arose on September 19, 2023, meaning his application should have been filed by November 19, 2023. Instead, the motion was not filed until March 25, 2024, a delay of approximately four months and six days.
Justice Mackie stated that the applicant failed to show exceptional circumstances to justify the delay. He also observed that Naidu was aware of his release date as early as July 2023 and could have acted sooner.
“Ignorance of the law which everybody is supposed to know does not afford excuse,” Justice Mackie said.
The court further ruled that constitutional redress is a remedy of last resort.
Justice Mackie found that Naidu had adequate alternative remedies available, such as commencing a civil claim for alleged incarceration beyond his sentence.
The court concluded that since the application was out of time and alternative remedies existed, no cause of action survived.
The application for constitutional redress was struck out. The court ordered that all parties bear their own costs.
