IT is important to look at the larger interest of justice and to hear the petition case against the 27 FijiFirst party parliamentarians and former FijiFirst MP Faiyaz Koya, the Court of Disputed Returns said yesterday.
The joint ruling by Justice Anjala Wati and Justice Kamal Kumar stated the election petition case must be heard as soon as possible.
The judges also ordered that the petition against the 2018 General Election results be served on the 28 respondents by substitute service via advertisement in the two local dailies.
Justice Kumar said the idea of serving the petition via advertisement was done to ensure that all parties are present in court.
He said this was a period when the parties that file the petition could file so everyone must be aware that a petition might be filed.
He said the advertisement would be brought to the attention of the respondent and there was no doubt that the petition would be brought to FijiFirst leader and Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s attention.
Justice Kumar made the comments after a counsel informed the court that some of the respondents including Mr Bainimarama were overseas.
On the question of the substituted service order, Justice Wati referred to a case citation during the hearing at the High Court in Suva yesterday.
She said the principle in the case states that unless the behaviour of the petitioners could be shown as contemptuous in court, they could seek extension of time even if an order that provided for automatic striking out has expired.
During the hearing Filimoni Vosarogo, the counsel for SODELPA leader Sitiveni Rabuka and National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad, told of the difficulties that they faced as they tried their best to serve a copy of the election petition to the 28 respondents personally.
He said they even engaged the services of a bailiff. Mr Vosarogo said this effort was deemed unsuccessful as he had been instructed that the 28 respondents were evasive as they had locked themselves up at the Suvavou House building in Suva.
He said they were fully aware of the court’s order and that the names of the 28 respondents would be struck out if their petitions were not served within 24 hours.
Mr Vosarogo said there would be nothing left to prosecute if the names of the 28 respondents were struck out from the petition. Justice Wati said the burden was still on Mr Vosarogo and his clients to serve the respondents.
In response, the Attorney-General’s lawyer, Devanesh Sharma, said no evidence was presented in court to prove that the respondents were evasive.
Mr Sharma said the court’s order must be affirmed and that was to have the names of the 28 respondents struck out from the petition.
Solicitor-General Sharvada Sharma also echoed similar sentiments and said his client had received a copy of the petition.
Mr Sharma, who is appearing on behalf of the Supervisor of Elections, said the court had made a ruling earlier that unless they were served, the respondents should be struck out and it must stand by it as this case must be dealt with urgently.
The case has been adjourned to Monday for directions on answers to be filed on this matter.
