THE Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) remains capable of absorbing the prosecutorial functions of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) despite operating with fewer resources and a heavier workload.
Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Nancy Tikoisuva said this during submissions to the Constitution Review Committee, highlighting disparities in funding and staffing between the two institutions.
She said that since 2023, the ODPP had operated with more than 50 prosecutors on a budget of about $6million, while FICAC had a budget exceeding $10m with only 14 prosecutors.
Ms Tikoisuva said the ODPP’s responsibilities spanned a broader scope, covering prosecutions across all areas of law, from minor offences to complex cases, including fisheries, maritime, environmental matters and civil forfeiture.
“And our work spans all areas of prosecution and also civil forfeiture, so from small crimes to big crimes,” she said.
She said the office had continued to meet its mandate despite limited resources but maintained that disparities in funding and pay structures remained a concern.
“There is a disparity in the way that resource has been allocated to the DPP’s office in comparison with FICAC.”
Responding to a question from commission member Neelesh Goundar, Ms Tikoisuva said the ODPP already had the capacity to take on FICAC’s prosecutorial role.
“Yes, we can still absorb the work of the anti-corruption agency in addition to the additional other work that we do.”
She added that the ODPP had adopted measures to manage its workload, including training police prosecutors and regulatory bodies to conduct certain cases under its oversight.
Spotlight on FICAC’s dual role
THE Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption’s dual mandate to investigate and prosecute corruption cases has been described as a “conflict of interest” under the 2013 Constitution of
Fiji.
Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Nancy Tikoisuva made the assertion before the Constitution
Review Committee, warning that the lack of separation between investigation and prosecution
could undermine independent decision-making.
Ms Tikoisuva acknowledged FICAC’s investigative strengths, noting it has access to specialised personnel such as digital analysts, accountants and seasoned investigators, particularly in areas involving serious fraud, corruption, asset recovery and financial investigations.
“With their resources, they have far more resources in terms of investigative tools as compared to Fiji
Police Force, with due respect,” she said.
Commission member Neelesh Goundar raised questions about the distinction between investigative
and prosecutorial roles, noting that police investigators often carried multiple responsibilities, including giving evidence in court. In response, Ms Tikoisuva said FICAC’s dual role could present institutional challenges, particularly where investigators receive direction from the same authority that decides whether charges are laid or not.
“There can be challenges if we do hold that role, if you’re an investigator receiving instructions from
the same body that will make the decision in respect of charges,” she said.
She described the combined role as “a very powerful” one, warning that the absence of separation raised
concerns about potential conflicts of interest.
