THE Judicial Services Commission (JSC) has ruled that it does not have the authority to suspend FICAC Commissioner Barbara Malimali.
A Commission Of Inquiry (CoI) had called for Ms Malimali’s suspension after allegations that she intimidated a witness, specifically FICAC manager of investigations, Kuliniasi Saumi.
Ms Malimali allegedly dismissed Mr Saumi who was giving evidence in the inquiry into her appointment.
Senior Barrister, Janet Mason representing the COI, maintains that the JSC does have the power to act under Section 44 of the Interpretation Act, which states that the authority to appoint includes the authority to suspend or dismiss.
However, the JSC has rejected this interpretation.
“We wrote to the JSC requesting Malimali’s suspension after Mr Saumi’s dismissal,” Ms Mason said.
“They responded, saying they don’t have the powers to suspend. We’ve written again.”
Ms Mason acknowledged that the legal framework for suspending a FICAC Commissioner is unclear, unlike other judicial offices.
The Constitution explicitly provides for the suspension of the DPP during investigations, but FICAC’s appointment process is governed solely by the FICAC Act, which does not include suspension or dismissal provisions.
“The FICAC Commissioner is not a judicial officer and doesn’t have to be a lawyer.
“Since the Act is silent on suspension and dismissal, we have relied on the Interpretation Act.”
The COI is now seeking discussions with the President’s Office, the Attorney-General, and the JSC to clarify the legal standing of Ms Malimali’s position and whether any action can be taken.
When asked if she had spoken directly to Ms Malimali regarding the case, Ms Mason confirmed she had only dealt with the JSC.
