Supervisor of Elections Ana Mataiciwa yesterday testified she did not sight a letter from the Constitutional Offices Commission, which purportedly stated that a salary of $350,000 with bonuses had been approved for her predecessor, Mohammed Saneem.
Mr Saneem is charged with one count of receiving a corrupt benefit by obtaining deductible relief of $55, 944.03 from the State.
Mr Saneem’s lawyer Devanesh Sharma had pointed out that on June 10, 2022, the COC had appointed an independent committee to evaluate Mr Saneem’s salary recommendation of about $300,000 and a two per cent gross salary increase.
Mr Sharma also cited a letter of advice dated June 30, 2022, from COC secretary Preetika Prasad, indicating that the salary of $350,000 with bonuses had been approved.
Testifying before Chief Justice Temo, Ms Mataiciwa told the court that she faced a tax penalty when her acting allowance was delayed, saying it was unfair for her to incur a penalty that was not her fault, a concern that the defence argued was relevant to Mr Saneem’s case.
She told the court she would have sought clarification from then attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum and Mr Saneem if the key documents linked to the allegations of misuse of funds had been made available in 2023 before her police complaint.
Ms Mataiciwa filed a complaint with police in January 2023, while she held the role of manager Legal at the Fiji Elections Office.
This, after she was approached by the director of Corporate Services, Samjeshwar Ram, who expressed concerns regarding Mr Saneem’s increased salary from $221,794 to $350,000, with a tax reimbursement payout of $55,794.
She then consulted the acting manager Legal Mesake Dawai and filed a police complaint via a letter against Mr Sayed-Khaiyum and Mr Saneem on February 13 that year.
Ms Mataiciwa mentioned that the only documents she reviewed at that time were Mr Saneem’s contract and the two deeds of variation in his personal file when she submitted a police complaint.
When asked why she did not report the matter to FICAC, as the FEO was required to do under section 18 of the Electoral Act, she said she had lost confidence in the institution, noting that previous complaints had not been acknowledged or addressed.
The trial continues today.
