FORMER supervisor of elections Mohammed Saneem yesterday testified that if the Government had deemed an additional clause, resulting in a reimbursement of $55,944.03 was illegal, he would have repaid the amount.
He said the money was rightfully his, and if the Government wanted it returned, it could have activated the remedial clauses for arbitration and demonstrated why it was entitled to the funds.
However, Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Nancy Tikoisuva pointed out that the reimbursement did not come from Mr Saneem’s personal income or through the Fiji Revenue and Customs Service, but rather from the Fiji Elections Office (FEO) budget.
Mr Saneem denied interpreting the law for his personal benefit and also denied instructing a staff member to destroy the first Deed of Variation (DoV) executed by former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, who had signed both DoVs in his capacity as Acting Prime Minister on June 30, 2022.
He told Chief Justice Salesi Temo that the way the complaint was lodged through the police, rather than FICAC, which is the appropriate authority for electoral-related complaints, raised concerns about due process.
Additionally, he claimed that naming his underage children in the charges, along with making allegations about undeserved holidays, reflected a personal vendetta against him.
Mr Saneem said if natural justice had been afforded to him at the time, the situation might have unfolded differently.
However, he believed the complainants lodged a complaint because they wanted his position as SoE.
When it was put to him that FEO financial controller Romika Sewak had to hide a copy of the first DoV to protect herself during an audit, Mr Saneem responded that she did not need to do so, as it was already FEO policy to store a copy in a safe.
With the defence having closed its case, closing submissions are scheduled to commence on November 7.
