4 Comments
Character witness Father Barr's statement held as contempt of court |
Former Prime Minister and Fiji Labour Party Leader, Mahendra Chaudhry has been fined 2 million Fijian dollars by High Court Judge Justice Paul Madigan. Chaudhry has to pay the fine by the 30th of June this year. Justice Madigan has ruled that failure to pay the fine will result in Chaudhry serving 15 months in prison. He has to serve a minimum term of 12 months in jail if the fine is not paid. Chaudhry’s conviction has also been recorded which means that he is ineligible to contest the 2014 general election. Mahendra Chaudhry has to comply with the Exchange Control Act by the 31st of July this year which means that he needs to repatriate the 1.5 million Australian dollars held in Australia. Failure to do so will make him liable to prosecution for continuing breach of the Exchange Control Act. The prohibition for Chaudhry to access the 1.5 million Australian dollars has also been lifted. Chaudhry cannot travel outside Fiji until he complies with the court’s order. While passing his sentence and highlighting the mitigation in the case, Justice Madigan highlighted that character witness, Father Kevin Barr launched into what can only be described as a political anti-government speech in court. The judge said Father Barr cast disparaging remarks on the nature of the proceedings against Chaudhry. Justice Madigan said in the light of this contempt of court, he gives no weight whatsoever to Father Barr’s testimonial. Judge Madigan said Chaudhry’s counsel must be seen as a party to this contempt of court as Chaudhry’s lawyer, Matthew Hutchings knew this was coming because he had a typed copy of Father Barr’s testimonial. Justice Madigan also highlighted that the issue of these funds held in Australia by Chaudhry was raised in parliament on the 2nd of December 2005 by the then Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase. The judge said the public record of proceedings which were before him reveals that Chaudhry vehemently denied the existence of the money. Justice Madigan said such deceit in hiding the existence of the money for so long from the authorities can only be an aggravating factor in this sentence. He said Chaudhry has not shown a shred of remorse for his breaches and appears to have been in a state of denial since 2008. Source: Fijivillage News |
Paul Madigan
We will hold you to account you scum. What is stated below confirms by [my] contempt for this person. Let's see what the Chief Justice says about such comments in open Court by Madigan
From a friend:
"Bro, this judge Madigan when advised that MPC has a stent due to cardiac issues replied: "which has been working well. He hasn't dropped dead" everyone was disgusted."
We will hold you to account you scum. What is stated below confirms by [my] contempt for this person. Let's see what the Chief Justice says about such comments in open Court by Madigan
From a friend:
"Bro, this judge Madigan when advised that MPC has a stent due to cardiac issues replied: "which has been working well. He hasn't dropped dead" everyone was disgusted."
"This incompetent judge, today said in the Chaudhry sentencing hearing today that Chaudhry had tried to conceal the monies and had lied to Parliament. Both these statements are extraordinary. Extraordinary as they are false. Firstly, Chaudhry never concealed any monies (he actually paid the relevant taxes at all times) and secondly he never lied to Parliament. However, the falsehood aside, there was no evidence during trial of Chaudhry concealing any monies or lying to Parliament. More alarmingly, this idiot, who likes to be addressed as Your Lordship, did not realize that all proceedings of Parliament are protected by absolute privilege meaning that it cannot be tendered or considered in Court. For him to do so speaks volumes about his lack of intellect. It also shows his efforts to discredit Chaudhry. Something which many have tried and miserably failed. And which brings me to my final point - with comments such as this and Madigan's perusal of affidavits not part of the evidence and his comments referring to the same in the admissibility ruling, where he also held that the search warrant executed by Sevuloni Masitabua was invalid as it was not authorized by the Minister but allowed it in the interests of justice - do you think Chaudhry got a fair trial? Since when does the interest of justice allow a Court of Law to override an express legislative provision? I and thousands all over Fiji and elsewhere know the answer. Madigan's actions in the Chaudhry trial would have had him sacked in any other jurisdiction and I await to see action the Chief Justice will institute against this recreant judge who is a disgrace and a threat to justice in Fiji." - Rajendra Chaudhry
Mahendra Chaudhry's Three Character Witnesses tell Justice Madigan:
Former Education Minister, Taufa Vakatale then took the stand, saying that she has known Chaudhry since the early 1970's. Vakatale said Chaudhry became a public figure when he joined the Fiji Public Service Association where he spoke for the rights of civil servants.Vakatale said in 2008, she was appointed to investigate allegations against Chaudhry. She said they found that he was not guilty of breach of the Exchange Control Act. Vakatale said this was stated in the report. She said Chaudhry had agreed to provide all the documents and the inquiry report was issued after discussions with Reserve Bank of Fiji and Fiji Revenue Customs Authority. Source: Fijivillage News;
Fijileaks Editor: See Victor Lal's 2008 response to Vakatale and her colleagues findings: "In view of the narrow limits of the terms of reference and a short time span (7 March to 10 March 2008), the findings are not surprising, for a wide-ranging inquiry would have yielded another result regarding Mr Chaudhry’s tax affairs...Since there was no commission of enquiry under the Commission of Inquiry Act (Cap 47), the Committee had not held any public hearings, called any witnesses nor taken any written or oral submissions as to facts or law...A close reading of the team’s background facts relating to Mr Chaudhry’s tax details reveal that they based their facts from the same tax file from which I wrote the story about his $2million, except with different conclusions. However, Mr Chaudhry must tell us about the source of Haryana funds. Who is the mysterious Harbhajan Lal? What committee he belonged to in Haryana? Is he the one who transferred the first two instalments, which saw Mr Chaudhry become an overnight millionaire? Was the money for him or the Indo-Fijian community? And why no other colleagues of his who were held hostage with him were entitled to a share of the $2million? Why only him and his family? There are still many unanswered questions on the Haryana front. And only Mr Chaudhry has the answers...The three-member team enquiry was tasked to see if tax assessments had been raised in accordance with the tax laws. As FIRCA’s duty includes the administration of the tax laws, this was in effect an enquiry into FIRCA not Mr Chaudhry. He should be stood down and a Commission of Enquiry should be set up, whose terms of reference should read: “To determine if Mahendra Pal Chaudhry had complied with the tax laws by declaring all his income.” It should also examine the Haryana letter. The Committee was however satisfied that the files provided by FIRCA and the materials provided by the Reserve Bank of Fiji were sufficiently comprehensive and contained sufficient information for it to conduct its enquiries and reach its conclusions. Meanwhile, Mr Chaudhry had neither told FIRCA, nor the Indo-Fijian community, or the nation, that he had received $2million from one Harbhjan Lal of Haryana in India, and that over half a million dollars of that money was secretly transferred into his bank account through the Indian Consulate-General in Sydney. Contrary to Mr Chaudhry’s assertion, I have never conceded that the $2million was for his resettlement in Australia."-http://www.coupfourandahalf.com/2010/07/mahendra-millions-unanswered-questions.html
Fijileaks Editor: See Victor Lal's 2008 response to Vakatale and her colleagues findings: "In view of the narrow limits of the terms of reference and a short time span (7 March to 10 March 2008), the findings are not surprising, for a wide-ranging inquiry would have yielded another result regarding Mr Chaudhry’s tax affairs...Since there was no commission of enquiry under the Commission of Inquiry Act (Cap 47), the Committee had not held any public hearings, called any witnesses nor taken any written or oral submissions as to facts or law...A close reading of the team’s background facts relating to Mr Chaudhry’s tax details reveal that they based their facts from the same tax file from which I wrote the story about his $2million, except with different conclusions. However, Mr Chaudhry must tell us about the source of Haryana funds. Who is the mysterious Harbhajan Lal? What committee he belonged to in Haryana? Is he the one who transferred the first two instalments, which saw Mr Chaudhry become an overnight millionaire? Was the money for him or the Indo-Fijian community? And why no other colleagues of his who were held hostage with him were entitled to a share of the $2million? Why only him and his family? There are still many unanswered questions on the Haryana front. And only Mr Chaudhry has the answers...The three-member team enquiry was tasked to see if tax assessments had been raised in accordance with the tax laws. As FIRCA’s duty includes the administration of the tax laws, this was in effect an enquiry into FIRCA not Mr Chaudhry. He should be stood down and a Commission of Enquiry should be set up, whose terms of reference should read: “To determine if Mahendra Pal Chaudhry had complied with the tax laws by declaring all his income.” It should also examine the Haryana letter. The Committee was however satisfied that the files provided by FIRCA and the materials provided by the Reserve Bank of Fiji were sufficiently comprehensive and contained sufficient information for it to conduct its enquiries and reach its conclusions. Meanwhile, Mr Chaudhry had neither told FIRCA, nor the Indo-Fijian community, or the nation, that he had received $2million from one Harbhjan Lal of Haryana in India, and that over half a million dollars of that money was secretly transferred into his bank account through the Indian Consulate-General in Sydney. Contrary to Mr Chaudhry’s assertion, I have never conceded that the $2million was for his resettlement in Australia."-http://www.coupfourandahalf.com/2010/07/mahendra-millions-unanswered-questions.html
Father Kevin Barr was the third character witness for Chaudhry in court. Father Barr said that Chaudhry is an inspiring person and outstanding leader. He said Chaudhry is concerned about the workers of the country and is a fighter for social justice.
This is not a court of politics – Justice Madigan: This is not a court of politics.That was the message from High Court Judge, Justice Paul Madigan after the third character witness in Mahendra Chaudhry’s mitigation, Father Kevin Barr started making comments about the trial which were not part of his character reference. Justice Madigan interrupted Father Barr and told him and Chaudhry’s lawyer, Matthew Hutchings that the comments were outrageous and this is not a court of politics. Father Kevin Barr then continued with the character reference, saying that Chaudhry’s record as Prime Minister and Finance Minister was outstanding. Source: Fijivillage News
This is not a court of politics – Justice Madigan: This is not a court of politics.That was the message from High Court Judge, Justice Paul Madigan after the third character witness in Mahendra Chaudhry’s mitigation, Father Kevin Barr started making comments about the trial which were not part of his character reference. Justice Madigan interrupted Father Barr and told him and Chaudhry’s lawyer, Matthew Hutchings that the comments were outrageous and this is not a court of politics. Father Kevin Barr then continued with the character reference, saying that Chaudhry’s record as Prime Minister and Finance Minister was outstanding. Source: Fijivillage News
Chaudhry’s lawyer asks Justice Madigan to impose no conviction recording as his client plans to contest the forthcoming September general election; says Chaudhry's house is valued at $300,000 and his only other property is his vehicle. Chaudhry is suffering from
diabetes, heart diseases and cardiac conditions;
His lawyer said after the 2000 coup, the Indian Counsellor provided Chaudhry with half a million dollars to settle in Australia
Chaudhry’s lawyer, Matthew Hutchings has asked for a non-custodial sentence. He said after the 2000 coup, the Indian Counselor provided Chaudhry with half a million dollars to settle in Australia. Hutchings said Chaudhry came back to Fiji to serve the people. He said Chaudhry was subjected to three coups and he was also abused and tortured. Hutchings said based on this, there might be resistance to return to Fiji with the funds. He also said that Chaudhry’s family suffered greatly when he was imprisoned in 1987 and 2000. Hutchings said there were questions on whether he would survive at the hands of the perpetrators.
Non-Custodial Sentence:
As the former Prime Minister Mahendra Chaudhry awaits his sentencing tomorrow, his lawyer today asked the court to dismiss his charges without recording a conviction as Chaudhry wants to contest the elections. Chaudhry’s lawyer, Matthew Hutchings told High Court Judge Justice Paul Madigan that Chaudhry is the leader of the Fiji Labour Party and elections are to be held in which the party will field candidates. Hutchings said that his client intends to stand for the elections and a conviction will mean that Chaudhry will not be able to stand as a candidate. Hutchings also presented a local doctor’s medical report stating that Chaudhry is suffering from diabetes, heart diseases and cardiac conditions.The High Court Judge then asked Hutchings on Chaudhry’s means to pay a fine and whether his ability to pay a fine will be a problem. Justice Madigan also asked Hutchings to ask his client about the value of his house and other assets. Chaudhry through his lawyer informed the court that the value of his house is not more than $300,000 and the only other property is his vehicle. Source: Fijivillage News
Non-Custodial Sentence:
As the former Prime Minister Mahendra Chaudhry awaits his sentencing tomorrow, his lawyer today asked the court to dismiss his charges without recording a conviction as Chaudhry wants to contest the elections. Chaudhry’s lawyer, Matthew Hutchings told High Court Judge Justice Paul Madigan that Chaudhry is the leader of the Fiji Labour Party and elections are to be held in which the party will field candidates. Hutchings said that his client intends to stand for the elections and a conviction will mean that Chaudhry will not be able to stand as a candidate. Hutchings also presented a local doctor’s medical report stating that Chaudhry is suffering from diabetes, heart diseases and cardiac conditions.The High Court Judge then asked Hutchings on Chaudhry’s means to pay a fine and whether his ability to pay a fine will be a problem. Justice Madigan also asked Hutchings to ask his client about the value of his house and other assets. Chaudhry through his lawyer informed the court that the value of his house is not more than $300,000 and the only other property is his vehicle. Source: Fijivillage News
Fijileaks Editor: Yes, but who provided the other $1million into his Sydney bank account between 2000 and 2002?
And if Chaudhry had returned to Fiji to serve his people, who was
lording it up in Australia from his millions?
editor@fijileaks.com
ARCHIVES
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
October 2012
September 2012