Once the nation's corruption watchdog, Barbara Malimali's FICAC office became a nursery, coddling the powerful while starving justice.
"Bottle-Fed, Untouchable: How Malimali Turned Prasad Into Little Lamb."
Biman Prasad’s 2014 FALSE statutory declarations should have barred him from Parliament of Fiji
*From concealing his shareholding and directorship in Lotus Construction (Fiji) Ltd, to hiding two villa units acquired from his company, to undisclosed transactions with his cousin, Biman Prasad’s 2014 false statutory declarations should have barred him from Parliament. |     |
*A three-year investigation by Fijileaks into the statutory declarations filed by NFP leader and Finance Minister Biman Prasad between 2014 and 2024 appears to reveal multiple potential breaches of Fiji's anti-corruption and governance laws. We are now prepared to resubmit (with documentary evidence) our 150 page findings to FICAC against Biman Prasad, and call that he be charged, for alleged:
(1) False declarations under the Political Parties Act 2013 (s.24);
(2) Abuse of office under the Crimes Act 2009 (s.139);
(3) Bribery and corrupt transactions under the Prevention of Bribery Act 2007 (ss.4–5);
(4) Fraudulent tax evasion under the Tax Administration Act 2009; and
(5) Breach of fiduciary duties and potential misstatements under the Companies Act 2015.
*The omissions in his 2014 statutory declaration individually constitutes a breach. Taken together, they paint a picture of a systemic pattern of alleged concealment designed to mislead the Supervisor of Elections and the public ahead of the 2014 general election.
Implications for Legitimacy of Prasad's 2014 Election Nomination
Because the omissions occurred before nomination, they strike at the legality of Biman Prasad’s candidacy itself. Under Fijian electoral law:
The passage of time does not extinguish strict liability.
In summary:
Because the omissions occurred before nomination, they strike at the legality of Biman Prasad’s candidacy itself. Under Fijian electoral law:
- A candidate must submit a true and complete declaration before being accepted onto the ballot.
- If that declaration is false, the Supervisor of Elections had no lawful basis to register him as a candidate.
- This opens the door to an argument that Prasad's election to Parliament was constitutionally invalid from the outset.
The passage of time does not extinguish strict liability.
In summary:
- The breaches are not minor clerical oversights. They go to the heart of electoral integrity and public accountability.
- They occurred at the most sensitive moment, just before the 2014 election, while Biman Prasad was NFP party leader and election candidate.
- They involved multiple undeclared interests, including directorship, shareholding, property ownership, gifts, and related-party dealings.
- This creates a compelling basis for a criminal complaint and possibly even a constitutional challenge to the validity of his election to Parliament in 2014.
The slogan "Change is Coming" and the tree logo were part of the NFP's 2014 campaign branding, used widely in that election. The three-digit candidate number (596) was a new feature introduced under the 2013 Constitution's single national constituency system, first used in the September 2014 election. Prasad received 5,386 votes as a candidate. The NFP won three seats.
The Arch of Irony: First They Sue Me, Now NFP and Prasad Quote Me
  "It is very obviously by the slant given to these distorted and less than factual stories that Fiji Sun and Victor Lal are driven by a political agenda." Jitoko Tikolevu, CEO, FIRCA  |   |
People sometimes ask me why I “have a biff” with Pio Tikoduadua. The truth is: I don’t. I have no personal quarrel with him. But after the 2006 coup, those of us who remained on the outside had a ringside seat to see how state power was wielded, who stood up, and who caved in.
And in 2025, when those same individuals now hold the levers of power, history demands an accounting.
And in 2025, when those same individuals now hold the levers of power, history demands an accounting.
That is why I write about Pio Tikoduadua. Not because of personal animosity, but because of the record.
The $2 million revelation that shook Fiji
Back in 2007-2008, I published articles in the Fiji Sun revealing that Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry had secretly stashed away $2 million in a Sydney bank account. For the average Fijian taxpayer, that was not a small detail. It was a betrayal of public trust. If the Interim Finance Minister and FIRCA's line-manager in the post 2006 coup Bainimarama government himself was concealing millions offshore, what hope did ordinary taxpayers have of fair treatment?
Instead of dealing with the substance of those revelations, the Fiji Islands Revenue & Customs Authority (FIRCA, now FRCS) and its board, including Pio Tikoduadua, turned their fire on me and the Fiji Sun.
FIRCA’s board goes to war with the press
In 2008, FIRCA filed a writ in the Fiji High Court. Represented by MC Lawyers, the plaintiffs were FIRCA itself and four of its board members: Peceli Vocea, Arvin Datt, Pio Tikoduadua, and Jitoko Tikolevu. Their Statement of Claim insisted that my reporting defamed the Board by suggesting dishonesty, incompetence, conspiracy, and misuse of funds.
On our side, the Fiji Sun and I were represented by Patel Sharma & Associates. I still recall the fax they sent me on 10 June 2008: a request to provide a “paragraph-by-paragraph response” so they could draft a Defence before the 16 June deadline.
I refused to play ball. I would not dignify a lawsuit that tried to flip the story, making the exposure of wrongdoing the offence, instead of the wrongdoing itself.
The irony of MC Lawyers
FIRCA had chosen MC Lawyers as its legal sword. Years later, the irony became unavoidable. One of its partners, Suresh Chandra, also the chair of the Electoral Commission, was found guilty of professional misconduct for misusing over $2 million in client trust funds. The Independent Legal Services Commission declared him unfit to practice law.
The very firm that once tried to muzzle me and the Fiji Sun collapsed under the weight of its own dishonesty.
Tikoduadua’s role
And there was Pio Tikoduadua, then a member of FIRCA’s board. He could have said: “Let’s confront Chaudhry, let’s prove to the public we are serious about tax integrity.” Instead, he joined the chorus that decided: “Let’s sue Victor Lal and the Fiji Sun.”
That’s the record. That’s what I mean when I say being on the outside after 2006 coup gave me a ringside seat. I saw who lined up to protect the powerful, and who paid the price for exposing them.
The boomerang of history
But history has a wicked sense of humour. Fast-forward to August 2025. Who is standing at a podium calling Chaudhry a “crook” for hiding that very same $2 million in Sydney? None other than Biman Prasad, the leader of the National Federation Party, and today the political boss of none other than Pio Tikoduadua.
In 2008, my reporting was defamatory, scandalous, and actionable. In 2025, the very same reporting is a convenient weapon for Pio Tikoduadua's political allies.
They sued me for it. They quote me for it.
So when I focus on Tikoduadua, it is not personal. It is historical. It is about showing that those who now preach integrity once presided over an institution that hounded journalists instead of holding politicians accountable. It is about pointing out that the very disclosure they tried to suppress has become the stick they now use to beat Chaudhry.
That is why I keep reminding readers: you cannot understand Fiji’s politics in 2025 without remembering what happened in 2008.
They Attacked Me. Fiji Sun publisher Russell Hunter: tortured and deported
But the story’s darker turn involves the late Russell Hunter, Fiji Sun’s publisher and someone who stood by the story when many would not. He paid a heavy price: abducted from his Suva home, tortured, and forcibly expelled from Fiji, all because he dared to publish the $2 million exposure.
In 2008, the interim regime under Bainimarama deported Hunter, and he was banned from returning. Reporters Without Borders condemned the move, saying it was a shocking signal to other journalists that exposing powerful wrongdoing would bring reprisals.
Yet today, those same people who once sought to silence that disclosure now quote and weaponize it. They litigated against the truth. Then recycled it when it suited their politics.
How Bainimarama attacked me
It wasn’t just Hunter who was targeted. Frank Bainimarama himself took aim at both of us. He publicly claimed I and Hunter were engaged in a “personal vendetta.” He challenged our credibility, saying “Victor Lal runs down everyone in Fiji” and that Hunter’s expulsions motivated his activism.
He tried to frame our journalism not as public service, but as vendetta, a tactic meant to delegitimise exposure by shifting the frame to personal bias. In doing so, he attempted to turn the spotlight away from Chaudhry, and onto us.
The full arc of irony
When I write about Tikoduadua now, I don’t do so from vendetta. I do so from memory. From the vantage point of someone who watched power misuse legal machinery, who saw intimidation deployed against media, who saw a publisher abducted. I refuse to let that history be erased.
Because those who forget it are doomed to replay it: sometimes as villains, sometimes as self-appointed arbiters of virtue.
The $2 million revelation that shook Fiji
Back in 2007-2008, I published articles in the Fiji Sun revealing that Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry had secretly stashed away $2 million in a Sydney bank account. For the average Fijian taxpayer, that was not a small detail. It was a betrayal of public trust. If the Interim Finance Minister and FIRCA's line-manager in the post 2006 coup Bainimarama government himself was concealing millions offshore, what hope did ordinary taxpayers have of fair treatment?
Instead of dealing with the substance of those revelations, the Fiji Islands Revenue & Customs Authority (FIRCA, now FRCS) and its board, including Pio Tikoduadua, turned their fire on me and the Fiji Sun.
FIRCA’s board goes to war with the press
In 2008, FIRCA filed a writ in the Fiji High Court. Represented by MC Lawyers, the plaintiffs were FIRCA itself and four of its board members: Peceli Vocea, Arvin Datt, Pio Tikoduadua, and Jitoko Tikolevu. Their Statement of Claim insisted that my reporting defamed the Board by suggesting dishonesty, incompetence, conspiracy, and misuse of funds.
On our side, the Fiji Sun and I were represented by Patel Sharma & Associates. I still recall the fax they sent me on 10 June 2008: a request to provide a “paragraph-by-paragraph response” so they could draft a Defence before the 16 June deadline.
I refused to play ball. I would not dignify a lawsuit that tried to flip the story, making the exposure of wrongdoing the offence, instead of the wrongdoing itself.
The irony of MC Lawyers
FIRCA had chosen MC Lawyers as its legal sword. Years later, the irony became unavoidable. One of its partners, Suresh Chandra, also the chair of the Electoral Commission, was found guilty of professional misconduct for misusing over $2 million in client trust funds. The Independent Legal Services Commission declared him unfit to practice law.
The very firm that once tried to muzzle me and the Fiji Sun collapsed under the weight of its own dishonesty.
Tikoduadua’s role
And there was Pio Tikoduadua, then a member of FIRCA’s board. He could have said: “Let’s confront Chaudhry, let’s prove to the public we are serious about tax integrity.” Instead, he joined the chorus that decided: “Let’s sue Victor Lal and the Fiji Sun.”
That’s the record. That’s what I mean when I say being on the outside after 2006 coup gave me a ringside seat. I saw who lined up to protect the powerful, and who paid the price for exposing them.
The boomerang of history
But history has a wicked sense of humour. Fast-forward to August 2025. Who is standing at a podium calling Chaudhry a “crook” for hiding that very same $2 million in Sydney? None other than Biman Prasad, the leader of the National Federation Party, and today the political boss of none other than Pio Tikoduadua.
In 2008, my reporting was defamatory, scandalous, and actionable. In 2025, the very same reporting is a convenient weapon for Pio Tikoduadua's political allies.
They sued me for it. They quote me for it.
So when I focus on Tikoduadua, it is not personal. It is historical. It is about showing that those who now preach integrity once presided over an institution that hounded journalists instead of holding politicians accountable. It is about pointing out that the very disclosure they tried to suppress has become the stick they now use to beat Chaudhry.
That is why I keep reminding readers: you cannot understand Fiji’s politics in 2025 without remembering what happened in 2008.
They Attacked Me. Fiji Sun publisher Russell Hunter: tortured and deported
But the story’s darker turn involves the late Russell Hunter, Fiji Sun’s publisher and someone who stood by the story when many would not. He paid a heavy price: abducted from his Suva home, tortured, and forcibly expelled from Fiji, all because he dared to publish the $2 million exposure.
In 2008, the interim regime under Bainimarama deported Hunter, and he was banned from returning. Reporters Without Borders condemned the move, saying it was a shocking signal to other journalists that exposing powerful wrongdoing would bring reprisals.
Yet today, those same people who once sought to silence that disclosure now quote and weaponize it. They litigated against the truth. Then recycled it when it suited their politics.
How Bainimarama attacked me
It wasn’t just Hunter who was targeted. Frank Bainimarama himself took aim at both of us. He publicly claimed I and Hunter were engaged in a “personal vendetta.” He challenged our credibility, saying “Victor Lal runs down everyone in Fiji” and that Hunter’s expulsions motivated his activism.
He tried to frame our journalism not as public service, but as vendetta, a tactic meant to delegitimise exposure by shifting the frame to personal bias. In doing so, he attempted to turn the spotlight away from Chaudhry, and onto us.
The full arc of irony
When I write about Tikoduadua now, I don’t do so from vendetta. I do so from memory. From the vantage point of someone who watched power misuse legal machinery, who saw intimidation deployed against media, who saw a publisher abducted. I refuse to let that history be erased.
Because those who forget it are doomed to replay it: sometimes as villains, sometimes as self-appointed arbiters of virtue.
 |  |
