Fijileaks
  • Home
  • Archive Home
  • In-depth Analysis
    • BOI Report into George Speight and others beatings
  • Documents
  • Opinion
  • CRC Submissions
  • Features
  • Archive

Justice Madigan convicts Pita Driti on sole evidence of Major Manasa Tagicakibau; says Driti was "evasive, divertive, petulant & ungracious"

26/11/2013

6 Comments

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA


CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
Criminal Case No.005 of 2012

BETWEEN : STATE
AND : PITA RAGOLEA DRITI

BEFORE : THE HON. JUSTICE PAUL MADIGAN

Counsel : Mrs. A. Campbell-Moffat S.C.
with Messrs J . Remedios and M. Korovou
for the State

Mr. F. Vosarogo for the Accused.

Dates of hearing: 18-22, 25 November 2013
Date of Judgment: 26 November 2013

______________________________________________________________________________

Picture
On way to be locked up until December 10 for sentencing
JUDGMENT

1. PITA RAGOLEA DRITI, you have been charged with the following offences:

First Count

Statement of the Offence
Inciting to Mutiny: Contrary to section 72(1) (a) of the Crimes Decree 44 of 2009.

Particulars of Offence


PITA RAGOLEA DRITI between the 1st day of August 2010 to 31st day of October 2010 at Suva in the Central Division knowing that Manasa Ralawa Tagicakibau is serving in the Republic of Fiji Military forces, attempted to seduce Manasa Ralawa Tagicakibau from his duty and allegiance to Fiji.

Second Count (In the Alternative)
Statement of the Offence


Seditious Offences: Contrary to section 66(1) (i) and section 67(1) (b) of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009.
Particulars of Offence


PITA RAGOLEA DRITI between the 1st day of August 2010 and 31st day of October 2010 at Suva in the Central Division uttered seditious words wherein PITA RAGOLEA DRITI stated words to the effect of “AG should be removed for he is influential in a lot of critical decisions which is deemed to mooring the Government away from its charted course” and/or that “the Commander RFMF no longer have the leadership anointment and he has lost credibility and Commander RFMF needs to be removed from his position” and/or that “if His Excellency the President refused to accept the proposal then there is no other option but to remove His Excellency”, in the presence of Manasa Ralawa Tagicakibau and, thereby intended to bring hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the Government of Fiji.

2. In the unanimous opinion of three assessors you have been found not guilty of both charges.

3. I have analysed the evidence and directed myself on my own summing up. The strength of the prosecution case is found in Major Tagicakibau’s evidence. I found him to be an honest and convincing witness. He told the Court of meetings with the accused in which he was asked not once but at least twice to use his private intelligence cell, the existence of which was known to the accused, to conduct surveillance on the Attorney General. The rational behind that request was quite clearly to get information to discredit the Attorney and to “bring him down”. That, coupled with the stated perception of the witness (Tagicakibau) that, whatever had been said as to “removal” or “elimination”, he had the impression that the Attorney’s life was to be taken.

4. In contrast to this evidence, I find that I do not believe the evidence of the accused. He was evasive, divertive, petulant and ungracious. That in itself does not make him guilty, nor does he have anything to prove but he contradicted himself and gave evidence that was incapable of belief, thereby in no way detracting from the compelling evidence of Tagicakibau.

5. The evidence of Tagicakibau and the surrounding circumstances establish an overwhelming case against the accused. I cannot believe that he knew nothing of any “plans” until Lt. Colonel Mara visited him in mid September. He was before that time, on his own admission, receiving official and unofficial intelligence reports on at least a weekly basis.

6. In addition to these findings of credibility, circumstances lead me to believe that the accused was taking active steps to impugn the reputation of the Attorney General, to cement disdain for him and to bring about the downfall of the Commander’s administration. He was having the Attorney General tailed, making enquiries about his social connections and his income. He was calling into aid the head of a crack platoon of unarmed combat specialists. That head, Warrant Officer Korovou was most reluctant to give evidence of his meeting with the accused. Whatever may have been said at that meeting, he told the Court that he came away from it with the distinct impression that there was going to be another coup.

7. The fact given in evidence by the accused, that on hearing of the plan he did nothing but stand back and consider it without reporting it to the Commander, does not serve him well. The irresistible inference is that he supported it and was doing whatever he could to justify it and further it.

8. Thinking that the plan may have been a “set-up” did not lead to the accused to take appropriate steps to deal with a possible “set-up”. Asking the purported architect of the plan : “is this a set-up?” does nothing to create confidence in his evidence.

9. In believing the evidence of Tagicakibau and finding nothing in the evidence of the accused to counter it, the case against him is overwhelming and I find beyond reasonable doubt that at the relevant times he was making an attempt to persuade the major from his loyalties to both Service and State.

10. For the above reasons I reject the opinions of the assessors and find the accused guilty of the first count. He is convicted accordingly. The second count charged in the alternative falls away.

P.K. Madigan
Judge
At Suva


Fijileaks Editor: See also below the Summing Up:
6 Comments
Court Typist
25/11/2013 06:11:55 pm

It is clear Madigan had already written this judgment, for how else he could come back so quickly to overrule the assessors!

Reply
rajesh
25/11/2013 06:58:37 pm

Madgun is ashole mf judge qori qase .

Reply
rajesh sdl
26/11/2013 01:47:50 am

Rajesh singh aka kutta

You call yourself a christain. Do you understand law.

Reply
Muslims=10 vs Fijians = 0
26/11/2013 01:38:44 pm

Looks like khaiyum wins again. fooling these Fijians is too easy - right Col Aziz?

Reply
Kumar
26/11/2013 05:29:38 pm

The decision was made before the trial even began. How can a 22 page decision be produced in and hour and a half.

Reply
kangaroo court
27/11/2013 04:29:45 am

@ Kumar

The judgement was 4 (FOUR) pages long.

What is the 22 page decision you're referring to?

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    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
    Picture
    Picture