|   Malimali |
*Serious questions have emerged following claims by Barbara Malimali's lawyer Tanya Waqanika on her Facebook page that Martin Daubney KC, who previously defended Richard Naidu and represented Finance Minister Biman Prasad through Naidu—was at one point proposed to chair Fiji’s much-anticipated Commission of Inquiry (COI).
*If accurate, the claim by Waqanika that Daubney was a preferred candidate to chair the COI raise serious concerns about impartiality and conflicts of interest.
*But who made the proposal? Was it the sacked Attorney-General Graham Leung or his predecessor, Siromi Turaga, now A-G?
*The timeline remains murky. Turaga served as Attorney-General until his resignation in early 2024, a period during which preparations for a Commission of Inquiry were said to be under Cabinet discussion. Leung, who assumed the AG post later that year, has remained silent on Waqanika’s claim. Neither man has confirmed nor denied whether Daubney’s name was formally proposed, or at what stage in the process the alleged recommendation was made.
*What is undisputed, however, is that Daubney had clear professional ties to two of the most politically exposed figures in Fiji’s current coalition government. In any system governed by the rule of law, prior legal representation—especially in cases involving allegations of impropriety or breaches of public trust—would typically disqualify a person from presiding over an independent investigation touching on similar themes.
From Fijileaks Archive, 22 May 2025
'As NFP Leader, [Biman Prasad] is not an 'office holder' within the meaning of that term in the Act and is therefore not a person who is required to make the 'office holder' disclosures under s24.'
Australian KC Martin Daubney, 22 August 2024 to Richard Naidu and FICAC.
*Prasad's legal team chose to ignore s24(2) which required Prasad, as an election candidate along with other candidates, to declare his income, assets, properties, directorships, shares and dividends under the Political Parties Act 2013. He stood for election as an NFP candidate in the 2014, 2018, and 2022 elections. He led the party into elections and signed the Coalition Pact to form the government with PAP and SODELPA.
*He began his lies in his first declaration in July 2014 when he did not disclose his Directorship in Lotus Construction (Fiji) Ltd. For TEN years he lied in his declarations for we didn't have his LOTUS FILE until last year, and the Fiji Elections Office relies solely on the candidates to declare truthfully and faithfully their statutory declarations. The FEO will investigate only if someone lodges a complaint against the candidate's declaration on publication.
*Prasad's legal team had ignored the then Chief Justice Tony Gates ruling in FICAC v Rabuka (2018), where the CJ Gates had confirmed that the PARTY LEADER fell under the ambit of an office holder. Gates stated at p63:   |   |
*On 22 August 2024, Prasad's lawyer Richard Naidu of Munro Leys obtained a legal opinion from Martin Daubney KC in Australia, and forwarded it to FICAC. Daubney, who had represented Naidu in his 'Scandalizing the Court' before the Fiji High Court, concluded:
'It is my opinion that Professor Prasad, as NFP Leader, is not an 'office holder' within the meaning of that term in the Act and is therefore not a person who is required to make the 'office holder' disclosures under s24.'
*Basically, they were throwing every other political leader under the bus, including NFP's own party candidates who, along with Prasad, were required to declare under the Political Parties Act 2013 their incomes, assets, gifts, properties, directorships, shares, and dividends.
