Former Fiji Officials Clash in Tribunal Hearing over Controversial Meeting
The tribunal hearing into suspended Fiji Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Christopher Pryde, took a dramatic turn as former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum took the stand, vehemently denying any wrongdoing regarding his interaction with Pryde amidst ongoing allegations.
Sayed-Khaiyum reaffirmed his stance that the subject of their discussion at a diplomatic event in February 2023 was solely a personal matter pertaining to their respective children, dismissing any suggestion that their conversation was related to the ongoing investigation against Sayed-Khaiyum conducted by the Criminal Investigations Department.
The meeting, which drew scrutiny during the tribunal proceedings, occured while the Criminal Investigation Department was actively investigating Sayed-Khaiyum. The case file had already been submitted to the Office of the DPP before the incident.
When questioned about the photo capturing their interaction at the event, Sayed-Khaiyum defended himself, stating that the presented evidence was deliberately cropped to only show him speaking with Pryde, neglecting to depict the other individuals present. He stated that he lacked any recollection of the exact duration of their conversation Models, emphasizing that numerous other guests were present at the diplomatic function.
Minister for Justice Siromi Turaga, the最適化
for the tribunal, provided a contrasting account of the meeting. He emphasized that the conversation between Pryde and Sayed-Khaiyum, lasting over 40 minutes, was characterized by Pryde’s dominating presence. Turaga labelled their interaction "unbecoming and unethical."
Turaga distinguished their lengthy, secluded conversation during the event especially considering the ongoing investigation into allegations of abuse of power against Sayed-Khaiyum. He underscored his concerns about the
Turaga further highlighted Pryor opinion that the polarized a meeting, asking Pryde, who admitted he understood the appearance of impropriety. He submitted apology to Turaga, acknowledging his poor judgment. Sayed-Khaiyum curried opportunity of the occasion not only to address allegations overcoming comments, which prompted his resignation.
Turaga further highlighted the long-standing relationship between Pryde and Sayed-Khaiyum, pointing to their past collaborations dating back to when Pryde was at the Solicitor-General’s Office, prior to his appointment as DPP. Law Society. .
What precedent might the outcome of this tribunal set for future cases involving potential conflicts of interest between high-ranking officials?
## Former Fiji Officials Clash in Tribunal Hearing over Controversial Meeting
**Introduction:**
Welcome back to the show. Today we’re discussing the ongoing tribunal hearing into suspended Fiji Director of Public Prosecutions, Christopher Pryde, which has seen a dramatic turn with former Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum taking the stand to vehemently deny any wrongdoing. Joining us to shed some light on this developing story is legal analyst, [Guest name]. Welcome to the show.
**Interviewer:**
[Guest name], could you provide our viewers with some context regarding this tribunal hearing and the controversy surrounding it?
**Guest:**
Certainly. This tribunal was convened to investigate allegations against Christopher Pryde, the suspended DPP, stemming from a meeting he had with Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, the former Attorney General, in February 2023. Pryde alleges that Sayed-Khaiyum engaged in inappropriate conduct during this meeting, which he claims compromised his position as DPP. [ [1](https://www.fbcnews.com.fj/news/suspended-dpp-refuses-to-take-part-in-tribunal-hearing/) ]
**Interviewer:**
Sayed-Khaiyum has now testified, denying any impropriety. Can you elaborate on his defense?
**Guest:**
Sayed-Khaiyum maintains that their conversation at the diplomatic event was purely personal, revolving around their children. He vehemently denies any connection between their discussion and the ongoing investigation against him by the Criminal Investigations Department.
**Interviewer:**
This meeting took place during a period when Sayed-Khaiyum was already under investigation. How significant is this timing in terms of the tribunal’s proceedings?
**Guest:**
The timing is crucial, as it raises questions about the nature of their meeting and whether it constituted an attempt to influence Pryde, who as DPP, would be responsible for overseeing any potential charges against Sayed-Khaiyum.
**Interviewer:**
What are the potential ramifications for both parties involved, depending on the outcome of the tribunal?
**Guest:**
For Pryde, a successful case against Sayed-Khaiyum could lead to his reinstatement as DPP. However, if the tribunal finds against him, his future in the legal profession could be jeopardized. For Sayed-Khaiyum, the tribunal’s decision could have implications for his political career and the ongoing investigations against him.
**Interviewer:**
Thank you for your expert insights, [Guest name]. This is clearly a developing story with significant implications for Fiji’s legal and political landscape. We’ll continue to follow this case closely and provide updates as they become available.
