The Attorney General's response to the press statement by the Fiji Law Society on the judicial review application filed by the society
May 16, 2008, 12:30

In its press release of 6 May 2008, the Fiji Law Society (“Society”) in response to an article published by The Australian, is purporting to suggest that it considers its judicial review application against the Judicial Services Commission to be “constitutional and fundamental importance.” And that the Society is pushing for a speedy hearing of this application. Once again, the Society is making misleading allegations, which do little credit to the entire legal profession.

The Society is also in its response making only selective references in that it only refers to the period post March 2008.

The simple and undisputed fact remains that the Society had filed its case over one year ago, on 19 April 2007. The State had promptly filed its Notice of Opposition on 27 April 2007, and in June 2007 had also filed an affidavit in response. From April 2007 to March 2008, the Society had not been able to get its act together to seek suitable legal representation. From April 2007, this application has been called in Court on a number of occasions. Indeed, in September 2007, the Society was ordered to pay costs of $100.00 after the Society or its solicitors failed to appear in Court.

The firm of solicitors which had filed the initial application on behalf of the Society in April 2007, withdrew in October 2007 and Messrs. Fa & Company were appointed the solicitors for the Society. Interestingly, when the matter was called in Court in November 2007, the counsel representing the Society again informed the Court that the Society is looking to brief this matter to another solicitor, and had sought an adjournment to next. The Court gracefully adjourned the case for about three months to February 2008 to allow the Society to take proper instructions.

It is worth noting that when the matter was called in February 2008, the Society sought further adjournment to obtain legal counsel. On this occasion, the State objected to any further adjournments. On this occasion, the Court gave one final adjournment to the Society to arrange for counsel to represent the Fiji Law Society.

After all these adjournments and failure on the part of the Society to proceed with due dispatch, the matter was referred to a judge in March 2008.

The record of adjournments and non-appearance on the part of the Society in this matter is clear indicia of the failure on the part of the Society to proceed promptly to have its application heard.

It is therefore ironic for the Society to issue a press release to say that it is pushing for a speedy hearing, when its lackluster approach to prosecuting this case is self-evident from the records.


Ends-
No: 0731