The Chaudhry Trial: Rajendra Chaudhry slams Justice Paul Madigan for "directing" that an application for stay pending appeal by Mahendra Chaudhry will not be accepted by the Fiji High Court Criminal Registry!

By RAJENDRA CHAUDHRY

Chaudhry further penalised by the incompetent judge Paul Madigan

"Paul Madigan has directed that an application for stay pending appeal by Mahendra Chaudhry will not be accepted by the High Court Criminal Registry.

He said such an application is to be made after sentence. It is beyond belief how a judge can decide which application will be accepted or otherwise. In doing so, Madigan is exercising administrative rather than judicial duties and this is unacceptable and is prejudicial to Chaudhry.

I believe that Madigan is deliberately flouting the law. The stay pending appeal is a right at law for Chaudhry under the Exchange Control Act, which deems no proceedings to be final till an appeal, as filed, is determined or withdrawn. The Court is thus bound by the law.

Notwithstanding the above ground, the Criminal Procedure Decree 2009 also provides for stay of judgment on certain grounds. The relevant part reads:

243. No judgment shall be stayed or reserved on the ground of --

(a) any objection, which if stated after the information was read over to the accused person, or during the progress of the trial, might have been amended by the court; or

(b) of any error committed in summoning or swearing the assessors or any of them; or

(c) any person who has served as an assessor not being qualified to sit as an assessor; or

(d) any objection which might have been stated as a ground of challenge of any of the assessors; or

(e) any informality in swearing the witnesses, or any of them.

Chaudhry's application is not covered in the above prohibitory grounds (a - e) so the Court has jurisdiction to accept and hear it. As such Madigan is bound by law to hear the application. His refusal to do so is mala fides his duties to say the least. Why the wilful blindness of doing what the law says Paul? Fearful that doing things by the law will get you sacked? You are an incompetent judge who is an affront to justice."