ourRULING on an application to dismiss or permanently stay the case against two Choiseul Chiefs and their spokesman, who were accused of making false statements on oath, will be delivered on March 3.
The defendants, John Kokoro, Alosi Jonah and Jerry Pakivai, are charged with making false statements on oath.
During a recent court hearing, their lawyer Joseph Iroga of Florida International Legal Consultancy Services, made an application to dismiss or permanently stay the charges against the defendants on six grounds.
But Public Prosecutor Jeremy Oiofa countered that the application should be dismissed and the trial proceed.
Mr Oiofa argued that the charges against the defendants are not defective or erroneous and that the court should allow the prosecution to proceed with their case.
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by William Chang Fuk Yeh, Director of Greenland Enterprise Limited, who alleged that the defendants made false statements in a sworn statement for a civil case.
The complainant alleged that the defendants signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Greenland Enterprise Limited for logging operations on Vealaviru or Robroy Customary land, which is owned by the Volaikana tribe.
The complainant further alleged that when the tribe made a new agreement with another company, New Venture Limited, only two Chiefs signed the MOA, which is contradictory to the evidence that there were three Chiefs representing the tribe.
The defendants argued that the charges against them are scandalous, vexatious and frivolous and that the court should not accept the means used to achieve the end, which is keeping the prosecution’s charges against them.
They also claimed that the charges were intended to achieve a collateral purpose of punishing them for refusing to back Greenland Enterprise Ltd in its application for a logging license.
Mr Oiofa, however, argued that the application for a stay was premature and an abuse of process as the defendants applied directly to the Magistrate Court, instead of allowing the court to assess the prima facie evidence against them.
A High Court ruling on 24 September 2024 removed the defendants as parties to civil case 88 and therefore their documents filed in court were also removed.
However, the prosecution alleged that the defendants committed a criminal offence by making false statements in their sworn statements for the civil case.
This civil case 88 has now been separated into two distinctive causes of actions – one for breach of contract against the defendants, New Venture and Ever Wind Ltd and the other for Judicial Review against Commissioner of Forest and the Premier of Choiseul Province.
This is regarding Form 1 Application for logging operations on Robroy Islands.
On 19 September 2024, the complainant filed an application for leave to amend the claim for breach of contract and concentrate mainly on the juridical review to avoid procedural irregularities and abuse of court process if both cause of actions are to be allowed in the same proceeding.
On 24 September 2024, the High Court ruled on the application to further amend the claim and further ordered the defendants, New Venture Ltd and Ever Wind Ltd to be removed from Case 88, but instead be sued separately for breach of contract under civil case 493 of 2024.
The prosecution alleged that it was during the civil case 88 that the defendants made statements as to their defence in their sworn statements.
In their sworn statement, the three defendants stated that there were only two Tribal Chiefs representing Volaikana Tribe of Choiseul Province. These two tribal chiefs were Kokoro and Jonah.
The prosecution claimed that the defendants’ sworn statements contradicted their original Memorandum of Agreement and the Supplementary Agreement to that MOA made before the Commissioner of Oaths.
The defendants, however, claimed that their sworn statements were made without any influence and that they were not aware of the exact content of the MOU.
In his sworn statement, defendant Pakivai, the spokesman for the Volaikana Tribe, claimed that he signed the MOU and MOA with New Venture Ltd, a company separate from the complainant’s company, without any external influence.
However, the prosecution alleged that this statement contradicted a letter he wrote to the Commissioner of Forest, which was signed before the Commissioner of Oaths.
In this letter, Pakivai stated that he was manipulated, deceived and coerced into signing the MOU without knowing its exact contents.
By ASSUMPTA BUCHANAN
Solomon Star, Honiara
