The Suva Magistrates Court has ruled that a caution interview conducted with a former clerical officer is admissible as evidence in an ongoing criminal case.
Resident Magistrate Charles Ratakele delivered the ruling on 20 May 2025 in the case against Ms. Talica Veiraurau, who is charged with One (1) Count of Abuse of Office.
It is alleged that between 11 March 2020 and 20 March 2020, while employed as a Clerical Officer at the Office of the Registrar of Lands, Titles and Deeds, Ms. Veiraurau lodged a caveat on the Titles Deeds Registration System (TDRS) over a native lease without proper documentation.
Through her legal counsel, Ms. Veiraurau had challenged the admissibility of the statements she made during the caution interview, raising eight grounds.
Among the claims, she argued that she was not promptly or adequately informed—either by the Registrar of Titles or a FICAC investigator—of the reasons for her interrogation, her right to remain silent, or the consequences of waiving that right.
She further claimed she was not given adequate opportunity to consult legal counsel in private at the start of the interview, and that her statements were obtained under oppressive circumstances, in breach of Sections 13(1) and 14(2) of the Constitution.
However, in ruling on the defence's voir dire application, RM Ratakele found that none of the defence’s arguments were substantiated.
“Having reviewed the evidence and testimony presented by FICAC, the court finds the evidence compelling,” he said.
He noted that the audio-visual recordings, accompanying transcriptions, and the consistent testimonies of prosecution witnesses pointed to a single conclusion: that the caution interview was conducted fairly and voluntarily.
“The defendant answered all questions without coercion or threats,” he said.
“Accordingly, the caution interview is admissible as evidence.”
The matter has been adjourned to 29 May 2025 for mention, to fix a hearing date.