Vijaya Sumputh argues that the two charges brought against her by the Independent Commission Against Corruption lack specificity, thereby depriving her of her right to a fair trial. The ICAC counters that the information provided is sufficiently detailed. This argument was presented on Monday, July 1, 2024, before the Financial Crimes Division as part of the trial brought against the lawyer for conflict of interest.
The former director of the Trust Fund for Specialised Medical Care (TFSMC) filed a motion on 16 May 2024 through her lawyer, Mr Fezal Boodhoo. She sought more details on the two charges of conflict of interest brought against her before the Financial Crimes Division (FCD). The Independent Commission against Corruption (Icac), represented by Mr Trishul Naga, objected to her motion.
On Monday 1 July 2024, Mr Boodhoo argued that the Icac must clarify the term “taking part”, which can have different interpretations. He asked the Icac to specify what his client is accused of so that she knows what line of defence to adopt in order not to find herself in an ambush.
As for the Icac lawyer, he insisted on the fact that the accusations were sufficiently detailed and had been communicated to the defense. Mr. Naga also specified that the defense is in the presence of the list of witnesses and the various depositions. Magistrate Neeshal Jugnauth will deliver his judgment on August 7, 2024.
Me Vijaya Kumaree Sumputh has pleaded not guilty to two charges of conflict of interest. The anti-corruption commission accuses her of having, on March 4, 2015 and January 18, 2017, participated in two meetings of the TFSMC Board of Directors during which the payment of a monthly allowance of Rs 45,000 and Rs 100,000 respectively had been approved in her favor.
