HRPP seeks to revive 'withdrawn' election case, questioning candidates' motives

The Electoral Court is now at the centre of a complex political dispute between the ruling Faatuatua i le Atua Sāmoa ua Tasi (FAST) party and the opposition Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP), following reports of an out-of-court settlement concerning the Falealili No. 1 election petition.

According to local media reports, the case stems from the August general election, during which Deputy Prime Minister Toelupe Maoiautele Poumulinuku Onesemo of FAST defeated HRPP candidate Tuiloma Tusa Laniselota Lameko. Both men initially filed petitions challenging the results, but indicated their intention to withdraw them at the end of October.

At the heart of the dispute are unverified claims, raised by HRPP officials and reported by the Samoa Observer, of a possible payment of ST$100,000 (NZ$63,000) to withdraw the petition. As reported by the Observer, at the end of October, an HRPP official confirmed the party had discussed the petition withdrawal and the alleged payment, which Tuiloma denied. The official stated that the party would not take action without evidence to support such claims.

According to reports, HRPP has since intervened, claiming a private settlement between the two candidates breaches party interests and principles of electoral integrity.

Party leader Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi issued a statement last week saying that “out-of-court settlements are allowing Members of Parliament who are participating in illegal and unethical practices to walk away with impunity”.

HRPP’s legal team, consisting of Faimalomatumua Mathew Lemisio and Francis Ainuu, formally applied last week to join the case. The court, presided over by Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese and Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke, is scheduled to hear that application on Thursday.

Sāmoan electoral law empowers the court to investigate, and if corruption is proven, elections can be invalidated. Photo/Anetone Sagaga

On Tuesday, Satiu confirmed that lawyer Unasa Iuni Sapolu is representing petitioner Tuiloma, replacing Su’a Alex Su’a as counsel. Unasa is opposing the HRPP’s application and has sought to block a witness proposed by the party regarding allegations that money changed hands to facilitate the withdrawal of the petition.

Ahead of Thursday’s hearing, the Chief Justice instructed HRPP’s lawyers to file a supplementary affidavit by the end of business on Wednesday, with responses due by 4pm on the same day.

During the government’s weekly press conference on 7 November, Deputy Prime Minister Toelupe denied any wrongdoing and expressed frustration over the accusations and questions by local reporters.

Watch Sāmoa's Deputy PM at the government's weekly press conference

“I hesitate to speak on something before the court, but it’s not true... the country has already made its choice [FAST government]... don’t forget to remember and keep the respect between us.”

Under the Electoral Act of 2019, attempts to exchange money or benefits for the withdrawal of an election petition may constitute bribery or corrupt practices, which are offences that could invalidate an election result and lead to criminal charges. The legislation also empowers the court to investigate such matters, and if corruption is proven, elections can be invalidated, potentially barring parties from public office.

HRPP argues that, if the alleged settlement payout is true, it undermines these legal provisions and public confidence in the electoral process. The party, citing its status as a registered political entity under Section 132 of the Act, asserts an interest in the continuation of court proceedings.

Tuiloma, the HRPP party candidate at the centre of the case, has not commented on the allegations.

If the HRPP’s application is granted, the party would effectively take over the petition that both candidates agreed to withdraw, allowing the court to examine the alleged payment and decide if any corrupt practices occurred.

The Electoral Court is expected to reconvene on Thursday to consider HRPP’s intervention and to establish whether the Falealili No. 1 petition will proceed to a full hearing or be dismissed.