Connect with us

Court

UPDATE: Supreme Court Orders Parliament to Meet Within Seven Days

Published

on

HRPP and FAST supporters leaving court after the decision was delivered
HRPP and FAST supporters leaving court after the decision was delivered

APIA, SAMOA – 28 JUNE 2021: Samoa’s Supreme Court has ordered that Parliament meets within seven days so that “Parliament may discharge its constitutional and other functions in accordance with Part V of the Constitution and the Standing Order of Parliament.”

Delivered by Justice Vui Clarence Nelson for the court that included Justice Lestatele Rapi Vaai and Justice Fepuleai Ameperosa Roma, the decision also found the swearing in of the Speaker and other officials in a tent outside the Parliamentary Chamber on Monday 24 May 2021 at 5:00 pm in the absence of the Head of State and others, was unconstitutional, unlawful and contrary to the customary practice for such matters and therefore be deemed void and of no effect.

The ruling also said that “It seems reasonably clear that the Executive arm of Government has deliberately and unlawfully prolonged the calling of Parliament for plainly political reasons. In so doing it has ignored various rulings of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal of the country leading to a constitutional breach which can only be repaired once Parliament meets.”

FULL DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT: 
Judgment Attorney General v Matafeo George Latu & Others 28 June 21

The Court ordered that the Proclamation of the Head of State dated 20 May 2021 to convene Parliament, be given full force and effect by the Attorney General without further delay or procrastination.

The Attorney General is to advise the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and all other relevant parties of “relevant actors” as the case may be to comply with the said Proclamation and convene the Parliament.

It also ordered failure to convene Parliament in accordance with the 20 May 2021 Proclamation of the Head of State would constitute a change of circumstances that would justify the Court revisiting the issue of necessity and whether the doctrine now requires to be invoked in the Respondents favour and declare that the swearing-in of 24 May 2021 by the Respondents is valid so that the business of lawful governance of the nation can proceed.

In its orders, the Court ruled

  • To reaffirm once again the validity of the Proclamation by the Head of State dated 20 May 2021 convening Parliament;
  • Find the swearing in of the Speaker and other officials by the first Respondents in a tent outside the Parliamentary Chamber on Monday 24 May 2021 and 5:00 pm in the absence of the Head of State and others was in circumstances that prevailed unconstitutional, unlawful and contrary to the customary practice for such matters and should therefore be deemed void and of no effect;
  • We are mindful however that there may continue to be ongoing efforts to prevent or obstruct the convening of Parliament in accordance with the Proclamation of the Head of State dated 20 May 2021;

The court gave the following declaratory orders:

  • The Proclamation of the Head of State dated 20 May 2021 is to forthwith be given full force and effect by the Applicant (Attorney General) without further delay or procrastination.
  • The Attorney General advise the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and all other relevant parties of “relevant actors” as the case may be to comply with the said Proclamation and convene the Parliament of Samoa within 7 days so that Parliament may discharge its constitutional and other functions in accordance with Part V of the Constitution and the Standing Order of Parliament;
  • The Attorney General to further advise all concerned that any attempt to undermine or subvert this process is tantamount to a contempt of the Head of State, the Supreme Court and of Parliament within the terms and Rule 85 of the Standing Orders for which appropriate action will lie;
  • Failure to convene Parliament in accordance with the above and the 20 May 2021 Proclamation of the Head of State in our opinion would constitute a change of circumstances that would justify the Court revisiting the issue of necessity and whether the doctrine now requires to be invoked in the Respondents favour and declare that the swearing-in of 24 May 2021 by the Respondents in these circumstances is valid so that the business of lawful governance of the nation can proceed.
  • Each party to be bear its own costs.