Sagaga 2 MP Fined $2000 for Contempt of Court

By Lagi Keresoma/

Apia, Samoa – 19 February 2025 – The Supreme Court has fined Member of Parliament for Sagaga 2, Maulolo Tavita Amosa and three others $2000 for contempt of court.

The penalty highlights the Court’s denouncement of such behaviour against the court orders.

The decision was delivered today by Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese.

The Respondents are Maulolo, Ututaaloga Charlie Ulia, Fata Lokeni and Fata Vaafai Tolutasi.

The Applicants are Sala Fili Lauano and others on behalf of the Alii ma Faipule of Leauvaa village.

“I impose on the Respondents a fine in the sum of ST2,000, payable to the Registrar within 14 days as of today. As I say, I regard the anarchic behaviour as troubling and I need to send a strong message to denounce your behaviour,” the Chief Justice ruled.

He also awarded costs of $1000 against the Respondents on account of the contempt of court issue and $500 on the “ill-conceived application for recusal of the judge from residing over the matter.”

“I understand from Maulolo’s affidavit that the Respondents take responsibility for instructing their lawyers to raise recusal as part of their litigation strategy of leaving no stone unturned. Let it be so, but there is a cost consequence for that decision,” said Perese.

His Honour also awarded costs of $500 against the Applicants in relation to the application for joinder, which was dismissed.

The contempt
The contempt of court charge against Maulolo and others stemmed from breaching the court’s order issued on 11 October 2024 to stop work on the disputed land at Leauva’a as there was a case pending before the Court.

On 23 December 2024, the court found Maulolo and others guilty of contempt and the decision on their conviction was delivered today.

“I note that since the 23 December decision, the Respondents have ceased their dangerous, intimidating and ugly behaviour towards people living on disputed land who identify as belonging to the village of Leauva’a,” he said.

Perese said the Respondents sought to characterise their actions as arising from their inability to control themselves and frustration at how long it was taking for their matter to be resolved in court.

He said even if that was so, it does not excuse actions of intimidation and bullying by the Respondents against the Applicants.

“The breaches in this case warrant more than an admonishment or telling off. Although there was no name calling and insulting of Judges, I consider it extremely serious that the court’s orders, which were intended to maintain peace, were deliberately breached,” said Perese.

CLICK FOR FULL DECISION: Lauano & Ors v Amosa & Ors (Contempt of Court sentence)