COMMENT: When the Law Is An Ass

By Lance Polu/

Apia, Samoa – 31 May 2025 – Although as long ago as in 1838 – eight years after Christianity first arrived in Samoa from London, the English proverbial expression – “the law is an ass” may even find significance in the current interpretation of the law in our ensuing political crisis.

In Charles Dickens classic Oliver Twist, the lines were said by a miserable Mr Bumble, husband of a domineering wife. In court, he was told that “the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction.”

Mr Bumble however replies: “If the law supposes that, the law is a ass – a idiot.”

In a day, 1 June, Samoa will turn 63 – as an ‘independent’ nation. This past Tuesday, 27 May, Fiame’s government fell when its budget was rejected on the floor of parliament by 16 – 34 votes against.

19 MPs of the FAST Party led by former Cabinet Minister and former Speaker Laauli Leuatea Polataivao Schmidt and 15 MPs of the Opposition Human Rights Protection Party defeated the budget on first reading. One Opposition MP voted for and two Opposition MPs abstained.

Before the vote, Fiame and his cabinet pushed to have the country listen to the “gems” in the budget before it was put to a vote. Fiame and her Cabinet insisted there must be reasons why a budget should be rejected, and MPs and the public should know its content first so they can decide to vote for or against.

It was a futile effort however, to “sugarcoat” the public with offers such as $1.8m per constituency under the final disbursement of the $1M Tala District Development Project.

KILLING THE VISION
After all, none of Fiame and her 14 Cabinet Ministers were ever part of the original vision and concept of the $1M Tala District Development Project.

It remains one of the most innovative projects in the FAST Partys 2021 election manifesto. It was the work of Laauli and three others, that formed the core of the FAST Party’s policies and manifesto.

Recently, Fiame and her Cabinet’s decisions have shifted the $1M project’s original vision that will compromise and ultimately kill the project.

In her ministerial statement before the budget was defeated, Fiame warned that as a matter of confidence, she will advise the Head of State to dissolve Parliament if the budget is defeated.

Sounding like a domineering Mrs Bumble, it was more a threat to MPs who naturally do not want to risk going back to early elections; than Fiame and her cabinet not wanting to abruptly end the cosy ride.

In the process, she missed (or undermined) the point that since January, one of the critical reasons against her and her cabinet was the legality of her minority government now pushing through a budget and seeking justification for their own existence to continue.

Of course she haughtily referred to two motions of no confidence against her that she survived. But the circumstances and the political wrangling that surrounded the two motions, reflected in the result. First, the 20 FAST MPs rejected the first motion because they wanted the critical legislations such as the Constitutional Amendment passed first. Then HRPP cuffed back by rejecting the FAST MPs motion.

This time, in less than an hour of the budget session, it was confirmed that Fiame had long lost the confidence of the majority of the Members of Parliament.

CAN FIAME STILL ADVICE THE HEAD OF STATE
So just having lost the confidence of Parliament, can she still have the authority to advise the Head of State to dissolve parliament; and remain as the caretaker government?

In essence, the Executive has fallen and only Parliament and the Judiciary, as the other two pillars of our democracy remain functioning.

So was the Head of State’s decision in order to appoint Fiame and her cabinet to continue as the caretaker government?

The Clerk of Parliament reported to the Head of State the result of Tuesday’s vote and proceedings; the composition of parliament and who had the confidence of the majority of MPs.

But that was ignored and labelled legally flawed.

The first time a national budget was defeated was in December 1982 and Tofilau Eti Alesana was appointed by the Head of State afterwards as Prime Minister of the HRPP Government as he had the confidence of the majority of parliament then. The Head of State did not dissolve parliament.

But with the composition of the current parliament, the two recognized parties are FAST with 29 MPs and HRPP with 18. Fiame and 5 others in her Cabinet have been terminated by the Party and Fiame herself publicly declared she is no longer a member of the FAST Party since their termination on 15 January this year.

But consider this state of comical contradictions!

34 MPs have voted out a Prime Minister and her government. She is no longer the PM and as an ordinary MP went to the Head of State and advised for her to be reappointed to continue in a position the majority of elected MPs had just voted her out?

Then oddly, the 34 MPs will now lose their status as MPs, salaries and benefits of their positions and cast out as ordinary citizens, while the group they had voted out, continue graciously for at least six months until a new government is elected and sworn in. It becomes more like what the Bishop said to the lady…. “This is utterly hypocritical!!”

15 MPs RESIGN AND WANT SHARE OF FAST PARTY FUNDS 
Three days to the day the Head of State announced to dissolve Parliament, Fiame and 14 of her cabinet announced today they have resigned from the FAST Party.

But fancy this… They did not lodge their letter of resignation with the Party’s executive; but rather in a letter on a Ministry of Public Enterprises Letterhead, to the Bank declaring that they have resigned as members of FAST and wanted their share of the party funds from a recent fundraising.

The letter said that they want the funds as they have set up their own political party. It was signed by just Fiame’s name, no designation, whether she is caretaker PM or whatever party she leads.

Again fancy this! Still Members of Parliament, Fiame and the 14 have resigned from the political party that they were official registered and sworn in as MPs. By law, they should have lost their seats and go back to by-elections.

But boldness may be building up that parliament will be dissolved and it is in  a very tight and tricky timeslot; through the weekend and public holiday before Parliament gathers for the last time for the Head of State to declare it dissolved on Wednesday 3 June 2025. Smart or just lip-servicing the rule of law?

Where is the Speaker who has been further targeted after he and the Clerk wrote to the Head of State promoting an alternative caretaker government when the Budget was defeated? Or is it too much now to do anything within the law to reverse the Head of States declaration?

So Mr Bumble in Oliver Twist may feel good to be told in court that the law supposes his wife is under his direction.

Great!

But in reality, living with a domineering one points the law to a ass.