Eight witnesses to give evidence in the Safata 2 election petition

By Jeannie Penehuro/

Apia, SAMOA – 22 September 2026 – The Petitioner Leleua Suataga Aso in the Safata 2 election petition has provided 8 witnesses to testify against the Safata 2 Member of Parliament and Respondent, Tuia Paepae Pua Letoa.

The hearing started yesterday on the allegation of bribery that is linked to the distribution of the compensation money for the district from the sunken HMNZS Manawanui at Safata in October 2024.

According to the Petitioners affidavit, the timing of the compensation money distribution accounts to bribery as it was close to the districts by-election in June where Tuia was elected.

The first witness was the Petitioners wife, Alofisa Aso who said she, her husband and 16 others of her family received their compensation paid through the Petitioners bank account on 30 June 2026 a few days before the by-election.

Defence counsel Muriel Lui for the Respondent asked Alofisa if she understood the Government process in distributing funds.

“Yes, I understand and I am aware of the work process required, but I believe the compensation money we received a few days before the by-election, felt like a bribe,” she said.

Muriel then asked if she and her husband called receiving and accepting the compensation fund on the same day a bribery.

Alofisa said the money is for all of Safata residents, and it wasn’t just them that received the money in her husbands’ account but also other members of their family.

Justice Leiataualesā Daryl Clarke intervened and informed Muriel that she should be more fair with her questions to the witness.

Counsel for the Petitioner, Magele Leone Su’a Mailo opposed Muriels’ line of questioning.

She pointed out that Alofisa’s affidavit clearly stated that both her and her husband along with other family members received their compensation on Leleua’s account.

Alofisa also said that if they knew of the time frame between the distribution of the funds and the by-election, they would not accept it until after the by-election.

The second witness was Toleafoa Losalia Sagalala Niumata who was a candidate in the Safata 2 by-election.

She said that she was also a part of the Safata 2 Committee elected to oversee the compensation fund which was later dissolved when the Government took over the distribution process.

Muriel explained to the witness that at the time the fund was supposed to be distributed, the Government was facing problems that triggered a by-election.

“Do you accept that the political situation may have delayed the distribution of the $10 million that was received in June?” Lui asked.

Toleafoa said that despite things that were happening with the Government which was not involved with it at the time, she believes it may have an impact on the delay of  distribution.

“When I checked my bank account, I got the money on the 30 June and the by-election scheduled for the 10th of the same month.”

Toleafoa also said that the district was not given a proper consultation after the Deputy Prime Minister Mulipola Anarosa Ale Molioo gave Safata options of the district handling the distribution or handing it over to the Government to distribute.

She also emphasized that it was not just the Safata district residents that received the compensation, but also other Safata families that lived outside of Safata.

The Petitioners’ witnesses were consistent on one key point, that they understood the process and the timeframe for distributing the Manawanui compensation payments was illegal according to the law.

Of the $10m tala compensation more than $6 million had been distributed to Safata families by early July, with the Disaster Advisory Committee saying the payments were part of an established process for distributing the funds.