Court clarifies reasons for dismissing Falealili 1 application to withdraw petition

By Lagi Keresoma/

Apia, SAMOA – 12 December 2025: The Electoral Court has clarified its reasons for dismissing the Falealili 1 application to withdraw the election petition and counter petition.

The written decision by Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese and Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke states the seriousness of the allegations brought by Tuiloma Tusa Laniselota Lameko (Petitioner) and the counter petition by Falealili 1 sitting Member of Parliament (MP) Toelupe Poumulinuku Onesemo (Respondent).

The decision pointed out “three factors that weighed against the grant to leave.”

One, the unchallenged credible evidence that a $100,000 transaction took place between the Petitioner and Respondent which they called the “gentleman’s agreement.”

Second is the “extensive allegation of bribery and treating in the course of the general election for Falealili 1.

The third reason is the “witness tampering” as confirmed by the Respondent’s submission of the “unwillingness  of witnesses”.

The court noted that the Petitioner and Respondent made no reference  to any consideration  being paid for the withdrawal and the arrangements are purely for maintaining peace, order and harmony in the constituency community.

“In response to the allegations that as part of the agreement to withdraw these proceedings, the Petitioner was paid $100,000 by the Respondent, the Petitioner  invoked his right to silence pursuant to article 9(5) of the Constitution and his privilege against self-incrimination,” said the court.

For the Respondent, his lawyer Muriel Lui said that all procedural requirements have been met.

She also informed the court of witnesses “unwillingness” to give evidence given  the position of Alii ma Faipule and that the grounds on which the parties rely on for their withdrawal is rooted in the customs and culture .

The Court however noted that the Respondent paid $100,000 to the Petitioner, he (Respondent) also invoked his right to silence pursuant to article 9(5) of the Constitution.

The court said the Interveners position was very clear.

“The Intervener submit that the joint application arose from a corrupt arrangement,”

The court also noted that neither the Petitioner nor the Respondent contested the evidence submitted by the Intervener.

With these reasons, the Court dismissed the joint application by the Petitioner and Respondent to withdraw.

CLICK FOR FULL DECISION: Reasons (Joint Motion to withdraw – Falealili 1)