Court Rules for Public Interest, HRPP Interim Order Denied

The Supreme Court has ruled against the interim injunction sought by the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) to hold off changes to the District Development Project committees.

HRPP had asked the Court to issue interim orders to prevent the appointments of DDC Chairs from taking effect and to halt the recruitment and selection processes for District Development Council positions until the full hearing is determined.

The petition was filed by the HRPP political party against the Prime Minister, the Government of Samoa, and the Ministry of Women, Community and Social Development.

HRPP is arguing that elected Members of Parliament should continue to serve as Chairpersons of DDCs in their respective districts, as was the case under the programme’s 2024 manual. HRPP further argues the Government’s current changes, now enacted under the new Act, are unlawful and unfair.

“The Court considers the public interest would be materially prejudiced by an order staying the development project because of the effect that this may have on Samoa’s wider economic and national interests.”

In delivering the decision on Monday morning, the Chief Justice said halting the programme would have significant consequences for districts and communities.

“An injunction would have the consequence of preventing the DDC from carrying out its mandate to distribute further funds to the community, which, in the absence of any contrary evidence has so far been carried out in good faith..”

The Court in its decision refers to the recent enactment of the District Development Act by Parliament this month, stating the DDA appears to demonstrate the Government’s commitment to the longevity of the Development Program.

“There is no apparent reason as to why the continuity of a long-term economic project for “development initiatives that will benefit the district’,’ and its integration into the Government’s overall economic strategy should be halted, whilst governance issues concerning the rightful Chairperson is being debated.”

The Court highlighted that the issue in this case is not about the merits of the economic development project, but about who should be the Chairperson of an incorporated society – the DDC.

Overall justice

,”The Court, standing back, considers the overall justice falls in favour of the Respondents, even if it could be said the Applicants had an arguable issue,” states the decision.

“The Court gives due regard to the public interest as the beneficiary of the development project..

“The Court considers the public interest would be materially prejudiced by an order staying the development project because of the effect that this may have on Samoa’s wider economic and national interests.”

“The halting of grants for such things as school fees may have far reaching and unintended consequences for students, families, and their community schools..”

The Court considered that If the programme is halted then “none of the community-based applications… can be considered or allocated for the foreseeable future,” stated His Honour Satiu Leatigagaeono Simativa Perese in his ruling.

The Court ruled that staying the development project would not be in the best interest of the nation, stating that public interest would be materially prejudiced by staying the development project.

In delivering his ruling, Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese said the Court would not step into policy decisions set by Government.

“The Court does not rewrite government policy,” the Chief Justice said.

He also noted that the programme manual is understood to [be] a living document and can accommodate changes in conditions and policies.”

On claims of bias and unfairness, the Court said: “The criteria on its face reasonably suggest sound governance and accountability rather than actual or implicit bias.”

“The application for interim relief is dismissed.”

The Case is adjourned until 9 April with a full hearing set for July 2026.