Court to Rule on Bribery Allegations Over Timing of Manawanui Compensation

The court has reserved its ruling on an election petition alleging that the timing and promotion of compensation payments to Safata residents amounted to bribery during the Safata No. 2 by-election.

Independent candidate Leleua Suataga filed the petition against Member of Parliament Tuia Pu’a Fuatogi Letoa who won the recent by-election triggered by his decision to cross the floor from HRPP to FAST.

The five allegations concern the distribution of funds, government involvement and a FAST Party roadshow held during Tuia’s campaign.

The compensation followed the sinking of the New Zealand naval vessel HMNZS Manawanui.

The ship ran aground on a reef off the south coast of Upolu on 5 October 2024 while conducting a survey and sank the next day.

All 75 people on board were rescued. In October 2025, the New Zealand Government paid the Samoa Government SAT$10 million following a request for compensation. Funds were later allocated to affected people in Safata.

In final submissions, the petitioner’s counsel, Magele Leone Su’a Mailo, said there was no dispute that Safata residents were entitled to compensation. Nor was it suggested that the scheme had originally been created for an electoral purpose.

“It is also not disputed that the distribution of the funds involved an extensive administrative process,” said Magele.

“The evidence demonstrates, however, that the people of Safata had been pursuing compensation since 2024 and had, over a considerable period, complied with successive surveys, verification exercises, documentation requirements and the execution of MOUs required by Government before payment could be made.”

Her argument focused on the government’s control over the timing of payments to residents shortly before the election, and the public association of those payments with Tuia during his campaign.

Counsel said Tuia did not accept that the government acted as his agent, but accepted that the FAST Party acted on his behalf at a roadshow organised to promote his candidacy.

Tuia’s counsel, Muriel Lui, argued that he had not appointed the government as his agent.

Ms Lui argued the decision to distribute the funds followed recommendations from an independent Cabinet-appointed committee.

Justice Leiataualesā Daryl Clarke asked whether Cabinet members attended the roadshow as FAST Party members or in their government roles.

Ms Lui said they attended as party members, while acknowledging that they were also members of the government.

Justice Leutele Mata Tuatagaloa questioned the government’s presence at the event.

Asked by Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke whether distributing the money at that time had been unwise, Ms Lui said it was perhaps unwise, but argued that it did not constitute corrupt practice.

The court has reserved its decision.