Judge Mata’utia Raymond Schuster of Samoa’s District Court has questioned the professionalism of individual law firms involved as counsels for the Human Rights Protection Party, following the frivolous and/or vexatious applications to recount the votes for 10 Constituencies in Samoa’s recent general elections.
Judge Schuster presided over four out of the 10 applications to recount filed by HRPP candidates against elected FAST party MPs.
The Judge offered his observations and insights in a strongly worded obiter dictum to his ruling on the Faasaleleaga 5 recount.
“I must, as a judicial officer and part of the third branch of this democratic government, raise a point of concern relating to all four applications..”
Judge Schuster highlights that in filing the applications, all three individual law firms involved as counsels for the HRPP candidates, “provided affidavit material for the Applicants with the exactly the same annexures and exactly the same grounds” of systematic issues for questioning the official count of the winning candidates.
“This is quite unusual in a legal fraternity, notwithstanding whether it’s the size of Australia or Niue,” he said.
Section 85 of Samoa’s Electoral Act allows for a candidate to apply to the Court for a recount, for abnormalities that may have occurred during the election process and/or during the official count of their constituency votes.
In his decision Judge said that if counsels had bothered to carry out “a proper legal analysis” of the general information provided, it would have “led to the conclusion” that none of the applications apply to Section 85.
“The further absence of specific evidence to support such a general statement is a real concern, not to be expected from an ancient profession,” stated Judge Mata’utia Raymond Schuster.
“This, in my view shows an absence of professional legal impartiality, professional legal independence, professional legal analysis and professional legal intuition so far as to assessing the crucial and specific nature of the election process in each of the four Applicants’ unique constituency of which the law firms represented..
“In a volatile political climate, the independence and sound voice of the legal fraternity is crucial to overcome legal uncertainty and clarify processes in a situation where every individual with or without legal training seems to have an opinion about the law,” he said.
“Lawyers must rise above emotions, loyalties, biases, talking points, innuendos and hyperbole’s to provide sound legal advise in order for people to make sound and prudent choices..
“This is telling especially on the issue as to whether the application was frivolous and/or vexatious..”
Judge Schuster points out that the Winning Candidates who had to engage counsel and be part of the legal proceedings, have now all filed for costs.
“The application deposit shall be withheld for now until determination of the issues of cost,” concludes Judge Schuster.
Frivolous and/or Vexatious Applications?
The four Constituencies before Judge Schuster included: Aana Alofi 3, Faasaleleaga 1, Faasalelelaga 5 and Alataua-i-Sisifo.
For Aana Alofi 3, the official count had HRPP’s Niuapu Aloifaiva Tanuvasa with 473 votes while the Winning Candidate, Agaseata Tanuvasa Valelio polled 896 votes.
There were 423 votes between the HRPP Applicant to recount votes, and the Winning FAST Candidate. It is noted that this Application was later withdrawn by Counsel.
For Faasaleleaga 1 – the Winning Candidate was 141 votes ahead. Leatigaga Matafai Lauina IIiga of FAST polled 866 while the HRPP Applicant before the Courts, Pipi Pauli Tevita Tariu Sinapati of HRPP polled 725.
For Faasaleleaga 5 there were between the Winning FAST Candidate, Vui I’iga Sione I’iga (468) and Peseta Vaifou Tevagena of HRPP (388) who applied for a recount.
For Alataua-i-Sisifo, the Winning Candidate, Taituave Lafaitele Taatiti (522) of FAST was 45 votes ahead of Aliimalemanu Moti Alofa (477) after the official count.
Some HRPP Applicants were placed third after the official count, and still applied for recounts under S85.
The race for Aleipata Itupa-i-Luga had the HRPP Applicant, Fuaava Saumalu Penaia (210) 8 votes behind Alailesulu Faapalo Toomalatai (218) and 136 votes behind the Winning Candidate, Taufua Edmund Taufua of FAST.
Similarly with Gagaifomauga 2, the HRPP Applicant was also in third place after the official count..
Tologataua Sooalo Sioeli Alofaifo of HRPP polled 303 votes to be placed third. The second placed candidate, Falesaopule Seimaleula Vaialia with 310 votes did not apply for a recount.
After the official count by OEC, the HRPP Applicant and popular radio host, Sioeli, was 31 votes behind Winning Candidate Foisala Lilo Tuu Ioane.
However after the Court count, Foisala remained at 334 while Sioeli lost 2 votes – dropping down from 303 votes to 301.
No Evidence of OEC Bias
All 10 Applications filed by HRPP candidates did not result in any changes to the official count by the Office of the Electoral Commissioner.
Judge Mata’utia Raymond Schuster states in his decision that he found no evidence of Electoral Office bias, incompetence or negligence in conducting the election on polling day and pre-Polling.
“I also find that there is no evidence that the systemic issues raised affected the result of the election in Fa’asalelelaga 5. This application based on the evidence had no prospect of success notwithstanding the margin of votes between the Applicant and the First Respondent.”
Judge Schuster then certified the declaration of official results issued by the Elelctoral Commissioner on the 5th September 2025 to be correct and accurate.
- Today in History: 10 Oct 1970 – Fiji Gains Independence - October 10, 2026
- Former Electoral Official Ordered to Attend Rehabilitation Programmes - October 7, 2026
- New Specialist Hospital Breaks Ground in Savai‘i, Set to Change the Landscape of Health Service Delivery in Samoa - September 16, 2026
