A recording allegedly of Tuiloma Lance Lameko telling Namulauulu Sami Leota that he had received two payments totalling to $100,000 tala was played before the Supreme Court of Samoa this morning during the hearing to decide whether HRPP would join proceedings in the Falealili 1 post-election petitions.
The hearing of an application by HRPP to join the post-election petitions between Falealili 1 candidates, Hon Toelupe Poumulinuku Onesemo and Tuiloma Laniselota Lameko was heard in a packed Courtroom before Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese and Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke this morning.
The Court heard a telephone recording which Faasaleleaga 3 MP Namulauulu Sami Leota says he had recorded, alleging it is a conversation between himself and Falealili 1 election candidate Tuiloma Laniselota Lameko.
In the recording, the Court heard the alleged voice of Tuiloma telling Namulauulu that he was paid $30,000 tala by Deputy Prime Minister Hon Toelupe Poumulinuku Onesemo, “at their second meeting”.
The same voice (allegedly of Tuiloma Laniselota) goes on to tell Namulauulu that he had received another payment of $70,000 tala, allegedly delivered by the wife of an MP “Vui Sione” the Court heard.
A number of affidavits were read out by the Court Registrar. Those of Hon Toelupe Poumulinuku Onesemo, Namulauulu Sami Leota, Lealailepule Rimoni Aiafi and Deputy Opposition Leader, Hon Fonotoe Pierre Lauofo.
Fonotoe’s affidavit recalls an HRPP caucus meeting in October where it is alleged Tuiloma was asked about a payment of $100,000 from Toelupe.
Fonotoe alleges that when confronted with Namulauulu’s allegation, Tuiloma did not deny the allegations and instead, told the HRPP caucus that the arrangement between himself and Toelupe was a “gentlemen’s agreement”.
Counsel for Tuiloma, Su’a Alex Su’a told the Court that Tuiloma reserved his right under the Constitution to not respond. He further argued that the evidence on the recording as well as the signed affidavits, was all hearsay.
Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese and Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke both took issue with this stance and told Counsel that if his client is choosing to not respond to the evidence, then he cannot argue it is hearsay.
Samoa’s leading provider of ICT Solutions.
Counsel for Toelupe, Muriel Lui told the Court the allegations were outside of the jurisdiction of the Electoral Court. Lui said the allegations were a matter for the Criminal Court and Lui also argued hearsay.
The Supreme Court judges said if the case is to be heard as Criminal Court proceedings, then the process would be further prolonged and the Court could call on bank statements and other personal information as evidence.
On Tuesday the Court dismissed an Application by Alii and Faipule of Falealili 1 asking to join court proceedings in support of Toelupe and Tuiloma’s joint wish to withdraw the case.
Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese had asked whether the alleged $100,000 tala payment to the petitioner was ever put to the Alii and Faipule, if they had a position regarding the allegation.
“Have the Alii and Faipule been informed of the alleged $100,000 tala given by the respondent to the petitioner?”
“What do they have to say about that?’
The hearing continued this afternoon with Counsel submissions.
Public Notices
ICT HELPDESK ANALYST
Latest posts by Grace Pouoa (see all)
Post Views: 2,003
