The Honourable Speaker, Papali’i Li’o Ta’eu Masipau’s response to my letter to the Editor underscores the points that I raised regarding the perception and reality of impartiality.
It is evident that the Speaker is unaware that, like Judges of the Court, the dignity of the position requires maintaining silence and refraining from issuing public statements and press releases on social media and newspapers.
My comments, therefore, were intended as “constructive guidance.”
He clearly carries the unenviable heavy burden of balancing his constitutional responsibilities as Speaker with his duties as a senior member of the Faatuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi Party.
The question of the confidence in Fiame Naomi Mata’afa’s Prime Ministership is certainly not going away and remains confusing in Parliament.
However, what is clear is the Speaker’s views on Fiame’s leadership abilities having signed the FAST Party letter on that subject and made certain rulings in connection with what to wear in Parliament to embarrass the PM even more.
When political leaders put forward proposals in these public opinion columns it is for the consideration of the people of the nation.
Such is the case with raising the idea of an independently elected Speaker, which is done in other countries.
So, while we appreciate the detailed technical explanation of the role of constitutional offices and how public proposals become law, that is not the point of this political discourse.
These issues are beyond individuals and the offices they hold.
It is what is best for the country and its people.
This is about nation building and lessons that Samoa has learned from the constitutional crises that have arisen during these turbulent times.
Over the last four years we have experienced the difference between the theory of accountability, transparency and the rule of law and what it takes to actually uphold it.
Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi
Leader of HRPP