Samoa’s Attorney General, Su’a Helena Wallwork Lamb, has deemed the Human Rights Protection Party’s (HRPP) request to activate the 10 percent quota for women in parliament as untimely. Lamb asserted that the Electoral Commissioner acted within the law, countering HRPP counsel Savalenoa Mareva Betham Annandale’s claims regarding the non-activation of the quota following the Head of State’s confirmation of the 51 newly elected Members of Parliament after the August 29 general election.
Lamb noted that arguments presented by the applicants suggesting the Court of Appeal could differentiate between Article 44 (1A) and Article 52 of the Constitution are unfounded. The HRPP’s application intends to prompt the Electoral Court to reconsider the timeline for enabling the quota aimed at securing a sixth woman parliamentarian.
She explained that the Court of Appeal had previously backed the Electoral Court’s ruling from June 2021, which established that the 10 percent quota could only come into effect after a by-election. However, the Court of Appeal did not fully engage with the relationship between Article 44 and Article 52, according to Lamb.
Under Article 44, a minimum of 10 percent of the Legislative Assembly must be women, correlating to the current minimum of five woman members. This provision stipulates that elected members may consist of or include additional representatives as per specified clauses. In contrast, Article 52 dictates the timing and requirements for when the Legislative Assembly convenes, mustering all members as confirmed by the Head of State’s writ shortly after elections.
Savalenoa contended that Article 52 necessitates the presence of all 51 MPs, including additional women, during the assembly’s first session post-election. However, Justice Leiataualesa questioned the authority of the Electoral Court to challenge a Court of Appeal decision. While Savalenoa did not contest the prior ruling, she argued that a different outcome might have occurred had the judges thoroughly evaluated the interaction between Articles 44 and 52.
The dialogue highlighted concerns about how a possible delay in activating the 10 percent quota could affect the legitimacy of the parliament. Savalenoa maintained that failure to comply with Article 44 would jeopardize the completeness of the Legislative Assembly’s composition.
The Attorney General dismissed the applicants’ claims regarding the overlap of Articles 44 and 52, citing prior rulings which clarified the activation timeline for the 10 percent quota. Lamb reaffirmed that Article 52 operates autonomously in addressing parliamentary convening times following elections, establishing the necessity for timely meetings of the Assembly as detailed within the constitutional framework.
Mauga Precious Chang, representing the FAST party, echoed the Attorney General’s call for denial of the HRPP’s application, noting the similarities in their arguments. Justice Leiataualesa has reserved his decision, which is expected to be delivered prior to Christmas.
This ongoing legal debate underscores the complexities of constitutional law and representation, particularly the importance of women’s inclusion in governance. As discussions unfold, the hope remains that all parties can work towards a resolution that upholds democratic principles while ensuring that the representation of women in parliament is adequately addressed.
Leave a comment