ON A DRACONIAN LAW (Re: Samoa Parliament)
Presently on Samoa’s political front, news of two Members of Parliament (MP) of the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) have resigned as members of that party. Now the HRPP leadership wants them to vacate their seats in Parliament and hold by-elections according to a law (a draconian one I think) passed a few years ago when the HRPP was in power. The two MP’s insist that they should instead remain as Independents and now the case is going to be decided by the Supreme Court, per the Constitution.
Two years ago, I wrote specifically about the above-mentioned law here in my blog, not knowing it will one day be challenged in Court. Below is an excerpt from the referenced blog post.
“[This] pea-brained law is the one where a Member of Parliament loses his/her seat (in Parliament) when he/she leaves or resigns from a political party. When a person runs in the national elections, he/she primarily and principally runs for a seat in Parliament, first and foremost, and not a seat in a party. The constituents and voters elect their candidate to go sit (no pun intended) in Parliament as a Member of Parliament not as member of a party. The candidate can and may run as a registered member of a party, yet his/her premiere right and privilege as a Member of Parliament supersede that of any party membership, loyalty or primacy.
Most importantly, when a member of Parliament is sworn in and takes the oath, in Parliament, he/she is sworn in, literally, as a “sui usufono o le Palemene,” (Member of Parliament) but not as member of a party. It is proper to read again the text of the Oath. When an MP leaves a party, he/she needs to stay in Parliament as an Independent. A party should not have the right — through its by-laws or through any Act — to abrogate or deny a duly elected MP his/her seat until the voters decide during a normal election or by election -- or for another legitimate reason. Or a recall also. Power without authority is illegal. The authority is vested in the people - not the party. A party may have the right, power and authority to sack an MP as member of the party, but not as member of Parliament. It’s blatantly absurd, if not stupid. I think the law was devised and passed by the HRPP as a ploy to prevent any member from leaving or defecting their ruling and majority party at the time, hence still having a monopoly on power as they have had for decades. Moreover, apart from other constitutional provisions as the right and freedom of assembly and association, I think the Oath as Member of Parliament supersedes that right and has overriding precedent in this context.”
And so the issue and law that I considered draconian and “illegal” two years ago, will now finally be scrutinized and tested in Court. I will wait and see if I was right. The law should be voided and removed. Hahahaaa …