Kalafi Moala
Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku is facing the greatest challenge in his 8 months of government leadership. One Minister died before he had an opportunity to serve in his portfolio; three of his senior Cabinet Ministers lost their seats in Parliament after they lost their appeals against bribery convictions.
Within just 8 months, Parliamentary by-elections have been called to fill the seats four of the Ministers have occupied. One was held on September 1 to replace the late Manuopangai Hingano. Three will be held on November 3rd to replace the seats held by former Deputy Prime Minister, Poasi Tei; former Minister of Finance, Tatafu Moeaki, and former Minister of Internal Affairs, Sangster Saulala.
Put more succinctly: in just a few months of being in Government, Cabinet had been reduced by 1/3 of its members; one exited by death, and three by a guilty version of bribery.
These men who exited Cabinet were personal friends, whom the Prime Minister had appointed to be with him in running the machinery of government. There’s nothing awry with this as you have to arrange for your friends to be in Ministerial posts in order for them to support your bid to be Prime Minister.
The by-election for Hingano’s seat held on 1 September has been won by former Ha’apai Governor and Parliamentarian, Mo’ale Finau. But he replaces Hingano, more as an opposition MP rather than a friend of the current government.
Added to the national emergency crisis of Covid 19; came the eruption of Hunga Tonga, Hunga Ha’apai, and the accompanying tsunami. This is a tragedy Tonga is still recovering from. And then on top of all that is the political and administrative crisis occurring in government.
No sphere in Tongan society is unaffected by these unwelcome tragedies that seem to happen one on top of another. One misfortune that could have been controlled, or at least managed better is the situation with the ousted Ministers. The person to whom all fingers point is the Prime Minister.
A time of intense difficulty
To say that we are in a crisis is an understatement. Crisis is explained by the dictionary as “a time of intense difficulty or danger.”
It is also a time when important and critical decisions need to be made by those in leadership. In fact, decisions made during crisis could either make the crisis worse or help resolve it.
So far, decisions made by the Prime Minister have worsen the situation, and he stands to be the big loser from it.
It surely does not speak well of the Prime Minister’s decision making capability, to have four Ministers exited his government within 8 months after their appointments; three of them broke the law..
The Prime Minister has not made a public explanation of why he appointed Hingano, knowing he was ill, and that he may never recover.
Hingano never had the opportunity to function in the ministerial role. He was ill, even before his appointment. And not long after, had to travel to New Zealand for cancer treatment. Unfortunately, he died on June 10th.
Barely a month after Hingano’s death, the three Ministers were found guilty of bribery at the Supreme Court. But they were granted a stay of their sentence until their appeal.
The Prime Minister, instead of supporting the verdict of the Supreme Court, and dismiss his Ministers to await appeal, supported the application for stay of judgment.
If the Appeals Court found error in the Supreme Court judgment, the Ministers could have been returned to Cabinet, and repaid in full their wages and other benefits.
But now that the verdict of the Supreme Court was upheld, it is most unlikely they will refund any pay they got during the time they served as Ministers even when declared guilty of bribery.
Taking rules violations lightly
The government, and the Prime Minister in particular, is taking the ousting of the Ministers lightly, holding on to the illusion that technically the Ministers did not commit bribery, but were practicing a cultural norm of gift-giving.
With this kind of attitude, the Prime Minister may not survive a vote of no confidence, likely to be launched by the opposition in June 2023. A Prime Minister is given 18 months to be in government before a vote of no confidence can be launched.
But culture is not the only excuse brought up to justify “gift-giving for votes”. One of the dismissed Ministers even pleaded in his departing speech in Parliament, that something needs to be done to the law, so that the judgment and consequent sentencing they’ve gone through would not happen again.
Blame it on culture, blame it on the petitioners, and blame it on the law, but three Ministers did wrong and were found guilty by the Supreme Court, and upheld by the Appeals Court.
And so, where do we go from here? We look to the Prime Minister to see what he is going to do. He is the elected leader of Government. It’s a make or break situation, and it is his to decide.
But unfortunately, it has happened exactly as we anticipated: the Prime Minister and his Cabinet cronies have continued in their affirmation of the unseated MPs as if they did nothing wrong.
The unseated three look to being awarded with lucrative jobs. One has already been awarded the position of head of projects at the Ministry of Infrastructure.
The Minister of Infrastructure (MOI), Sevenitini Toumo’ua was quite forward in saying that the Ministry is not paying for Moeaki’s contract. “It is being paid from overseas aid, that came through the Ministry of Finance (Moeaki’s former ministry), which the former Minister made arrangement for,” Toumo’ua said.
Blind supporters of Moeaki have gone on social media to try and justify whatever lucrative award has been given to him. The argument was that the unseated three were not guilty of a criminal offense; but were found guilty based on a civil petition which is not so bad, “filed by jealous opponents.”
Whether criminal or civil, the fact that the three were found guilty of bribery – breaking the rules, infringing on the Election Act – was enough for them to be remorseful, and to exercise their conscience to refrain from appearing to have gotten away with it.
While Moeaki has secured a lucrative high and responsible position in the Infrastructural Ministry; Tei has applied and have been interviewed for the position of CEO of Lulutai Airlines, the government owned national airlines.
Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku is increasingly becoming predictable in his decision making. He is determined to hold on to power rightly or wrongly. No government before him has had to face the situation he is facing within the ranks of his own Cabinet.
Will he survive a vote-of-no-confidence?
He does not seem to be able to see that his political future will be affected by how he handles the crisis he is facing, which is a leadership crisis.
It may be a reliable source that has hinted Samiu Vaipulu, the Minister of Justice, is being talked about to take the Deputy Prime Minister portfolio. Lord Vaea is thought to be readied to take over the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA). That means there would be three nobles in Cabinet, and it definitely is a move to solicit the numbers from the noble representatives.
There is no way the Prime Minister will survive a vote-of-no-confidence without strong support from the nobles; but even that, it does not look good for him if the remaining by-elections are going the way of the opposition, which is a most likely scenario.
In a crisis, one of the important questions is: “what could have been done to prevent this crisis, and reduce the impact on people.” What could have been done, and what needs to be done!
It looks however that the Prime Minister may only have one option to take if he wish to remain in power, and that is what he should have done from the beginning of his government’s political crisis.
He should take a stand against corruption and advocate for the rule of law. He should have distanced himself from his offending ministers, and dismiss them from Cabinet once found guilty by the Supreme Court.
He should own up and be transparent about his lack of conscientious actions. In fact he should act as a leader, and not just a politician with an entitlement.
No leader during crisis can survive if he deals reluctantly with rules violations. And no leader can survive the pressures of any crisis if he is unwilling to face up to his own indecisiveness and inconsistencies.
So far, Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku has not spoken openly where he is taking the nation. No government before this one has had more public expectation to perform well. But we have been left to guess where we might be going, based not on his transparency, but on his behavioral lack of action.
…………………….
END.