By Linny Folau

The election of Sione Sangster Saulala as the Tongatapu No. 7 People’s Representative to the Legislative Assembly has been declared void by the Lord Chief Justice, who this morning found that he committed bribery on two occasions, during the November 2021 General Election campaign. After his election Saulala was appointed as the current Minister for Internal Affairs.

He is the second high ranking church member to be disqualified from his parliamentary seat for bribery during the Tonga general election, following the voiding of the election of Tongatapu No. 10 PR Dr Pohiva Tu'ionetoa by the court on Friday.

The latest election petition was filed by Piveni Piukala who contested the same Tongatapu No. 7 constituency in the General Election, on 18 November 2021, as Saulala.

Piukala sought a declaration from the Court that Saulala’s election is void on the grounds that he committed bribery. He filed four claims of allegations.

Lord Chief Justice M. H. Whitten QC issued a written 75-pages judgment, after hearing evidence presented over three-days of trial on 31 March, 1 April and 14 April, at the Supreme Court in Nuku'alofa.

He found that Mr Saulala had indeed committed bribery in the first two claims, namely that on 28 September 2021, he gave Hengihengi Kolo of Tofoa, $100. And that on 16 November 2021, he gave ‘Ahio Tauelangi of Pea $20 and a box of chicken to Mr Tauelangi and others.

He said as a result of the first and second claims having been proved, Mr Saulala was found guilty of bribery at the election.

"Accordingly, pursuant to s 32(1) of the Act it is hereby declared that the election of Sione Sangster Saulala, on 18 November 2021, as the representative of the Tongatapu 7 constituency is void."

Two claims unproven

The Lord Chief Justice then found the third and fourth claims had not been proven.

This included alleging that on November 2021, by his wife, Mr Saulala indirectly gave a bag of groceries to ‘Ahio Tauelangi.

The other was that prior to 8 November 2021, Mr Saulala asked the then Prime Minister for help with his campaign by bringing forward Government planned roadworks in the area between Pea and Tokomololo, which works were undertaken in the first half of November 2021.

Evidence

The first claim was that on 28 September 2021, Mr Saulala gave Hengihengi Kolo of Tofoa, $100.

The Lord Chief Justice said, Mr Saulala denied this claim on the basis that he never gave Hengihengi any money and that he only ever gave Sione Kolo $100 in the second week of July 2021.

Kolo (76) is Hengihengi’s uncle who lived next door.

However, Mr Saulala stated that he wished to correct that statement by saying that he recalled visiting Sione in July 2021 and again on 28 September 2021, and that on both occasions, he gave Sione money.

He maintained the correctness of the statement in his response that he gave $100 to Sione but sought to clarify that to mean that, on 28 September 2021, he gave the money to Hengihengi to give to Sione.

Mr Saulala also stated in his evidence that the money was not paid for the purpose of influencing any voter nor was it paid to induce Hengihengi to vote for him.

Tokaikolo Church

He then explained that the President of his church at the time was Rev. Nesiasi Kolo, who succeeded (his) Mr Saulala’s father as President of the Tokaikolo Church and who was Sione’s older brother. Mr Saulala described his family as having a ‘long and close working relationship’with Rev. Nesiasi since the Tokaikolo Christian Church started in 1980.

Lord Chief Justice Whitten said, the manner in which Mr Saulala surreptitiously placed the $100 in Hengihengi’s hand when they shook hands was not at all consistent with his stated purpose for giving Hengihengi the money. 

"If it was genuinely intended for Sione, one would have expected a more open display when giving the notes and a clear request that they be given to Sione as part of Mr Saulala’s usual assistance. In my view, the way in which Mr Saulala gave Hengihengi the money was not consistent with an innocent purpose. It was far more consistent with not wanting it to be seen by any onlooker (even his driver), including, at first at least, Hengihengi himself. In doing so, Mr Saulala sought to conceal the money because of what it was: a bribe."

He said to accept Mr Saulala’s evidence on this matter would necessarily require a finding that by not passing the money onto Sione, Hengihengi effectively stole from his elderly and sick uncle.

"That was never put to him and it would have been surprising if it had because, for the reasons stated above, Hengihengi did not present as the sort of man who would commit such a despicable and dishonest act. On the contrary, in my assessment, Hengihengi Kolo impressed at all times during the trial as an honourable man and a witness of truth." 


For those reasons, Mr Saulala has failed to discharge the evidentiary burden of proving that the $100 was given for Sione or for any other innocent purpose. It follows that I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that Mr Saulala gave Hengihengi Kolo $100 in order to influence his vote. 


Accordingly, the first claim of bribery against Mr Saulala has been proven, said the Lord Chief Justice.

$20 and chicken - second claim

In 'Ahio's affidavit, he said between 4:00pm. and 5:00pm on 16 November 2021, he was returning from his plantation. He stopped in front of Fehoko and Va’eiki’s residence and talked with their children. 

He said that Mr Saulala’s vehicle stopped, and joined the conversation. He then told them that he went to drop off a box of chicken to the community police at Tokomololo. 

He said that Mr Saulala ‘then offloaded a box of chicken’ for ‘Ahio and the others to distribute amongst themselves’. Just before he left, Mr Saulala gave ‘Ahio a $20 note. When ‘Ahio tried to return it, Mr Saulala insisted that he keep it for ‘anything he wanted to buy’ and then drove off.

Mr Saulala admitted giving $20 to ‘Ahio but said that it occurred on 8 November 2021, not the 16. He described ‘Ahio as ‘family’ and that he had been helping ‘Ahio and his family since the family reunion in 2017.

Lord Chief Justice Whitten said, there was no issue, on the facts, which were eventually accepted by Mr Saulala, that he gave the money to an identified elector (‘Ahio) and chicken to identified electors ('Ahio, ‘Asaloni, Siupeli and Sipiloni Tamale and Samupeni Kiteau) within three months of the election. 

Mr Saulala denied giving the money or chicken on 16 November 2021 but admitted giving ‘Ahio the $20 on the 8^th. However, he did not admit or even engage with the allegation that he also gave a box of chicken on that day. In other words, he evaded the issue, he said.

The Lord Chief Justice took into account the unchallenged evidence of ‘Ahio and ‘Asaloni Tamale and that ‘Ahio tried to return the $20 to Mr Saulala.

"That, in my view, was clearly inconsistent with Mr Saulala’s evidence of having assisted ‘Ahio and his family ‘from time to time’ and with Tevita’s evidence that they had all ‘worked together’since the family reunion in 2017."

Unreliable witness

In addition to this claim, the Lord Chief Justice said Mr Saulala was an unimpressive witness and that his evidence on the pivotal issue of the purpose of his gifts was inconsistent, contradicted by other evidence filed on his behalf and unreliable.

"Therefore, where their evidence conflicted, I preferred the evidence of the witnesses called by Mr Piukala over that of Mr Saulala and his."

Further, I am satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that in respect of this claim, Mr Saulala engaged in conduct which was designed, or had the tendency, to mislead the Court, thereby further undermining his reliability as a witness of truth, he said.

The Lord Chief Justice also did not regard any differences in the evidence as to the date or precise location to be of any great significance.

“To measure bribery in elections by the subjective value of a gift to each individual recipient, and whether it was sufficient to actually influence the recipient’s vote, would be to open up electoral corruption to some sort of free economy or market where votes could be bought by the highest bidder and only those candidates who paid enough could be convicted,” he said.

He said, Mr Edwards’ final submission was that the $20 and box of chicken should be treated as part of Mr Saulala’s election expenses. 

"It is not clear whether that submission, if accepted, was intended to provide a defence to this claim of bribery, but if it was, for the reasons which follow, it too must be rejected."

He said, there was no evidence here that ‘Ahio (and certainly not the other men)was, vis-à-vis Mr Saulala, any of the relations specified in subsection (3). Mr Saulala did not claim the gifts to be expenses for charitable purposes. Accordingly, subsection (3) does not apply.

“For all the above reasons, I find that the second claim of bribery against Mr Saulala has been proved,” he ruled.

Order to pay costs

The Lord Chief Justice then ordered that Saulala to pay the petitioner’s costs of this proceedings.

“Having regard to ss 38 and 39 of the Act, and the fact that parts of the evidence and submissions in relation to the third and fourth claims were relevant to the successful first and second claims, it is ordered that, subject to any application for any different order being filed within 14-days of the issuing of this judgment,” he said.

William Clive Edwards SC represented Mr Saulala. The petitioner Piveni Piukala represented for himself.

Son of church leader

Saulala won the Tongatapu 7 electorate with 810 votes and Piukala came in third with 610 votes in the 2021 General Election.

He is the son of the former President of the Tokaikolo Church, Rev. Dr Liufau Vailea Saulala who passed away in 2020.

Saulala was first elected as Tongatapu 7 People's Representative to the Legislative Assembly in the 2010 elections. In 2012, he joined the then Government as a Minister of Agriculture.

He was not re-elected in 2014 until he ran again in the 2021 election and was successful.

Saulala was then appointed as Minister of Internal Affairs by the current Government headed by Prime Minister Hon Hu'akavameiliku.

Meanwhile, this is the second People's Representative to the Legislative Assembly that has been found to have committed bribery in a string of elections petitions filed before the Supreme Court. 

Dr Pohiva Tu'i'onetoa, former PM and Tongatapu 10 People's Representative had his election declared void last Friday, after he was found to have committed bribery in one occassion, in the lead up to the 2021 elections.

It is not clear at this stage, whether a by-election will be called for the two seats vacated.