IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Informant

AND:

TOOMALATAI LAUVAI II,
of Vailoa Aleipata
Defendant

Sgt. F. Pula for Prosecution
TK Enari. for Defendant

Date of Hearing: 2.9.1998
Date of Decision: 14.9.1998

DECISION OF VAAI, MGT

The defendant Toomalatai Lauvai is charged that he did disobey the order of the Land and Titles Court delivered on the 1st September 1995 namely that.

"Ua teena le talosaga toe iloilo, ae mo le faaatoatoaina o faaiuga tau i lenei mataupu o lea e iai le suiga i le faaiuga a le faamasinoga lea nafaia i le aso 24 o Me 1991 ma ua mafua ai le talosaga toe iloilo, i le faaopoopoina o le poloaiga lenei.

E poloaina le itu talosaga (Toomalatai Lauvai II ma isi) ina ia tulai ese ma aveeseina uma o latoufalefaapea ma a latou meatotino uma o loo i le vaega o le fanua o Vailoa lea e i lalo o le pule a le suafa Puepuemai, ia aua ne 'i silia le aso 1 o Mati 1996. Vagana ai, ia aua neifaatamaia pe faaleagaina ni laau aoga o loo ola i luga o le vaega o le fanua o le suafa Puepuemai o loo faaaogaina e le itu talosaga.

O le tau o lenei Faamasinoga e $100 e totogiina atu e le itu talosag mai tupe sa faaulu ai la latou talosaga toe iloilo.

O le a maua i le Ofisa o le Resitara kopi o lenei faaiuga faapea ma mafuaaga i se aso lata mai."

The defendant does not deny that contrary to the order of the Court he has continued to live on the land and he will not vacate the land. He says the land concerned has been the subject of conflicting decisions in the past. At the time the order was made the defendant was a member of Parliament and during one of his speech in the house he referred to the land in question and the sequence of court decisions concerning the said land or part of it. The defendant was told by the then Honourable Minister of Justice to put his grievances in writing and forward copies to the Minister of Justice, the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice. I have read a copy of the letter which has been produced as exhibit. The defendant has reiterated in this court what he has written in the letter. He has not received a reply to his letter. I am not the least surprised. He has continued to whip a dead horse.

The defendant cannot use these contempt of court proceedings to challenge the decision of the Land and Titles Court which ordered him to vacate the land. Section 71 of the Land and Titles Court states that no decision or order of the Land and Titles Court shall be reviewed or questioned in any other Court by way of appeal, prerogative writ or otherwise howsoever. In any event the conflicting past decisions were subjected to deliberations during the hearing of the appeal, were referred to in the submissions of parties and were referred to in the written decision of the Land & Titles Court dated 5th June 1997.

The defendant acknowledges the order of the court ordering him to vacate the land. He has refused to vacate the land. Accordingly I have no difficulty finding that the charge against the defendant has been made out.

MAGISTRATE