Ads by Google Ads by Google

Election petition dismissed for lack of evidence

Allegations by Alataua losing candidate, Fatumalala L.A Al-Shehri against Speaker of the House, Savali Talavou Ale, Folole Fagaima, Ailini Asiata, Sinataua Misipati and Tu’ufuli Tu’ufuli alleging that there were violations of election rules listed in the 2014 candidate manual, have been dismissed by the Appellate Division of the High Court.

 

Al-Shehri asked the Appellate Court to “recheck” 14 names she provided in her complaint, wherein she alleges that some people who are off-island voted in the last election.

 

She also complained that at the Poloa, Fagali’i and Fagamalo polling stations elderly men who were unable to vote on their own were accompanied by their daughters even though the designated time for the disabled to vote had expired.

 

The decision was issued late Monday afternoon and the five-page opinion and order was signed by Chief Justice Michael Kruse, Associate Justices, John L Ward and Lyle L Richmond and Associate Judges Logoai Siaki and Satele Ali’itai Lili’o.

 

According to the order, on election day, Savali received 272 votes, Samatua Edwin Hollister 108 and Al-Shehri had 48 votes.

 

The order says that one of the defendants in this matter, Fagaima, who was the Election Office official assigned to District No. 14 on election day, filed a motion to dismiss Al-Shehri’s complaint. The grounds of the motion are that Al-Shehri did not seek remedy within the power of the court, and that she failed to timely challenge the qualifications of the 14 electors named on the complaint.  Fagaima also said that Al-Shehri had failed to contest a sufficient number of ballots to make a difference in the outcome of the election.

 

The court noted that they can only invalidate an election when presented with clear and convincing evidence that a correct result cannot be ascertained because of a mistake or fraud on the part of the district or election officials, or because it cannot be determined that a certain candidate or certain caudates received a majority or plurality of votes cast. The plaintiff failed to make such a showing.

 

Al-Shehri also conceded that she was not at court to challenge the outcome of the election. “By plaintiff’s own admission the court was not therefore presented with a case or controversy under the law for which it can provide a remedy.”

 

Also the court notes that even assuming the truth of plaintiff’s allegations, the extent of her showing “simply does not support a finding that the results of the District #14 election are uncertain on the basis of mistake, fraud or the indeterminacy of the leading candidate’s majority margin according to the valid votes cast.”

 

“In sum, we must enter judgment for defendants because Al-Shehri did not seek a remedy within the power of the court and did not present enough evidence to render the result of the District #14 election indeterminate.”