In recent weeks, Tonga’s political landscape has experienced significant turmoil following a press conference in which former Prime Minister Hu‘akavameiliku sought to re-frame and justify his actions while in office. The former Prime Minister resigned in anticipation of a vote of no confidence that he knew he could not survive. During the press conference, he announced his intention to clarify issues related to Lulutai Airlines, a subject that has drawn considerable scrutiny from the incoming Eke government. Key issues surrounding this controversy include the purchase of Lulutai’s Twin Otter aircraft, a loan from the Retirement Fund for Lulutai, the insurance claim for the Saab 340 after its crash and the secrecy and lack of accountability regarding the airline’s operations and management.
Nothing new
When the press conference was announced, I anticipated, as editor, hearing from key officials who could address critical concerns. I had expected to hear from the CEO of Civil Aviation, the CEO of Lulutai Airlines, a representative from the company that sold the Twin Otter aircraft, an official from the insurance company covering the damaged Saab plane, the Auditor General to clarify the financial irregularities linked to Lulutai, and a spokesperson from the Retirement Fund, which had provided loans to Lulutai. These individuals are responsible for overseeing these matters and know exactly what happened.
Instead, the stage was dominated solely by politicians— former Prime Minister Hu’akavameilikui and his associates, including his former Deputy and former Minister of Civil Aviation—the very individuals embroiled in serious allegations concerning the national airlines. Rather than addressing the media with new insights, they recycled the same old responses from their time in power, offering no substantive answers or evidence to counter the allegations.
Worst in communication
Now, out of office and facing mounting scrutiny, the former Prime Minister seeks to clear his name. During his time in office, when given opportunities to address allegations, he consistently chose silence and what might have been seen as cover-ups—actions that only deepened public scepticism about his leadership and integrity. Now, after resigning and becoming aware that his actions are under scrutiny, he has suddenly returned to the table—the very table where he once sat and had the opportunity to clear his record but chose not to. This belated attempt at accountability only underscores his earlier failure to address the allegations when it mattered most.
As a journalist with over 20 years of experience covering six consecutive governments and six different Prime Ministers, I can confidently say that Hu‘akavameiliku’s tenure was the worst in terms of communication. Throughout his time in office, he consistently ignored requests for comment on critical issues, even when approached via Facebook Messenger. On one occasion, after I sent him a message seeking clarification on a pressing matter, he chose not to respond. Moments later, he posted an announcement about an event organised by the Tonga High School alumni association, of which he was the chairperson – an apparent and deliberate snub that underscored his contemptuous attitude toward senior members of the media.
His disdainful attitude toward the media was further solidified by his recent response to a New Zealand lawyer criticising him on Facebook. Lawyer Nalesoni Tupou accused the former Prime Minister of securing a loan from China—a claim Hu‘akavameiliku vehemently denied. However, Tupou’s strong language in the post seemed to strike a nerve, prompting the former leader to break his usual silence and respond on Facebook. In his response to Tupou, Hu‘akavameiliku claimed he typically ignored such comments to avoid giving them undue importance, but he made an exception for Tupou, citing the lawyer’s prominence in New Zealand. This seems to show a very skewed sense of respect—valuing only those deemed important while dismissing journalists who do not meet his arbitrary standard of status.
Communicate to dominate
As a journalist, I closely followed Hu‘akavameiliku, as I would any former Prime Minister, as part of my professional duties. He seemed to develop an unhealthy sense of self-importance that was reflected in his failure to establish an effective communication strategy during his time in office. Instead, he adopted a communicate to dominate approach—holding tightly controlled press conferences, selectively answering questions, and using rhetoric to deflect criticism. This strategy allowed him to avoid meaningful engagement with the media and sidestep public concerns, further eroding trust in his leadership.
The pattern of poor communication extended to his secretary, Paula Ma‘u. Before becoming secretary to Hu‘akavameiliku, Ma‘u was known for his ability to provide clear and responsive answers to our inquiries. However, once in the role, it seemed that he did not want to engage with journalists, refusing to answer any questions whatsoever. Was it because Hu‘akavameiliku stopped him from responding to media inquiries?
The Minister of Civil Aviation
The former Minister of Civil Aviation, Sevenitini Toumo‘ua, provided several examples of poor leadership in communication. Throughout his tenure, journalists felt he had failed to address critical questions regarding Lulutai Airlines, the MV ‘Otuanga‘ofa and the housing projects for the victims of the Hungas eruption.
When Kaniva News published a story based on a report by the Australian civil aviation authorities that the black box on the Lulutai Airlines Saab 340 may have been turned off, he demanded a retraction and threatened legal action if we did not comply. However, I stood firm, corrected him, and urged him to read the report himself before making such accusations. He never responded.
Misleading parliament
Equally concerning is the fact that the Minister also told Parliament that a $2 million grant from Australia was directly allocated to support Lulutai Airlines. However, a letter from Australian authorities clearly stated otherwise, confirming that the funds were intended as budget support for the Tongan government, leaving it to the government’s discretion to determine how the money would be used. These incidents raised serious questions about what has seemed to be a a troubling pattern of evasion, defensiveness and a blatant disregard for accountability.
The Right Time for Accountability
Hu‘akavameiliku and his inner circle should act maturely and allow the Eke government to complete its review of his administration, particularly the Lulutai Airlines controversy. Once the review is finalised, they should be allowed to respond reasonably. That would be the appropriate time for corrections, but not now. Authentic leadership requires timely accountability, not retrospective excuses. The former government’s current actions only erode public trust and undermine the principles of transparency and good governance, further distancing them from the integrity expected of those who once held power.
