Winger Will Jordan scored five tries as the All Blacks opened their 2021 campaign with a record-equalling 102-0 trouncing of an inexperienced Tonga side on Saturday at Auckland’s Mount Smart Stadium.
Looking to make a statement after managing only a 50 per cent win record last year, New Zealand ran in 16 tries against a team boasting fewer combined test caps than All Blacks skipper Sam Whitelock alone.
Tonga, featuring 13 debutants in their matchday 23 after Covid-19 travel restrictions deprived them of their Europe-based players, were simply outgunned and outsmarted in a mismatch of a contest.
Beauden Barrett, back in the famous black shirt after a sabbatical in Japan, converted the final try after coming on as a replacement to equal the score in the mauling the Tongans suffered at Albany in 2000.
Jordan came up one short of the All Blacks record for most tries in one match, set by Marc Ellis in the 145-17 win over Japan at the 1995 World Cup in South Africa.
“It was good to get out there,” said Whitelock, who was playing his 123rd test.
“The Tongan team were here to play and it wasn’t easy out there.”
The All Blacks coach Ian Foster bristled at suggestions the one-sided test wasn’t good for either side and should never have been played.
Fans and pundits were largely in agreement the game was a poor look for international rugby, but Foster said he hoped the storyline would not be around how much of a gap there was between the two teams.
He said the Covid pandemic had made things more difficult for Tonga and was asked how the match could have been made a more even contest.
“Take away Covid, take away quarantining and add another month on the calendar for the world rugby thing. There is no solution to that right now,” Foster said.
“I’d be disappointed if that’s what we are dwelling on. We weren’t happy last year when we got no rugby. This year we’ve got some rugby. Clearly the itinerary has put Tonga in a compromised position, but they’ve been keen to play and deserve a lot of credit for that.
“I’d like think we aren’t just going to focus on the scoreline and say this was a game that shouldn’t have happened, because for the Tongan people it was an important game, and it was equally important for us to go out and start what could be a long year.
“In today’s environment you take what you can get.”
Fullback Damian McKenzie crossed for the first try in the second minute and, after Dalton Papalii had touched down and Will Jordan and Brad Weber had grabbed a brace each, the All Blacks were 38-0 up in the 20th minute.
Tonga managed to stem the torrent of tries temporarily by abandoning the tactic of kicking away possession but flanker Papalii grabbed his second try in the 37th minute to give the home side a 43-0 lead at the break.
No.8 Luke Jacobson crossed soon after the restart with winger Jordan and halfback Weber completing their hat-tricks before the 50th minute.
The Tongans, many fresh out of quarantine, started to tire and the All Blacks backs put on an exhibition with Richie Mo’unga crossing, Jordan adding his fourth and fifth tries and centre Rieko Ioane racing away to touch down.
Lock Patrick Tuipulotu burst through the defensive line to take the score into the 90s with three minutes remaining and winger George Bridge crossed on the overlap after the fulltime siren to take them to the century mark.
“We didn’t get the result tonight but I’m very proud of my brothers here,” said emotional Tonga captain Sonatane Takulua.
According to Tongan law, the Lavulavus could be granted bail if the court is satisfied that — there is a reasonable prospect of the appeal succeeding; the appeal is unlikely to be heard before the whole or a substantial portion of the sentence has been served; and there are substantial grounds for believing that, if released on bail (whether or not subject to conditions) he will surrender to custody without committing any offence whilst on bail.
The appeal by the Lavulavus came after the Appeal Court in 2019 refused Tongasat company’s application to present new evidence in an appeal against a decision handed down against it.
Tongasat – formally known as the Friendly Islands Satellite Telecommunications Ltd – appealed the judgment and asked the court for permission to produce new evidence.
New evidence can only be introduced if the court grants permission on special grounds.
However, the Court said none of the evidence was discovered for the first time after the trial.
“The role and involvement of the new witnesses was known in 2008 and 2011, the witnesses were living in Tonga and available to be interviewed here,” the Court report said.
The Tongasat appeal was therefore dismissed.
Lavulavu sentencing
Former Cabinet Minister and MP ‘Akosita has been sentenced to six years in prison.
However, the Supreme Court suspended the last 12 months of her sentence for two years on condition that she comply with the probation officer, satisfactorily complete a life skills course and commit no offence punishable by imprisonment.
Her husband, who has a long record of court appearances and convictions, will serve the full six years.
Both defendants were convicted on three counts of obtaining money by false pretences.
They were found guilty of fraudulently obtaining money from the Ministry of Education and Training by lying in applications for money from the Technical Vocational Educational Training Grant about the number of students enrolled at their private college, the ‘Unuaki ‘o Tonga Royal Institute.
Mr Justice Cooper, presiding, said, he utterly rejected their claims that the money was used for the Institute.
The judge said they could have been charged with theft.
The court was told the Lavulavus had committed a carefully executed fraud over several years that amounted to a serious breach of trust.
Mr Justice Cooper told the court a pre-sentence report on ‘Akosita said there had been no attempt to repay the money, that she still maintained her innocence and showed no remorse.
The judge said ‘Akosita had supplied false references, something the pre-sentence report described as “an act of dishonesty which further proves her true character.”
Mr Justice Cooper said ‘Etuate Lavulavu’s offences were not out of character and was known to be deceitful. He posed a risk of re-offending.
The judge said a pre-sentencing report on ‘Etuate found that he still denied the offences; showed no remorse, blamed the court for being biased and did not accept his guilt. He had offered to pay all the money back in exchange for a community penalty and being spared prison.
“Had either defendant admitted their guilt and repaid the monies, as they seemingly can afford to do, then I would have approached this sentence in a totally different way,” the judge said.
“Instead, Mr. Lavulavu offered what some might think sounds very much like a bribe to stay out of prison.”
The judge said he had taken into account all possible mitigating factors to keep the overall sentence as low as I possibly could.
“I thought long and hard about the submissions in relation to Mrs Lavulavu and her being a mother of young children,” Mr Justice Cooper said.
“I feel I am unable to lessen her sentence despite this. It could be argued that she deliberately put her children’s wellbeing in jeopardy with her course of criminal behaviour; some might argue that was an aggravating feature to do so, I do not see it that way, but I do not lessen her sentence for that.
“Both defendants were in this together and their sentences reflect this.”
FAKAMATALA FAKATONGA
Kuo ‘i ai ha lipooti ‘o pehē kuo tangi ‘a e ongo Lavulavu’ ‘i hona tautea ngāue pōpula taki ta’u ono ka ‘o ka hili pe ta’u ‘e nima pea ‘e ‘atā ‘a Akosita ‘o malu’i angalelei ia ‘i hono toenga ta’u ‘e taha’ ‘i ha toe ta’u makehe ‘e ua ‘oua na’a’ ne toe fakahoko ha hia ngāue pōpula. Taimi tatau ‘oku pehē ‘e he lipooti ko ‘eni ‘a e VPON ‘oku kole ‘a e ongo loea ma’a ‘Etuate mo Akosita’ ke peila pe tāuhi kinaua ki tu’a ke tali ai ‘ena tangi’. Ne na ‘osi kole peila ki mu’a ke faka’atā ‘a ‘ena fefolau’aki he ‘otu motu’ mo Tongatapu’ hili hono fakahalaia’i kinaua’ pea na’e ‘ikai tali ia ‘e he fakamaau’anga’. Ko e anga ‘eni e lau ‘a e lao ‘a Tonga’ ki he me’a ko e peila ‘o fakatatau ki he kupu 4B ‘o e lao peila’. ‘E ‘atā ki ha taha kuo tautea ke ngāue pōpula tu’unga ha’ane faihia ka kuo ne tangi ‘i hono tautea’ ke ne kole ki he fakamaau’anga’ ke peila pe tāuhi ia ki tu’a kae ‘oua leva ke mahino ‘ene tangi’. Ka ‘e makatu’unga pe hano tali ‘o e kole peila’ ‘okapau ‘e fiemālie ‘a e fakamaau’anga’ ngali ‘e ‘i ai ‘a e faingamālie ‘uhinga lelei ke ikuna ai ‘a e tangi ‘oku fai’, pe ngalingali ko e tangi’ ‘e ‘ikai fakahoko leva ki mu’a hano ngāue’i kakato pe konga lahi ‘o e tautea’ pea ‘oku ‘i ai ‘a e tui mālohi ka tuku ange ki tu’a ‘a e pōpula’ ‘e foki pe ‘iate ia ki he kau polisi’ hala ke ne toe fai ha hia lolotonga hono peila ia ki tu’a. Fekau’aki mo ha tangi ‘i ha tautea kuo ‘osi fakahoko ‘e tokoni ‘a e fakatamala ko ‘eni ki ai. Na’e tangi foki ‘a e Tongasat mo Pilinisesi Pilolevu ‘i he 2019 hili ‘a hono fakahā ‘e he Fakamaau lahi ‘aho ko ia’ kuo na halaia ki hono ma’u ta’etotonu ‘a e pa’anga $90 miliona Tonga ‘a e pule’anga’. ‘I he tangi ko ‘eni’ na’e fakamahino ai kuopau ke ‘i ai ha fakamo’oni fo’ou mo mahu’inga pea ko e fakamo’oni fo’ou ko ia na’e te’eki ‘o hake ia’ lolotonga e hopo ne iku fakahalaia’i ai ‘a e pilinisesi mo ‘ene kautaha’ kae lava ke tali ‘a e kole ke toe vakai’i ‘e he fakamaau’anga tangi ‘a e tangi ‘oku fai’. Ko e fakamo’oni fo’ou leva ne taku ‘e he Tongasat ko e pehē kuo nau toki ma’u hili enau halaia’ ko ha fuakava ‘a Looti Matoto mo Sunia Fili, ‘Aholotu Palu pea mo Dr ‘Aisake Eke. Na’e pehē leva ‘e he fakamaau’anga tangi ‘e tali pe ka ko ha fakamo’oni mātu’aki fo’ou ‘eni ‘i he ‘uhinga pe ‘e taha kapau na’e faingata’a fau ke lava ma’u ‘a e fakamo’oni ko ‘eni lolotonga ‘a e hopo ne fakahalaia’i ai ‘a e Tongasat mo e pilinisesi. Kae hili ‘enau vakai ki ai na’e pehē ‘e he kau fakamaau tangi, ko e fakamo’oni ko ‘eni kuo fakahū ange ‘e he Tongasat mo Pilolevu na’e hala ‘atā ke toki ma’u pe he hili ‘a e hopo’. Ko e fakamatala ‘a e kau fakamo’oni ko ‘eni ne ‘osi ‘i ai pe ia ‘i he 2008 mo e 2011 pea na’e ‘i Tonga pe kau tangata ko ‘eni ke nau omi ki fale hopo ‘o fakamatala ai ki he’enau fuakava lolotonga e lele ‘a e ‘uluaki hopo’. Pea na’e ‘ikai ha me’a fakalao ‘e taha ke ne ta’ofi kinautolu ke nau fakamo’oni he hopo ko ia’. Ko ia ai ne ‘ikai tali ia ke fakahoko ‘a e tangi ko ia’. ‘I hono fakahoa ‘eni ki he tangi ‘a e ongo Lavulavu ‘e ‘ikai mama’o ‘a e makatu’unga ko ‘eni’ mei ai’. Kuopau ke fakahū atu ‘e he ongo Lavulavu ‘a ‘ena fakamatala mo ha fakamo’oni mātu’aki fo’ou ‘aupito ke sio ki ai ‘a e fakamaau’anga tangi’. Pea kapau te nau tali ‘a e ngaahi mo’oni’i me’a fo’ou ko ia’ pea ‘e tali leva ke nau hoko atu ki ha hopo tangi. Pea ka ‘ikai fiemālie kau fakamaau tangi ki he ngaahi mo’oni’i me’a kuo fokotu’u atu ke fai ai ha hopo tangi, pea ko ‘ene leveleva’ ia.
Former Cabinet Minister and MP ‘Akosita Lavulavu has been sentenced to six years in prison.
Hon. ‘Akosita and her husband ‘Etuate Lavulavu
However, the Supreme Court suspended the last 12 months of her sentence for two years on condition that she comply with the probation officer, satisfactorily complete a life skills course and commit no offence punishable by imprisonment.
Her husband, who has a long record of court appearances and convictions, will serve the full six years.
Both defendants were convicted on three counts of obtaining money by false pretences.
They were found guilty of fraudulently obtaining money from the Ministry of Education and Training by lying in applications for money from the Technical Vocational Educational Training Grant about the number of students enrolled at their private college, the ‘Unuaki ‘o Tonga Royal Institute.
Mr Justice Cooper, presiding, said, he utterly rejected their claims that the money was used for the Institute.
The judge said they could have been charged with theft.
The court was told the Lavulavus had committed a carefully executed fraud over several years that amounted to a serious breach of trust.
Mr Justice Cooper told the court a pre-sentence report on ‘Akosita said there had been no attempt to repay the money, that she still maintained her innocence and showed no remorse.
The judge said ‘Akosita had supplied false references, something the pre-sentence report described as “an act of dishonesty which further proves her true character.”
Mr Justice Cooper said ‘Etuate Lavulavu’s offences were not out of character and was known to be deceitful. He posed a risk of re-offending.
The judge said a pre-sentencing report on ‘Etuate found that he still denied the offences; showed no remorse, blamed the court for being biased and did not accept his guilt. He had offered to pay all the money back in exchange for a community penalty and being spared prison.
“Had either defendant admitted their guilt and repaid the monies, as they seemingly can afford to do, then I would have approached this sentence in a totally different way,” the judge said.
“Instead, Mr. Lavulavu offered what some might think sounds very much like a bribe to stay out of prison.”
The judge said he had taken into account all possible mitigating factors to keep the overall sentence as low as I possibly could.
“I thought long and hard about the submissions in relation to Mrs Lavulavu and her being a mother of young children,” Mr Justice Cooper said.
“I feel I am unable to lessen her sentence despite this. It could be argued that she deliberately put her children’s wellbeing in jeopardy with her course of criminal behaviour; some might argue that was an aggravating feature to do so, I do not see it that way, but I do not lessen her sentence for that.
“Both defendants were in this together and their sentences reflect this.”
Background
The Lavulavus were arrested and charged with fraud on March 3, 2018. Akosita was subsequently sacked from her Ministerial position by the late Prime Minister, ‘Akilisi Pōhiva.
She was appointed Minister for Infrastructure and Tourism by Prime Minister Pohiva Tuʻiʻonetoa in October the following year, while she was awaiting trial.
Tuʻiʻonetoa has so far taken no action against her.
FAKAMATALA FAKATONGA
Pehē ‘e he fakamaau lahi’ ne mei lava ke toe tā mo e tikite ‘a e ongo Lavulavu’ ki he kaiha’a (theft) makehe mei he faka’ilo kuo’ na ngāue pōpula ai’ ‘a ia ne faka’ilo pe kinaua he founga ne na ma’u kākaa’i’aki ‘a e pa’anga’ kae ‘ikai ko e kaiha’a. ‘I hono fakahū atu ‘o e fakamatala ki mu’a pea hilifaki ‘a e tautea’, ‘iloa ‘eni ‘i he lea ‘Ingilisi’ ko e pre-sentence report. Ko e lipooti ‘eni ‘e fai ia ‘e he kau ‘ōfisa polopeisini’ ‘aki ‘enau faka’eke’eke ‘a e taha ‘e tautea’ ko e hā ‘enau ongo’i ki he hia ne nau fai’, hā ne nau fakahoko ai ‘a e hia’, pea ko e hā honau puipuitu’a fakafāmili hangē kapau ‘oku ‘i ai ha fānau mo ‘enau ngāue. ‘I he lipooti ‘o Akosita mo ‘Etuate na’e mahino ‘a e ‘ikai ha’ana loto faktomala, na kei tu’uaki pe a’u ki he mōmeniti faka’osi ‘ena tonuhia’, pea mo taukave’i ne na ngāue’aki pe pa’anga’ ki he’ena ako’anga’. Na’e ‘ikai tui ki ai ‘a e fakamāu’. ‘Ikai loto ‘a Akosita ia ke totongi fakafoki ‘a e pa’anga’ pea’ ne tō ai e lea ‘a e fakamaau lahi’ ko ‘eni ‘o pehē kapau ne na fakatomala mo loto ke totongi fakafoki ‘a e pa’anga’ na’e mei kehe ‘aupito ‘a e tautea te ne hilifaki’. Na’e mahino ki he fakamāu’ ko ‘Etuate ia kuo pāte’i faihia, tala ‘e ia ‘oku fakapalataha ‘a e fakamāu’ pea ‘i he tui ‘a Nicholas Cooper ‘e toe fai hia pe ‘a ‘Etuate ia he kaha’u’ pea ko e ‘uhinga ia ‘a e ‘ikai ke ne toe fakasi’isi’i hono tautea ngāue pōpula ta’u ono’. Na’e loto ‘a ‘Etuate ia ke ne totongi fakafoki ‘a e pa’anga’ kotoa kae fetongi ‘aki hano tautea pe ia ke ngāue ki he komiunitii’ pea ‘oua na’a ngāue pōpula. Ka ne pehē ‘e he fakamāu’ kuo hangē tofu ‘ene ‘ai’ ‘ana ha totongi fakafufū kae ‘atā mei pilīsone’. Ko Akosita ne ta’u ono mo ia ka ne malu’i angalelei ‘a e ta’u ‘e taha fakamuimui’ ‘o holo pe ‘o ngāue pōpula ta’u nima ka e toloi ‘a e ta’u ‘e taha fakamuimui’ he ta’u ua. Na’e ‘i ai mo e lave ‘a e fakamāu foki ki he pehē ‘oku ‘i ai ‘a e fānau ‘e toko ua ‘a e ongo Lavulavu’ pea ke hoko ia ko ha me’a ke toe si’isi’i ange ai hono tautea ‘o Akosita’ ka ne ‘ikai tui pehē ‘a e fakamāu’ tu’unga he kei loto fefeka pe ‘a Akosita mo kavekavea’u tokoua ‘oku tonuhia pe ia’ pea na’ e totonu ke kimu’a ‘ene fakahoko ‘a e hia’ ke ne fakakaukau’i lelei ‘oku ‘i ai ‘ene fānau. Na’e toe fa’u ‘e Akosita ‘a e ngaahi tohi fakaongoongo lelei loi ‘o ‘oange ki ha kakai ke nau fakamo’oni ai ka ne ‘ilo ia he lipooti ko ‘eni na’e ‘ikai ‘ilo e kakai ia ko ‘eni’ ki he kakano ‘o e tohi’. Pea na’e pehē ai ‘e he fakamāu’ ko e ta’efaitotonu ‘eni ‘a Akosita kuo ‘asi lelei mai ai hono lanu totonu’.
The Lavulavu couple have been sentenced after incorrectly receiving more than TOP$500,000 when they owned and operated the ‘Unuaki ‘o Tonga Royal Institute.
Akosita Lavulavu has been sent to jail for five years while her husband ‘Etuate was jailed for six years.
They were convicted for using student numbers they knew were false to apply for government grants.
“This is an example of the worst sort of dishonesty,” remarked Justice NJ Cooper in his verdict.
After almost five weeks of deliberations, an Auckland high court jury on Thursday found Malia Unalotokilakepa Li guilty of the manslaughter of her husband Lanitola Epenisa.
Malia ‘Unalotokipea Li. Photo/Facebook
She is scheduled for sentencing next month. Li is remanded in custody to await the hearing.
The mother-of-two has been on trial after Epenisa died from the blood infection sepsis, after two strokes slowly ate away at his ability to walk and speak coherently and he developed pressure sores from immobility, the NZ Herald reported.
“He was found dead by emergency staff in a Māngere home, drenched in urine in a room with a bag of soiled clothes and a nest of mice”, the paper reported.
Lanitiola ‘Epenisa. Photo/Supplied
Li was charged with manslaughter for failing to provide her husband – deemed a vulnerable adult – with the appropriate medical care, hygiene, food and water between January and October 2016.
The Crown said Li left Lanitola Epenisa in a La-Z Boy chair, next to a nest of mice and piles of rubbish. Pressure sores on his buttocks became so deep they exposed muscle and bone.
The sores became infected from his faeces and urine and Epenisa died of blood poisoning on October 2, 2016.
Li’s legal team said their client had done all she could for her sick husband, whose health had deteriorated to such an extent that he could not fight off infection.
OPINION: Convicted Cabinet Minister Akosita Lavulavu will be sentenced tomorrow July 2 at 10am.
Whatever her sentence, it will add a new chapter to the democrat MPs endeavour to push for more democracy in terms of good governance, transparency and accountability.
Minister of Infrastructure ‘Akosita Lavulavu and husband ‘Etuate Lavulavu. Photo/Akosita Lavulavu (Facebook)
In this opinion piece I will round up the debates and exchanges with the Prime Minister in the past two months on Akosita’s saga.
I have previously made it clear that the Prime Minister owed the public a proper response to the repeated calls to dismiss Akosita because he was the one who chose her to be Minister of Infrastructure, Tourism and Transport. He knew when he appointed her in 2019 that she had been charged with serious fraud offence in 2018. He should have checked the legal implication of her charges and how they could affect the government.
Clause 51(3)(a) vs clause 23
Prime Minister Pōhiva Tu’i’onetoa’s insistence, based on Clause 23 of Tonga’s Constitution, that he cannot sack Akosita, was unfounded in many respects.
In fact, his power given by Clause 51 (3) (a) means he can do something, but he refused to do it and unfortunately, he appears to have attempted to mislead the public about this clause.
Clause 51 (3) (a) says: “Minister shall retain his position as Minister until – (a) his appointment is revoked by the King on the recommendation of the Prime Minister or in accordance with clause 50B”.
Prime Minister Pōhiva Tu’i’onetoa. Photo/Kalino Lātū (Kaniva Tonga)
This clause has two independent phrases divided by the conjunction “or” which means it is either the Prime Minister who can recommend to the king that a Minister’s appointment be revoked, or the minister can be revoked according to Clause 50B.
In his recent response to media in a livestream talk show the Prime Minister appears to have intentionally avoided talking about the first phrase and claimed his power in clause 51(3)(a) can only be exercised according to clause 50B.
In my opinion, Clauses 51 (3) (a) and the re-enacted Clause 23 appear to be in conflict when it comes to Akosita’s case because one clause allows the Prime Minister exclusive power to sack her at his pleasure, while the other says she must not be sacked if she seeks leave to appeal her sentencing. It also says that if she is sentenced to no more than two years imprisonment she is still entitled to be appointed a minister, no matter how serious the offence committed.
When constitutions and laws clashed it is a matter for the judiciary to make a final decision and clarify which one is void. Unfortunately, Tu’i’onetoa appears to have taken the role of the judiciary into his hands in this case and declared that Clause 23 was the only clause he could use and turned a blind eye to clause 51(3)(a).
A sensible leader should use his discretion and use the clause which will do what is best for the people, no matter what. In Akosita’s case the Prime Minister should have stuck to Clause 51 (3)(a) and shown he had a sense of responsibility to the whole kingdom.
Shifting
The Prime Minister’s comments and response to media questions about Akosita’s case clearly show he has shifted his justification when it suited him.
When asked about her pay while she was in court, instead of saying how many days were involved and which law justified her payment, Tu’i’onetoa said Akosita was still working at the time and Cabinet ministers worked 24 hours a day.
Tu’ionetoa was uncertain whether Akosita would appeal her sentencing. On June 5 he said “if after the 42-day period stipulated by the constitution is over and there is no appeal I will make the final decision.”
But his most telling comment was when he said he did not want to sack Akosita as he feared she might take him and the government to court using Clause 23. He said he did not want to be penalised by the court and for the government to have to pay Akosita compensation.
But the Prime Minister appears to have no concern at all about who will pay back the monies being paid to Akosita after her conviction and in the next 42 days if she appeals her sentence. Of course she could accept her sentence and go to jail, or her appeal could be rejected.
That is why it would have been better for the Prime Minister to immediately take action and dismiss or suspend Akosita without pay under Clause 51(3)(a). If she did end up taking him and the government to court and won, that would have been it. It would have been fair to pay her back all her entitlements, salaries and allowances because the legal process had been gone through.
Precedents
In law there are precedents – previous actions take by the courts of the legislature – that are considered as an authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts, or similar legal issues. In Akosita’s case, there is a clear precedent for his dismissal.
Akosita was dismissed in 2018 by Late Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pohiva after she was arrested and charged for the fraud of which she has now been convicted.
Prime Minister Tu’i’onetoa should use this as a precedent to dismiss Akosita. He should also use it in court if Akosita takes legal action against the government because of clause 23.
Akosita has been found guilty of plundering more than half a million pa’anga from the government school grant scheme which was co-funded by New Zealand and Australia. The Prime Minister has a duty to spend every cent of public money wisely. Instead, he has continued to reward her with the same benefits and entitlements given to other ministers who have not been convicted of serious fraud.
The end justifies the means
In English there is an idiom that says the end justifies the means used to achieve it. Whatever means the Prime Minister is using at the moment seem only to point to one end, to keep Akosita in Cabinet. But is this goal really enough to justify the financial implications, the chaos over the Constitution and the effect on his government’s reputation?
Akosita’s court appearance tomorrow morning will determine the next chapter of this sorry saga.
A Tongan student at USP tested positive for Covid-19 in Fiji, Tonga’s Minister of Education Hu’akavameiliku told Parliament this morning.
Education Minister Hu’akavameiliku. Photo/Facebook
He said the person was in stable condition but gave no further details.
Fiji media said 312 positive COVID-19 cases and four related deaths had been recorded today, Tuesday 29.
As Kaniva News reported in May, a Tongan man was tested positive for Covid-19 and was quarantined in Nadi after arriving from Auckland.
Fiji was recording hundreds of daily cases and the numbers would only increase if everyone in Fiji doesn’t get on board to help beat the virus, said public health expert Dr Api Talemaitoga.
Taleimaitoga, an Auckland-based general practitioner who has been a part of New Zealand’s Covid-response efforts, told Stuff New Zealand Fijian health authorities are already struggling to contain the virus.
Talemaitoga said he was particularly concerned about the spread of misinformation about the virus and the vaccine on Fiji’s social media.
“The messages spreading on social media, that the virus is made up, the vaccine is something else – it’s just the … the enemy is the virus and the vaccine is the layer of protection they need,” he said.
“People are just not taking public health advice seriously, and it’s really disappointing. There is no cut-through, a lot are heeding advice, but there are still a lot that don’t want to follow or understand what that means”.
A government interim committee is in charge of preparing Tonga’s rugby league team for the October world cup tournament in England.
PM Pōhiva Tu’i’onetoa. Photo/Kalino Lātū
The committee was set up in May this year with the help of the Asia Pacific Rugby League (APRL).
Known as Interim Management Group (IMG), the committee undertook to do its best to restore the sport after a long-running battle over governance, money and a threatened player boycott.
The committee is working to select players and a coach, the Prime Minister said in a statement this afternoon.
The IMG members are:
Chairman : Prime Minister Pōhiva Tu’i’onetoa
Deputy Chairman and Treasurer : Minister for Finance Tēvita Lavemaau
Secretaries: Chief Secretary Edgar Cocker and Jeremy Edwards (from Asia Pacific Rugby League)
Action Committee members: Minister for Labour Tatafu Moeaki, CEO Dr Fotu Fisi’iahi, Scott Clark and Gareth Holmes.
The revelation came after the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has dismissed Tonga National Rugby League’s (TNRL) appeal against its expulsion from the global governing body in April.
The TNRL was expelled from the International Rugby League (IRL) in March last year.
The Asia-Pacific Rugby League Confederation last year endorsed the bid by a rival body, Tonga Ma’a Tonga Rugby League (TMTRL), for full IRL membership.
The revelation also came after TMRL president Lord Fakafanua previously said he would welcome it if TNRL and TMTRL were merged.
“TNRL is a separate entity with Mate Ma’a Tonga. I would welcome the restoration of TNRL and Mate Ma’a Tonga on the international stage but this is a conversation that must be initiated between TMT and TNRL”.
However, in May APRL said it was taking the lead on the future of Tonga’s international membership.
It said there is no requirement for an IRL member to be in place in time for the Rugby League World Cup but an entity must sign the tournament participation agreement.
It also said discussions were already underway with the Tonga government, the national team management and TMT.
The IRL also said it received a letter from the PM Tu’i’onetoa, and “there was a commonality of purpose in what both parties want to achieve”.
A petition to impeach fraudster Cabinet Minister Akosita Lavulavu is still in the hands of the privilege committee members, the Opposition Party Leader Semisi Sika said.
Akosita and her husband ‘Etuate Lavulavu are set for sentencing this Friday July 2 at the Nuku’alofa Supreme Court at 10am.
The Lavulavu couple had been found guilty after they plundered more than half a million pa’anga of the government school grant scheme.
They were convicted for using student numbers they knew were false to apply for government grants.
“This is an example of the worst sort of dishonesty,” remarked Justice NJ Cooper in his verdict.
“The conduct of these defendants would be disgraceful in anyone, but for a member of cabinet, and a man who used his political connections and position to facilitate these frauds, goes beyond just criminally reprehensible,” he said.
In 2015 a petition was submitted to impeach the then Infrastructure Minister ‘Etuate Lavulavu after he was accused of misusing and mismanaging government funds and nepotism.
Akosita has been placed on leave awaiting his sentencing.
Prince Ata’s claims in front of Cardinal Mafi at a Catholic Church event that a kava club on his estate was misappropriating money have split the community.
Prince Ata. Photo/Supplied
Ata, who was sitting next to the Cardinal, began yelling the allegation, while a speaker was announcing a list of donors who had helped build a new presbytery in Kolovai. One of the donors announced was Toa Ko Pouvalu kava club.
The club is on Prince Ata’s Kolovai estate. Traditionally it belongs to the royal.
The Prince claimed the Toa Ko Pouvalu club had misappropriated money.
The Prince was guest of honour at the official opening of the presbytery last week.
Livestreamed video of the incident appears to show the Cardinal reacting with surprise to the allegations.
The Prince then turned to the Cardinal and appeared to be trying to clarify his claims.
The Prince raised his right hand and shouted in Tongan “nau kai pa’anga nautolu ia,”which roughly translates into English as “they misappropriated money”.
Some guests can be heard laughing, apparently in support of the Prince.
The video of the event was widely shared on Facebook by many Tongan groups and individual Facebook accounts.
One group known as Tonga Felafoaki racked up 1,100 reactions, 111 comments and 582 shares.
It is not known what triggered the Prince’s outburst.
Mixed reactions
Public reactions have been mixed, with people living at the Prince’s estate of Kolovai and its Hihifo vicinity jumping to the royal’s defence and saying he was just making a joke.
“We still stand by our Prince. We are getting used to his way of having fun with his people,” a commenter wrote on Facebook in Tongan.
“It was just his sense of humour,” one said.
“Yep that’s Ata,” another said.
However, critics said it was extremely disrespectful of the Prince to make such an allegation during a church function in front of the head leader of the Catholic Diocese of Tonga and Niue.
“It was rude of him to make such an allegation while the function was livestreamed,” a critic wrote.
“That’s not how a Prince should behave in public”, another said.
Some supported the Prince and said it was good of him to be frank and make such allegation as a deterrent for those who appear to be corrupt.
Prince Ata and the Mormon church
In 2014 His Majesty King Tupou VI sent the then Prime Minister and soldiers to a church in Haveluloto to persuade the Prince to stop a baptism ceremony that would have made him a Mormon.
However, the following year, the Prince was baptised as a Mormon in Hawai’i without the king’s knowledge.
Prince Ata is the king’s second son and fourth in line to the throne. His birth name is Prince Viliami ʻUnuaki-ʻo-Tonga Lalaka moe ʻEiki Tukuʻaho.
The king later appointed him the chiefly title Ata which entitled him to the estate of Kolovai and the island of ‘Atatā.
