Skip to main content

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Law Reform in Plural Societies

Part of the book series: The World of Small States ((WSS,volume 2))

  • 419 Accesses

Abstract

On 10 December 2011, following several unsuccessful attempts to reach agreement, and convinced that the village matai (traditional Samoan chief) Leota Ituau Ale (Ale) was acting against the interests of the village, the village council of Solosolo banished Ale and his family from the village of Solosolo. On 9 February 2012, Ale petitioned the Land and Titles Court of Samoa (LTC) to overturn the decision of the village council. A week later, in a decision handed down on 17 February 2012, the LTC ruled in favour of Ale and revoked the banishment order of the village council. On 20 February 2012, a family home belonging to Ale at Solosolo was scorched to the ground. Despite the LTC decision, the village council continued to enforce its banishment order over Ale and his descendants.

On 24 February 2012, deeply affected by the destruction of Ale’s residence, Satoa a village youth wrote to the editor of the local newspaper the Samoa Observer, expressing profound disappointment, and questioned the tofa faatupu (customary deep wisdom) and the Christian morals of the village council. He challenged Solosolo villagers around the globe to fight against ‘village corruption’, to prevent future destruction to property and families resulting from village council decisions in Samoa.

On 28 February 2012, Satoa’s family was banished from Solosolo. Satoa’s parents paid ST$2,000 and two sows, following which the banishment order was partially lifted and only Satoa’s family members were allowed to remain and participate in village activities. The banishment order against Satoa remained. From the village council’s perspective, Satoa was banished because he had shamed the village by publicising Solosolo village matters in the local newspaper. It was also to remind the youth to respect the institution of the village council, which is the highest traditional authority responsible for the welfare of the village.

Satoa later published a public apology to the Solosolo village council in the local newspaper. He accepted the banishment order against him, but also posed a challenge, ‘if the village council can prohibit the freedom of speech, there is no point in government preaching the importance of individual rights’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Ripine (2012), Samoa Observer.

  2. 2.

    Leota Leuluaialii Ituau Ale et al v Alii & Faipule Solosolo (Unreported, Land and Titles Court of Samoa, LC.11469 P2, 17 February 2012). Solosolo is a Samoan village on the eastern coast of Apia.

  3. 3.

    Ilalio (2012), Samoa Observer.

  4. 4.

    Pseudonym, 2012, Samoa Observer. The writer wrote under a pseudonym, and was later identified by the local newspaper as Satoa. Since the banishment order, Satoa has lived in another village, while his wife and two children continue to live at Solosolo.

  5. 5.

    Tupufia (2012), The Samoa Observer.

  6. 6.

    Ibid.

  7. 7.

    McLachlan (1988), p. 336. In a study on state recognition of customary laws in the South Pacific, McLachlan finds that due to the complexities of the relationship between state law and customs, studies of each separate jurisdiction are realistic.

  8. 8.

    Meleisea (1987).

  9. 9.

    Ibid; Field (1984), Campbell (1990).

  10. 10.

    Taule’alo et al. (2002), p. 2.

  11. 11.

    Constitution of the Independent State of Samoa 1962 (Samoa) art 102.

  12. 12.

    Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2011), p. 27. Other inhabited islands Manono and Apolima account for less than 3% of the population and are counted in the Upolu population.

  13. 13.

    Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2009a, b), p. 25, 31. A majority of 68% of households surveyed were classified as agriculturally active, 34% were involved in subsistence farming largely for home consumption.

  14. 14.

    Samoa Bureau of Statistics, above n 12, 27–28. This 2011 census found that of the working age group of Samoa aged 15 and above (115,871), 59% were non-economically active, while 41% were economically active. Of the non-economically active, 71.4% were involved in domestic duties and 23% attended school. Of the 41% economically active, 35.6% were involved in subsistence employment such as agriculture, farming and fishing while 57% were employed in non-subsistence employment.

  15. 15.

    Ibid, 68. About 46% of the population 5 years and above only reached secondary education and 22% attained tertiary education. Although about 87% of the population aged 15 and over reached secondary school or achieved the Pacific Senior Secondary Certificate (PSSC), only 6% completed a Post-Secondary Certificate, 4% gained diplomas, and 3% completed a first degree or higher qualification.

  16. 16.

    Ibid. Of 26,205 Samoan households surveyed, only 2611 had access to a computer of which 1905 can access internet, the majority of this number were located in the urban area Apia.

  17. 17.

    The origins of Samoa’s indigenous institutions are complex. A simplified account of it in this book could unfortunately diminish its importance. The brief account here is to put this study into context.

  18. 18.

    Suaalii-Sauni et al. (2009), p. 157.

  19. 19.

    Vaai (1999), p. 37.

  20. 20.

    Ibid, 41.

  21. 21.

    Le Tagaloa (1992), p. 121.

  22. 22.

    Interview with VC1 Focus Group (Samoa, 1 March 2011).

  23. 23.

    Meleisea (1987), pp. 1–2.

  24. 24.

    Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2001), p. 1.

  25. 25.

    Officer of Internal Affairs (MWSCD) to Lalotoa Mulitalo (2012).

  26. 26.

    Le Tagaloa, above n 21, 118–119.

  27. 27.

    Keesing (1934), p. 52.

  28. 28.

    Samoa Bureau of Statistics, above, n24.

  29. 29.

    Acts Interpretation Act 2015 (Samoa) s 3.

  30. 30.

    Interview with SOH Respondent 4 (Samoa, 11 July 2011).

  31. 31.

    Regulations Ordinance 1953 (Samoa).

  32. 32.

    Constitution of the Independent State of Samoa (1962) art 111; Narokobi (1989), p. 4; Aleck (1995), p. 3.

  33. 33.

    For the procedure of law making of the village councils, see Suaalii-Sauni et al. (eds), above, n 18, 165.

  34. 34.

    Le Tagaloa (1992), pp. 117, 121. Le Tagaloa argues that the faamatai is the most appropriate social organisation for the Samoan people on the basis that the faamatai gives everyone the right to be an heir, the insistence of culture on unity or holistic view of life, the inclusive decision-making process of soalaupule, and the ability of the Samoan culture to adapt to change and new ideas.

References

  • Aleck J (1995) Introduction: custom is law in Papua New Guinea. In: Aleck J, Rannelles J (eds) Custom at the crossroads. University of Papua New Guinea, p 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell IC (1990) A history of the Pacific Islands. University of Queensland Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Email from an Officer of Internal Affairs (MWSCD) to Lalotoa Mulitalo (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Field MH (1984) MAU – Samoa’s struggle against New Zealand oppression. A.H. & A.W. Reed Ltd

    Google Scholar 

  • Ilalio MH (2012) Family home gutted after court case. Samoa Observer Samoa

    Google Scholar 

  • Keesing FM (1934) Modern Samoa, its government and changing life. George Allen & Unwin Ltd, London, p 52

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Tagaloa AF (1992) The Samoan culture and governance. In: Crocombe R et al (eds) Culture and democracy in the South Pacific. University of the South Pacific, pp 117, 121

    Google Scholar 

  • McLachlan C (1988) State recognition of customary law in the South Pacific. PhD Thesis, University of London, p 336

    Google Scholar 

  • Meleisea M (1987) The making of modern Samoa: traditional authority and colonial administration in the history of Western Samoa. University of the South Pacific Fiji, pp 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  • Narokobi B (1989) Lo Bilong Yumi Yet: Law and Custom in Melanesia. Melanesian Institute for Pastoral and Socio-Economic Service and the University of the South Pacific, Fiji, p 4

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripine S (2012) Solosolo banishes former Speaker Leota Itu’au Ale again. Samoa Observer Samoa

    Google Scholar 

  • Sad Solosolo blood [sic] (2012) Shame on you Solosolo! Samoa Observer Samoa

    Google Scholar 

  • Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2001) Population and Housing Census

    Google Scholar 

  • Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2009a) Agriculture Census Analytical Report, p 25

    Google Scholar 

  • Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2009b) Agriculture Census Tabulation Report, p 31

    Google Scholar 

  • Samoa Bureau of Statistics (2011) Population and Housing Census Analytical Report, p 27

    Google Scholar 

  • Suaalii-Sauni T et al (eds) (2009) Su’esu’e Manogi: In Search of Fragrance, Tui Atua Tupua Tamasese Ta’isi and the Samoan Indigenous Reference. National University of Samoa, p 157

    Google Scholar 

  • Taule’alo TI, Fong SD, Setefano PM (2002) Samoan customary lands at the crossroads - options for sustainable management. In: Proceedings of the National Environment Forum, Department of Lands, Surveys and Environment

    Google Scholar 

  • Tupufia LT (2012) Banned forever. Samoa Observer Samoa

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaai S (1999) Samoa Faamatai and the Rule of Law. National University of Samoa, p 37

    Google Scholar 

Court Decision

  • Leota Leuluaialii Ituau Ale et al v Alii & Faipule Solosolo (Unreported, Land and Titles Court of Samoa, LC.11469 P2, 17 February 2012)

    Google Scholar 

Legislation

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mulitalo Ropinisone Silipa Seumanutafa, T.L. (2018). Introduction. In: Law Reform in Plural Societies. The World of Small States, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65524-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65524-6_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65523-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65524-6

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics