It is a hard pill to swallow to realise that no one from the government side made a single submission to support the repealing of a New Zealand law that is racist and discriminates against Samoans.

Prime Minister Fiame Naomi Mataafa confirmed the government did not make submissions to the Select Committee in New Zealand regarding the attempt to repeal the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982.

Her reasons are very diplomatic. "Consider Samoa—would we want another government to come here and tell us what to do?" Fiame told this newspaper.

What was the government scared of when it decided not to make submissions for something that would give justice to a group of Samoans who were treated with indignity? The first thing that comes to mind is that they did not want to step on the toes of their aid partners, someone who has been key in direct budget funding and other grants.

To think this is like being held at ransom. This is a similar situation when Samoa decided to be absent from voting to stop the genocide happening in the Middle East. The government does not want to have a stand.

For the Prime Minister to say this was a law in another sovereign nation is a fair comment. It is not good to interfere in the affairs of another country. However, would you stay silent when this impacts Samoans, the people of this nation?

The law may be in New Zealand but the injustice was done to the people of this land, not New Zealanders. These people still reside in this country. Are you not the government of these people? Are you not supposed to be the voice of these people, are you not to serve or protect them?

Maybe the government did not make submissions as the government, but this did not stop any government members from making submissions on their own accords as leaders or matai. Even this was not done.

The most ironic thing about this whole affair is the position of the Speaker of the House, Papali'i Li'o Tae'u-Masipau. He was in the gallery watching the first reading of this bill in the Beehive. He was excited and even made the assumption that the presence of the Samoan members of parliament had something to do with the bill making it past the first reading.

Straight after he announced his intention, as the Speaker of Samoa's Legislative Assembly, to encourage Samoan parliamentarians to submit proposals to the Select Committee in New Zealand to restore citizenship rights for Samoans living there.

He expressed his commitment to encouraging participation from Samoans in New Zealand and pledged to submit a written proposal to the Select Committee upon his return.

This is a U-turn from what he had said back then. Now he has confirmed that he did not make a submission as he had promised in April when he attended the first reading of the bill in New Zealand.

"The bill mainly concerns Samoans living in New Zealand," Papali'i said. "I didn't make a submission, but other MPs were free to do so if they wished."

As a millennial would say, ‘for reals’. This is a bill not about Samoans living in New Zealand about about Samoans born between 1924 and 1948 and still living in Samoa.

It was an opportunity to take back what was wrongfully stripped from Samoans born between 1924 and 1948.

This is the citizenship that the Muldoon-led government in 1982 did not see fit to offer Samoans, a country they ruled for almost four decades, made use of its resources and people but when it came to giving back what they deserved, it was denied.

When the Privy Council granted New Zealand citizenship to Western Samoans born since 1924, the government did not accept this decision. It rushed through an act granting New Zealand citizenship only to Western Samoans who were living in New Zealand on 14 September 1982 or subsequently obtained permanent residence.

After Western Samoa achieved independence in 1962, the status of Samoans living in New Zealand was uncertain. In a case taken to the Privy Council, Falema'i Lesa, a Samoan woman living in New Zealand, pressed her claim to be a New Zealand citizen. The Privy Council ruled that all Western Samoans born between 1924 and 1948 were British subjects and that in 1949 they and their descendants had become New Zealand citizens.

Many Samoans felt betrayed by the New Zealand government’s response. The 1982 act remains a concern for Samoans in New Zealand who desire freedom of movement between the two countries. In March 2003, a petition with 90,000 signatures calling for the law’s repeal was presented to Parliament. Outside, about 2000 Samoans protested with speeches, dancing, and singing.

There will be a second reading and the bill needs to pass that and these submissions would help that.

The Opposition did their best, made written submissions and a small contingent even flew to New Zealand to make oral submissions.

This is not about diplomacy, this is about justice. If the government will not help this purpose, then who will?