The Electoral Court has voided the election of Deputy Prime Minister Toelupe Poumulinuku Onesemo, finding that bribery occurred in the 2025 general election, raising concerns about an alleged $100,000 payment and a potential conflict of interest involving the Attorney General.

In a ruling delivered on 24 March 2026, the court found that $150 was given to a voter to influence how he voted in the Falealili No.1 constituency.

The court said the payment was made on the eve of the election by Leapagatele Petelo, who it found acted as an agent of the respondent, a FAST Party member.

It ruled that even without a formal appointment, Petelo’s close links to the respondent’s campaign meant the respondent was responsible for the act.

Evidence accepted by the court showed the money was handed to the voter, Nofovaga, at his home late at night. The court said the words used made it clear that the payment was not a gift but was intended to secure a vote.

The court said it was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that bribery had been proven and declared the election void.

The petition was brought by HRPP member Tuiloma Laniselota Lameko.

The court noted that the respondent did not give evidence to challenge the claims and relied on written submissions. While there were inconsistencies in witness accounts, it said these did not undermine the overall credibility of the evidence.

In separate remarks, the court described the case as involving “unprecedented circumstances,” including allegations that $100,000 was offered to the petitioner to withdraw the case.

The allegation was supported by an audio recording and claims of witness intimidation. The court also noted that 49 subpoenaed witnesses failed to appear.

It directed that the alleged payment be referred to the Attorney General for review and possible action.

However, the court also noted that the Attorney General had appeared as counsel for the respondent in the same proceedings, and said appropriate steps must be taken to avoid any potential conflict of interest as the matter moves forward.

The court declined to pursue a counter-petition against the petitioner and ordered that each party bear their own legal costs.