Attorney General Mauga Precious Chang, who previously acted as counsel for former Deputy Prime Minister Toelupe Pou Onesemo before her appointment, has stood down lawyer Letoafaiga DJ Fong from appearing at a court mention on 25 March, which was called to address an alleged $100,000 bribery involving Toelupe, whom she previously represented.

The Electoral Court on 24 March delivered its judgment and ancillary remarks in the election petition, voiding Toelupe’s seat after finding him guilty of bribery. The court also raised issues, including the alleged $100,000 payment and possible contempt of court involving witnesses who failed to appear.

In those remarks, the court directed amicus curiae Letoafaiga, who had acted in that role from the outset of the petition, to appear at the mention on 25 March.

However, when the matter was called, Letoafaiga had been replaced by lawyers Violina Leilua and Jasmine Faleafaga.

Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese queried why counsel who had been involved from the beginning of the case did not appear.

The Office of the Attorney General advised the court that Letoafaiga had been stood down on the instructions of the Attorney General.

Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke then directed that counsel who had carriage of the matter from the outset should continue to assist the court.

The Attorney General’s office told the court it would confirm its instructions and provide an update when the matter is recalled. The court directed that the status of Letoafaiga as lead counsel be clarified and that progress on addressing its earlier remarks be reported.

The court also directed that lawyers from other parties not be present, with the matter to be handled solely by the Attorney General’s office.

The 25 March mention was adjourned and rescheduled to Tuesday, 31 March.

Two days later, on 27 March, the Attorney General’s office issued a statement maintaining that the judiciary, as a separate arm of government, does not have the power to direct decisions on investigations or prosecutions.

In its ancillary remarks on 24 March, the court also highlighted a potential conflict of interest, noting that the Attorney General had previously acted as counsel for Toelupe before her appointment.