Attorney General, Savalenoa Mareva Betham-Annandale has confirmed walking out of an urgent Supreme Court hearing which was convened on Sunday to hear a motion by the Fa’atuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi (F.A.S.T.) party.

Responding to a Samoa Observer story on her abruptly leaving a Supreme Court hearing, which was presided over by Chief Justice His Honour Satiu Simativa Perese, Justice Vui Clarence Nelson and Justice Tafaoimalo Leilani Tuala-Warren on Sunday morning, the Attorney General's Office confirmed in a statement that she left the hearing. 

“To set the record straight, this press release contextualizes Media Reports that I walked out of a hearing of an application by FAST this morning,” said Savalenoa in the statement.

The motion filed by the Faatuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi (F.A.S.T) party was to overturn an order from the Head of State to suspend Parliament's scheduled swearing-in on Monday, made via a late-night order issued on Saturday.

According to Savalenoa, on Sunday 23 May 2021 at around 9am, lawyer George Latu and a process server turned up at her home in an attempt to serve an application to attend the Court. 

“This attempt was apparently made on the instructions of the Court Registrar. Out of courtesy to Mr Latu, a senior lawyer, my husband invited him to wait at the conference room of his office next door to my home, where I eventually met with Mr Latu," reads the statement. 

“I explained to Mr Latu that I was meeting him out of professional courtesy. He attempted to serve documents on me. I explained that I was refusing service and he said that he was acting on the instructions of the Court Registrar. 

“I was not shown any such instructions and presumably, Mr Latu wanted to convey that message, because Rule 26 of the Civil Procedure (Supreme Court) Rules 1980 clearly prohibits service on a Sunday."

Savalenoa then outlined that Rule 26 of the Civil Procedure that when process may not be served or executed - no process shall be served or executed on a Sunday or on Christmas Day, Good Friday or Anzac Day. 

“If any process is so served or executed, the service or execution shall be void and have no effect," she added in the statement.

“Additionally, it seemed less than appropriate that I be summoned to a Court hearing without knowledge of the substance of the matter.” 

As reported earlier the court registrar, who is not authorised to speak to the media, said the hearing was in session when the Attorney General exited the court room despite the Chief Justice asking her to sit.

“[The A.G.] walked out and the Chief Justice repeatedly told her to sit down several times but she left,” said the registrar.

According to the statement, Savalenoa said upon arriving at the courthouse she enquired with the registrar as to whether they would proceed to an in-chambers meeting and she confirmed that that was so.

“We were called to the in-chambers meeting, which was actually being held inside the Supreme Court #1," the statement added. 

“Upon the arrival of the Justices, the Deputy Registrar called out the name of the matter, something more consistent with a hearing rather than an in-chambers meeting. 

"I rose to enquire whether we were there for an in-chambers meeting or a court hearing to which the Honourable Chief Justice confirmed it was in-chambers. 

“I rose again to advise the Court I was not there to represent anyone as I had not been served and had no instructions. 

“Again, the Honourable Chief Justice stated that I was served on a pickwick basis and that the application was essentially an ex parte, and whether I wished to respond or not, it did not matter. I rose again to object but was told to sit down. 

“The Honourable Chief Justice then invited Mrs Heather-Latu to speak to her application. At that point, it was clear to me that this gathering had been convened for a hearing and whatever application Mrs Heather-Latu had filed was about to start. 

"I then politely rose again to advise the Honourable Court that I would take my leave as I felt it was not appropriate.” 

Further down the statement Savalenoa confirmed walking out of the court hearing despite representing one of the parties in the substantive proceedings, Office of the Electoral Commission last week.

“I then walked out of what I had been advised to be an in-chambers meeting. It was clear to me that it was actually a court hearing of an application of which I had not been duly served. 

“Additionally, even if that attempt at service could be construed as service, it would have afforded little or no time for preparation, including taking instructions from the client, basic requirements for a fair hearing.

“It is my respectful view that the right to a fair hearing and the principles of natural justice have to be duly observed and adhered to for all parties involved in a matter. 

“I will await the proper service of such matter at my Office at level 6 of TATTE Building, where I will then be in a position to read and understand what has been filed and sought, take instructions and be in a position to file an appropriate response.”