Governments and public institutions around the world have strict laws and policies governing the giving of gifts to public officials.

The rationale behind these laws or policies, in most democratic nations with similar systems of governance to Samoa, is to maintain the integrity of the public officials and the offices they occupy as well as to show citizens that these officials can exercise judgment in the course of their work with impartiality, independence, and neutrality.

The three pillars mentioned above lie at the core of the rule of law, and while they are considered critically important attributes for judges and arbitrators of a judicial system, they are just as important for other leading public officials such as Prime Ministers, Cabinet Ministers, and senior and mid-level public servants within the government. In fact all public officials irrespective of seniority within the bureaucracy. 

This is why the article (Ministers gifted $40,000) in yesterday’s Weekend Observer edition – which reported on the various Cabinet Ministers including the Prime Minister and senior bureaucrats receiving gifts of cash totaling $40,000 from the American Samoa government when they visited Pago Pago last week to participate in the 3rd Atoa o Samoa summit – should be a concern for citizens who would want more transparency from the Government.

The article reported that Samoan Cabinet ministers and government representatives were given a total of $40,000 in cash as gifts by the American Samoan Government during the fa’aoso or the traditional gift exchange.

The Samoan government's delegation comprised Prime Minister, Fiame Naomi Maatafa, who received $7,000, and Cabinet Ministers including the Minister of Works, Transport and Infrastructure, Olo Fiti Vaai, Minister of Finance, Mulipola Anarosa Molioo, Minister of Commerce, Industry and Labour, Leatinuu Wayne Sooialo, Minister of Health, Valasi Tafito Selesel, and Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, Laauli Polataivao Schmidt who each received $4,000.

We understand that there is a cultural element behind the traditional gift exchange of fa’aoso – which is considered essential in nurturing and growing relationships between two parties – but the cultural practice in itself already clashes with the values of a democratic government, to be accountable and transparent, as well as for our public officials to be seen to be impartial, independent, and neutral in the course of their public duties.

There is no questioning their commitment to Samoa when they attended the 3rd Atoa o Samoa summit in Pago Pago last week, but the Government leaders’ failure to publish a full list of all public officials who traveled to Pago Pago and details of the gifts they received (in cash or kind) upon their return to Apia points to non-transparency on their part. 

The underlying point is that the gifts that the Samoa Government took over to Pago Pago to exchange with the American Samoa government officials, as part of their cultural obligations under fa’aoso, were paid for using taxpayer money as confirmed by La’auli Leuatea Schmidt, the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries. At the very least, Samoan taxpayers and the public should have been privy to details on who received what or how much.

Going forward, it is time for the Government to consider formulating guidelines on gift giving or receiving during the course of public officials undertaking official duties on behalf of Samoa. It might want to look at the guidelines that Australia currently uses, which can be found on the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet website, and set out the process for the public officials. Among its various features, the guidelines have a section for “Allowable limit”, which gives a monetary value of a gift from “government sources” (AUD$750) or “private/industry sources” (AUD$300) to set the boundary considered appropriate under the law. The next section on “declaration” highlights the need for Australian public officials to make a declaration to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet through the completion of a declaration to advise that the allowable limit was exceeded.

The Samoan Government guidelines, if the current Administration agrees to go down this path in order to promote transparency and accountability, should have a provision that will make it mandatory for public officials to sell gifts that exceed the allowable limit or give the cash that exceeded the allowable limit to a local charity. 

It would be wrong for our leaders to think that it is okay for public officials in the Government to accept $40,000 in monetary gifts, and not make a public declaration to the people of Samoa, whose hard-earned taxes were initially used to purchase the gifts for the cultural exchange. Surely, after celebrating the country’s 60th Independence anniversary, there should be an appetite amongst Samoa’s current leaders for a new culture of governing based on the pillars of the rule of law.