The decision by the high chiefs of Falelatai to say they accept and endorse only one candidate is undemocratic, unfair, draconian, dictatorial and an act of extortion.

The chiefs of Falelatai are attempting to stop other political parties besides the Human Rights Protection Party from contesting the election in the district and have threatened action if anyone goes against their wishes. They have sent a warning to political parties to refrain from putting up billboards and holding rallies in the district. The chiefs sent a letter to all political warning them not to go against their wishes. The chiefs have accepted HRPP candidate Lupematasila Tologata Tile as their member of parliament, and he should run uncontested.

Understandably, the chiefs have the power to take such action, but is their action illegal and depriving the rights of voters in their district and that of the other candidates who want to contest a ‘free and fair election? It is also easy to assume that the villagers would by now have been told who to vote for. Can the chiefs do that? They have, but it is not right. It has violated the law and the rights of people. According to the Office of the Electoral Commission, such an act is illegal. People have the right to choose who to vote for. If the chiefs or the HRPP candidate had issues with the other candidates, why not challenge it in the Electoral Court?

The villagers will now vote out of fear of being banished and having their houses burned in front of them. What has happened to being a Christian nation? The Bible does not teach people to rule people by driving fear into them. The matai hierarchy is a birthright and a privilege, but it should not entitle people to break laws. The courts have set precedents regarding similar action by chiefs, and each time, such action has been deemed illegal.  The chiefs should be doing their best as traditional leaders to ensure their people are accorded their rights and get a chance to be part of an election which is fair and free.

The chiefs can have their political allegiance, and that can be expressed by ticking the name of the candidate when they are in the polling booth. Each vote is equal to another's and carries the same weight despite of social status, wealth, gender, criminal record, disability, and other things. The chiefs do not have the right to force people to vote for whom they want. This is systematic corruption.

HRPP has steered clear of the situation. The party said they were unaware of the situation. That is doubtful. Their response was ambiguous. HRPP leader Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi says the act is illegal and the courts would be the place to go, and in the same breath, he says, the decision of the chiefs should be respected. Following the law should be everyone’s responsibility. If a political party is being favoured by chiefs in this manner, the party should offer advice to the chiefs that they want to contest the elections fairly and win them the right way.

The elections are less than a month away. It is a chance for people to vote in leaders whom they choose to represent them and not the ones chosen for them.  For many years, voters have been voting along family and village lines, under instruction from the village matai, where candidates are chosen for them or simply for the person who provided the most benefits and gifts. It is no secret that for some, casting a vote means a few hundred in the pocket or a three-day-long alcohol-filled binge session.

A vote is much more than that. It holds the power to ensure the future of children is protected; it could be the long-lost answer to eradicating violence in homes, ridding child vendors off the streets and improving the lives of every child, woman and man.

Do not sell that vote, and do not succumb to pressure by the village council, which tells people who they should vote for or face village penalties. Each matai is a leader, and he or she must ensure that every voter in their village fulfils their right to vote and vote for any candidate they like. Village councils and chiefs have to move away from the practice of enforcing votes because a victory for their favoured candidate means money and progress for them. There is a greater motive at play, which is the good of the nation. Such greed has also resulted in self-serving elected leaders.

A forced should not be counted; it must not be counted.