The lawyer for unsuccessful Faasaleleaga No.2 candidate Magele Sekati Fiaui told the Electoral Court on Friday that no evidence was presented by the respondent to disprove testimony placing sitting member of parliament Vaaelua Senetenari Samau—also known as Bible—at an alleged committee meeting where money was said to have been distributed.

Counsel Mapusua Tanya Toailoa, appearing for Magele, said the petitioner’s witness, Lawrence, had clearly identified and placed Vaaelua at a meeting on 7 June 2025, which formed part of the allegations of bribery and treating. She said it was not the petitioner’s duty to prove Vaaelua’s absence, but for the respondent to provide evidence showing he was elsewhere.

“Our evidence was clear that he was there,” Mapusua submitted. “If the respondent says the meeting did not happen or that Bible wasn’t there, then it’s for them to point to evidence showing he was somewhere else. There’s no such evidence before the court.”

She added that while members of the constituency committee claimed they were not present on that day, their absence was not proof that the meeting never occurred or that the MP was not there. “Them saying they weren’t there is not the same as saying Bible wasn’t there,” she told the court.

Mapusua argued that the respondent’s position effectively invited the court to find that the petitioner’s witness was fabricating his evidence. “The only way their case stands is if the court concludes that Lawrence is lying,” she said. “But there’s no evidence to support that inference.”

Magele’s petition challenges Vaaelua’s election win for the Falealupo constituency, alleging that money was distributed during a committee meeting as part of campaign-related activities.

In response, Vaaelua has filed a counter-petition accusing Magele of engaging in similar electoral offences during the campaign period. Both petitions are being heard together.

The matter is being presided over by Justice Leutele Mata Tuatagaloa and Justice Loau Donald Kerslake, who are expected to deliver their ruling once submissions from both sides are complete.