The Chiefs Keep Their

Power In W. Samoa

From GLEN WRIGHT, in Apia

For the second time in 10 years Western Samoa’s Parliament has voted against universal suffrage. After only one day of debate on March 27, the vote was 37 to 6.

Motion to change the electoral law was introduced by the national as sembly’s youngest member, Letele Taneolevao Siaosi. His proposal was that only Matais (chiefs) be can didates for the assembly, but that the vote be given to all citizens more than 21 years old.

Thus some 8,500 chiefs continue to speak for more than 30,000 adult Western Samoans in matters of government.

The only time universal suffrage has ever been exercised was in 1962 when every adult voted in the inde pendence plebescite, at the insistence of its sponsor, the United Nations Speaking against Siaosi’s motion, MP Fatialofa said that people over 21 who were not chiefs would cause trouble if given the vote.

Scornful

“They would sway the majority, and that is not the right thing to do,” he declared.

Prime Minister Fiame Mata’afa, who supported universal suffrage in the constitutional conventions of 1954 and 1960, argued that in voting for independence and the Constitution in 1962 the people approved restrict ing political power to the chiefs Members of Parliament were just as unanimously adamant that tradi tion and custom be the principle of Western Samoa’s Government, point ing with scorn to the wars, riots, revolutions, insurrections and civil uprisings in countries whose govern ments are based on the legal process.

They argued that the Matai system is as democratic as possible, because Matais are chosen, often from a field of candidates, by unanimous vote of their aigas (extended families).

According to the Constitution the Matais in turn choose 45 of their number every three years as members of Parliament, the Head of State appoints one of them Prime Minister, who selects a cabinet of eight. When

present Head of State Malietoa Tanumafili dies, his successors will be chosen every five years by Parlia ment, which also has power to re move him or them The debate was lackadaisical and characterised by such reasoning as; “People over 21 will agree, and say, ‘the right to vote is not for me’,” — MP Polataivao.

But the six dissenting MP’s, the Press, and a host of youth leaders vigorously oppose this view. Their opinions shaped by exposure to libertarian ideas expounded by school teachers, Press and radio, they chafe under the rigid authoritarianism of the Matai system.

Customarily every morning the chief calls his tribe together and issues the day’s orders; not only who is to do what, but how it is to be done. All production and earnings must be given to him. He takes what he wants and distributes the rest ac cording to a traditional pecking order.

He reserves to himself the right to make all decisions, large and small. He has his choice of the women, too.

Social order

In return, he is obligated to main tain social order and provide for the physical needs of his tribe.

However, thanks to foreign institu tions, recent generations have become much better educated than most of their rulers. Therefore, they argue, they are better equipped to make some decisions, and can make significant contributions to others.

High on the young commoners’ grievance list is the Matai’s self assumed prerogative of taking first choice of the women, both in and out of marriage. This runs counter to the Christian sex code to which all subscribe by virtue of church membership, and to their own design for living.

Although few Samoans abide by Christian ethics, they do make a

vital distinction between free-will and coercion and accuse their chiefs of hypocrisy on this score.

Another cause for dissatisfaction has been election malpractices by the Matais. They have created, and forced their tribes to approve, scores of new Matais, some only ten years old. Such chiefs do not have the traditional attributes: control of customary lands or per formance of government function, but were created solely so that their votes could be manipulated in parliamentary elections.

The government has made it illegal to confer a title on anyone less than 21, but the creation of great numbers of titles for electoral purposes is still possible.

"Rear-guard action"

In an editorial, the Samoa Times, stated: “The whole debate had the distinct atmosphere of a rear-guard action. ... If the opposition is to become no more enlightened than this, it will eventually find itself cutting out the Electoral Act altogether or limiting the amount of education to be given to the growing generation, as more and more young people who form 60 per cent, of the population demand their say in the planning of the future.”