Why Chief Justice dismissed petition
The petition by George Cowan in relation to the Mauke electorate was heard by Chief Justice in Mauke on Thursday 2nd and Friday 3rd November 2006.
In an oral judgment delivered at 10am on Friday 3rd November, Chief Justice Williams found that neither of the two remaining rounds of the petition, which alleged bribery had been established.
The first allegation was as follows:
“That during the campaign period in August 2006 leading up to the General Election on 26 September 2006, in Rarotonga, Mr Mapu Taia, the successful candidate directly or indirectly gave or offered to give to any electors, namely participants attending the Maire Nui Festival from Mauke Island all being electors on the Mauke roll, valuable consideration, namely the payment of the board and lodgings at the Mauke Hostel, at $3.00 per person making a total of $980.00 for 7 days accommodation, in order to induce the electors to vote (for him).”Section 88(a) of the Electoral Act 2004.”
The Chief Justice held that he doubted that there had been an offer to electors in statements made by Mapu Taia at a meeting in Mauke following the return of the Mauke Tere party.
But in any event there was no proof of any intent to induce the electors. The statement was not made in a political setting. It was made in the context of the triumphant return of the Mauke Tere party.
There was no mention of the forthcoming election and no request to vote for Taia. The Petitioners had completely failed to make out their case to the standard of proof required.
The second allegation of bribery was:
That during the campaign period in August 2006 leading up to the General Elections on 26 September 2006 in Rarotonga, Mr Mapu Taia, the successful candidate directly or indirectly gave to any Electors namely participants attending the Maire Maeva Nui Festival From Mauke Island all being electors on the Mauke roll, valuable consideration, namely the payment of all of their sea freight charges for all their cargo being shipped from Rarotonga to
Mauke, to the value of $506.30 in order to induce the electors to vote (for him). “Section 88(a) Electoral Act.
The evidence revealed that Taia’s daughter had paid the freight. However, Taia’s daughter, who lived on Rarotonga and who was a Rarotonga-based team leader of the Mauke Tere Party was not the electoral agent of her father.
In any event she made the payment not for political purposes but to help out her Mauke Tere Party team mates. Her father had no prior knowledge that she was going to make the payment. Once again, there were no political purposes involved.
On dismissing the petition Chief Justice Williams ordered the Respondent to pay costs.

Headlines : Times 175
- WHAT A MESS
- Surprise resort baby born at Rarotongan
- Carlson makes quick Emergency start
- Apia, here comes Our Beautiful Pacific
- Pacific Blue gets new plane options for here
- New dates for hotel opening
- Why Chief Justice dismissed petition
- Ring the bell, lots of boxing planned
- A boring day off for Maara Vaiimene?
- Cath Kara call in
- Wilkie tells of his Fiji mission
- Ruling on gifts opens up a new era
- Metua Rakei learns to live

Headlines : Times 174
- PM heads back to Fiji
- Rarotonga witnesses give Vaipae evidence
- Cassey carries on
- Avatiu adds up to Peto
- Mauke excavator not factor in election
-Poly Blue offering $100 Sydney-Apia
- All Blacks launch Air New Zealand’s new ‘Round the World’ services
- How Marjorie Crocombe ran into Australian style apartheid
- RARO CALLING
- Shona named Miss South Pacific judge