18 February 2026
Rt Hon Christopher Luxon
Prime Minister of New Zealand.
Re: Proposed Visit to Samoa — Rule of Law and Governance Concerns
Prime Minister,
New Zealand’s relationship with Samoa is historic, close, and deeply valued. That relationship has always been grounded in shared commitments to democracy, judicial independence, and the rule of law.
It is precisely because of that relationship that your proposed visit to meet with the PM of Samoa, La’auli Leuatea Schmidt in March 2026 raises serious concern.
The Samoan Prime Minister is currently awaiting the outcome of criminal proceedings involving serious charges before the courts. At the same time, there are credible public concerns regarding executive appointments made outside established constitutional or statutory due process — including the appointment of the new Attorney-General and the installation of District Committee leadership reportedly including individuals recently convicted by the courts and many more.
These issues are not political disputes. They go to the heart of constitutional governance.
Why This Matters
New Zealand has consistently positioned itself as a regional champion of:
• Judicial independence
• Separation of powers
• Anti-corruption standards
• Transparent public appointments
• Respect for due process
These principles are not aspirational. They are embedded in:
• The Commonwealth Charter (commitments to democracy and rule of law)
• The United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC)
• Longstanding Pacific Islands Forum governance standards
• New Zealand’s own foreign policy framework emphasising accountable institutions
An official visit at a time when a sitting Prime Minister faces pending criminal adjudication risks creating the perception — whether intended or not — that New Zealand is prepared to overlook unresolved rule-of-law issues in favour of diplomatic convenience.
Perception matters in constitutional democracies. Legitimacy matters in the Pacific.
The Risk to New Zealand’s Credibility
If the visit proceeds before the conclusion of the criminal process:
- It may be interpreted as tacit political endorsement of executive conduct currently under judicial scrutiny.
- It risks undermining confidence in judicial independence in Samoa.
- It weakens New Zealand’s moral authority when advocating for governance reforms elsewhere in the region.
- It places New Zealand diplomatically at risk should adverse findings emerge.
New Zealand has historically exercised quiet but principled leadership in the Pacific. That leadership is strongest when it is anchored in consistent standards — not selective ones.
A Principled Alternative
This is not a call for disengagement from Samoa.
It is a call for principled engagement.
A temporary postponement of the visit until the criminal proceedings are resolved would:
- Affirm respect for judicial independence.
- Protect New Zealand’s diplomatic integrity.
- Signal that constitutional process is non-negotiable.
- Demonstrate that Pacific partnerships are grounded in shared governance standards — not personalities.
Such a position would strengthen, not weaken, the bilateral relationship in the long term.
Prime Minister, New Zealand’s standing in the Pacific is built not only on aid and diplomacy, but on consistency. When governance standards are tested, silence or symbolism carries weight.
At this critical juncture, leadership requires clarity.
We respectfully urge you to reconsider the timing of this visit until the judicial process in Samoa has concluded and constitutional concerns are addressed.
New Zealand’s credibility — and the integrity of regional democratic norms — depend on it.
Sincerely,
Pulotu Sala Canada Alofa McCarthy
CTV Media
Aotearoa/New Zealand
