Re: Are we wrong or does this government just loves wasting money?
This is the consecutive editorial championing the decision by the overseas prosecutor not to proceed with prosecution of the Police Commissioner.
One of the matters raised by the NZ based prosecutor, to justify not proceeding, was that “interviews of potential witnesses, of an acceptably rigorous standard, were not conducted”.
My issue is with these acceptably rigorous standards.
Who determines what these rigorous standards should be here in the Samoa police force or anywhere in the Samoan public service for that matter?
I am not a police prosecutor or a lawyer and I have no idea what an acceptable rigorous standard is in these investigative matters.
Do you Mr Editor? Or are you taking the word of the NZ based prosecutor?
Are our standards on anything of the same rigour as those for the overseas countries?
Take Samoan standards for getting a driver’s licence.
Are they the same as those for NZ or Australia? I don’t think so.
I know relatives of mine with Samoan drivers’ licences who have migrated to Australia and who have subsequently failed their driving tests.
That is because, in my humble opinion, our local standards of tests are not of the same rigorous standards as overseas.
Or take the case of road construction and maintenance in Samoa.
Are they of the same standard as those of Australia or NZ?
Perhaps if these road works were of the same rigorous standards as those of the overseas countries my car wouldn’t be in the repair shop so many times during the rainy season.
Your editorial seems to imply that there is one widely known standard of behaviour and testing for anything in any country.
The examples above clearly show that that this is not the case.
Please don’t insult my intelligence by running this line as if it is a widely understood and applied principle.
Or maybe this principle was not covered in my Common Sense 101 course.