Government Defends Sacking of Lulutai CEO Poasi Tei, Citing Poor Performance and Political Favouritism
The government has mounted a firm defence against a lawsuit filed by former Lulutai Airlines CEO Poasi Tei, rejecting claims of wrongful dismissal and asserting that the termination was lawful, necessary, and in the public interest.
In legal filings obtained by Tonga Independent News, the government argues that Tei’s employment was terminated under clause 13.1 of his contract, which permits dismissal with reasonable notice and without cause. According to the defence, Tei was given one month’s written notice, fulfilling all contractual obligations. It contends there was no requirement to provide advance warning or to offer Tei a hearing prior to his removal.
The government disputes that Tei’s performance warranted his continued leadership, citing what it describes as a consistent pattern of poor financial and operational outcomes at the airline during his tenure. While acknowledging that formal appraisals had recorded high scores, the defence challenges their accuracy and questions their reliability as reflections of Tei’s actual performance.
More pointedly, the defence argues that Tei’s appointment as CEO was flawed from the outset. It references his disqualification from Parliament in 2022 following electoral bribery convictions and notes that his subsequent appointment to lead the national airline was approved by the same Prime Minister who had earlier appointed him to Cabinet. The government characterises the appointment as an act of cronyism and asserts that the employment contract lacked the mutual trust and good faith essential for a valid agreement.
Concerns were also raised about gratuity payments received by Tei, which the government claims were approved during a period of financial instability at Lulutai Airlines, and allegedly authorised without appropriate assessment. These payments, it states, were signed off by the then Prime Minister, who concurrently chaired the airline’s board.
In response to Tei’s claim that the dismissal was politically motivated, the government denies any such influence. It maintains that the decision to terminate his contract was made by a newly appointed board in February 2025, following an internal review that raised serious concerns about the company’s financial trajectory and mounting public criticism.
The government further rejects any assertion that Tei is owed additional compensation or the full value of his contract, insisting the one-month notice was fair and compliant with the agreement. It also dismisses Tei’s reliance on implied legal principles such as the right to be heard or mutual trust, arguing that clear contractual terms override such concepts.
The government concludes that the dismissal was a proportionate response to a struggling organisation in need of decisive reform. It is seeking full dismissal of Tei’s claims, reimbursement of legal costs, and any further orders the court considers appropriate.
Tei’s lawsuit, which alleges wrongful dismissal and breach of contract, has reignited public debate over political interference in public sector appointments. While some argue that his appointment should never have occurred, others view the dismissal as abrupt and unjustified. The case now proceeds through the courts, where it will likely test the boundaries of executive discretion, ethical governance, and public accountability in Tonga.
The case continues.
Tu’ifua Vailena
