Can the Cabinet provide the actual law(s) they followed when making this ruling, and why the government of The South Pacific should consider its validity over an attempt to subvert the current boundaries in the Charter?

EDIT: if the Cabinet is officially using an executive action, perhaps the Cabinet may attempt to explain how this ruling clearly does not contradict protocol followed in the Election Act or other clauses of the Charter.

Until such conditions are met, I advise that the region should follow what is outlined in the law rather than some hodgepodge "executive action".