Supreme Court questioned

THE highest court in the land is the Supreme Court.Vested in it is the primary responsibility of interpreting the Constitution and all sub-ordinate laws.It is the last post for all matters legal and its decisions are binding on all but itself. Its decisions are final and take the form of laws.It must never create confusion or cause the public to question its decisions.This is an awesome responsibility that must be guarded religiously.Last Friday, the Supreme Court created a lot of confusion and concern by a decision which is yet to be erased from the minds of the people.

The court handed down a decision in the matter of Sir Michael Thomas Somare versus the Ombudsman Commission but, at the same time, made observations that impacted a totally different matter which had been decided by an earlier Supreme Court.Last Friday’s court went to great lengths to actually discuss the merits and demerits of that earlier decision in a manner so as to leave no doubts in the mind of the reader that this court was rendering the earlier decision void.

This is what courts do all the time but, in this instance, this was not the matter before it.

The earlier matter concerned the case of Patrick Pruaitch versus the Ombudsman Commission, the public prosecutor and the Leadership Tribunal.That court in March this year quashed earlier Supreme Court and National Court decisions which suspended Pruaitch as finance and treasury minister and restored him as leader until matters pending before court were decided.

Last week’s decision raised four arguments to suggest that the Pruaitch Case 2, as the March judgment was described, was wrong.

The fourth reason, the court states, is that “the decision in Pruaitch Case 2 does not correctly represent the law in so far as it concerns challenges against the Ombudsman’s decisions”.

If further states: “The Pruaitch Case 2 runs against the spirit and intent of section 217(6) of the Constitution and the whole scheme of making leaders accountable for the sake of good leadership, good administration and good governance.”Elsewhere in the decision, it states: “For avoidance of doubt, we reiterate that suspension is triggered from the moment a decision is made to refer a leader to a leadership tribunal by the public prosecutor ...”

This basically sums up this court’s view of the earlier court decision and it only falls short of an order of the court stating the same to have full effect.In the mind of any reasonable man on the street reading this judgment, the earlier court decision stands voided.Indeed, this is how one former acting judge read it and influenced a newspaper to publish that opinion.Today there are raging and unanswered questions in the minds of the people: Is Pruaitch suspended or not suspended?

Is the March Supreme Court decision voided or not?Who gets to make the announcement since there has been no order of the court stating this?Pruaitch himself has accused the court of “abuse of judicial powers” and contravening the courts’ rules, principles of precedents and finality in decision making.The Supreme Court will need to answer those charges. It owes it to the people generally and to Pruaitch and his family and supporters to answer these questions as a matter of urgency.

A number of issues also bug the common man who is not well versed with the traditions, rules and processes of courts.If a three-man bench made the March decision, surely the next Supreme Court that decides on its ruling should comprise a bench greater than three men.Since Pruaitch Case 2 was not the matter before this court, but arguments have been raised which seem to quash that decision, where do the orders come from? Who issues them for this judgment to supersede the earlier one, if that is to be the process?

And, most glaringly, last Friday’s Supreme Court was led by Deputy Chief Justice Gibbs Salika. He also happens to be the judge appointed as chairman of the Pruaitch tribunal.The common man must be pardoned if he were to read conflict of interest into this.That does not look good at all.