PNGBLOGS

I have not participated fully in the discourse concerning the disqualifications of the Chief Justice and Mr Justice Kirriwom because I believed in the system. Today I believe the system’s viability is at stake. I have practised law in this country for 40 years and this is the first time that we have a conflict between all three arms of government. We did have the first one between the judiciary and the executive when Minister Rooney was sentenced for contempt of Court and her subsequent release from Bomana on licence resulted in the resignations of the judges. The crisis that we are now witnessing is two fold. One concerns the ruling and orders of the court on 12 December 2011 in proceedings SCR of 2011. The other concerns the perceived bias by a number of judges of this court. The two in my humble view should not have been confused or fused together into the same bundle. If so we will be digging our own graves. By this I mean the disaster that has befallen the national judicial sy

The action of the O’Neil/ Namah Government is not legitimate. To use Section 105 of the Constitution which is not about deferral is outright abuse of our Constitution. There are specific provisions on deferral under Section 246 which provides for deferral under a State of Emergency and in such a case it can only be in 2 month time frames with report back to Parliament after each 2 months (Section 239 (3)). If the rolls and the security issues warrant a State of Emergency (which I do not agree with) then it could be implemented in that way. If the Electoral Commissioner reported that more time was needed for the rolls then that also would be acceptable (but two months of intensive work would solve the roll problems that are common every election). However, it turns out that the so-called report to Parliament today did not come from the Electoral Commissioner's Office. Whose report was it? It was yet another lie which was presented as if it had come from the Electoral Commissioner. (

The action of the O’Neil/ Namah Government is not legitimate. To use Section 105 of the Constitution which is not about deferral is outright abuse of our Constitution. There are specific provisions on deferral under Section 246 which provides for deferral under a State of Emergency and in such a case it can only be in 2 month time frames with report back to Parliament after each 2 months (Section 239 (3)). If the rolls and the security issues warrant a State of Emergency (which I do not agree with) then it could be implemented in that way. If the Electoral Commissioner reported that more time was needed for the rolls then that also would be acceptable (but two months of intensive work would solve the roll problems that are common every election). However, it turns out that the so-called report to Parliament today did not come from the Electoral Commissioner's Office. Whose report was it? It was yet another lie which was presented as if it had come from the Electoral Commissio

PAPUA NEW GUINEA'S decision to delay national elections by six months has raised concerns in Canberra and prompted questions in Port Moresby about the constitutionality of the move. A vote in the national parliament, by 63 to 11, in favour of the delay came yesterday with a blunt warning to Australia from the Deputy Prime Minister, Belden Namah, not to interfere. ''Whatever [the Foreign Affairs Minister] Mr Bob Carr says about sanctions, I want to say … do not threaten the independent state of PNG,'' he said. ''You must respect our wishes. You must not intrude into our election process.'' The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, said last night that Canberra was ''disappointed and concerned'' by the delay. She said that ''as a strong supporter of Papua New Guinea, Australia believes elections should be held on time, in accordance with the constitution''. Last month Senator Carr threatened to consider sanctions against PNG if

PAPUA NEW GUINEA'S decision to delay national elections by six months has raised concerns in Canberra and prompted questions in Port Moresby about the constitutionality of the move. A vote in the national parliament, by 63 to 11, in favour of the delay came yesterday with a blunt warning to Australia from the Deputy Prime Minister, Belden Namah, not to interfere. ''Whatever [the Foreign Affairs Minister] Mr Bob Carr says about sanctions, I want to say … do not threaten the independent state of PNG,'' he said. ''You must respect our wishes. You must not intrude into our election process.'' The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, said last night that Canberra was ''disappointed and concerned'' by the delay. She said that ''as a strong supporter of Papua New Guinea, Australia believes elections should be held on time, in accordance with the constitution''. Last month Senator Carr threatened to consider sanctions agains

Wake Goi has recommended to Parliament that elections be deferred after giving a shortfall of K60M,  incomplete preliminary rolls for inspection, security not in order.  He is recommending for a delay of 6 months.  Parliament is now debating this recommendation.  Complete morans, they had 5 years to prepare and now they have failed the people of PNG.             UPDATE 2 Parliament votes in favour of elections to be deferred. 63 - yes, 11 - no. Namah warns Australia to stay out UPDATE 3 PAPUA New Guinea's parliament has ignored an Australian threat of sanctions and voted to delay national elections for six months. Deputy Prime Minister Belden Namah warned against foreign intervention in parliament's decision following today's vote, passed 63 to 11 following a 90-minute debate. New Foreign Minister Bob Carr last month threatened to consider sanctions against PNG if it abandoned plans to hold mid-year elections in June, saying to do so would create

Wake Goi has recommended to Parliament that elections be deferred after giving a shortfall of K60M,  incomplete preliminary rolls for inspection, security not in order.  He is recommending for a delay of 6 months.  Parliament is now debating this recommendation.  Complete morans, they had 5 years to prepare and now they have failed the people of PNG.             UPDATE 2 Parliament votes in favour of elections to be deferred. 63 - yes, 11 - no. Namah warns Australia to stay out UPDATE 3 PAPUA New Guinea's parliament has ignored an Australian threat of sanctions and voted to delay national elections for six months. Deputy Prime Minister Belden Namah warned against foreign intervention in parliament's decision following today's vote, passed 63 to 11 following a 90-minute debate. New Foreign Minister Bob Carr last month threatened to consider sanctions against PNG if it abandoned plans to hold mid-year elections in June, saying to

By John Nonggorr Dr. John Nonggorr THE O’Neill-Namah regime has proved the true purpose of the Judicial Conduct Act that it got parliament to pass in less than 24 hours without discussion or debate. It was designed to target judges who will not toe its line. If what is reported is correct –  that the regime has used this act to pass a motion in parliament today to refer the chief justice (Sir Salamo Injia) and Justice Nicholas Kirriwom to the governor-general – parliament has now directly taken over the disciplining of judges. This is unheard of in a democracy. The O’Neill-Namah regime has now suspended two senior PNG judges who ruled, on Dec 9 last year, that the O’Neill-Namah government was formed in breach of the Constitution. The same issues are now before the Supreme Court. The O’Neill-Namah government has disciplined the two senior judges for going against its regime. This is a major threat to the judiciary. Which other judge now dares to rule against this regime? Where is the r

By John Nonggorr Dr. John Nonggorr THE O’Neill-Namah regime has proved the true purpose of the Judicial Conduct Act that it got parliament to pass in less than 24 hours without discussion or debate. It was designed to target judges who will not toe its line. If what is reported is correct –  that the regime has used this act to pass a motion in parliament today to refer the chief justice (Sir Salamo Injia) and Justice Nicholas Kirriwom to the governor-general – parliament has now directly taken over the disciplining of judges. This is unheard of in a democracy. The O’Neill-Namah regime has now suspended two senior PNG judges who ruled, on Dec 9 last year, that the O’Neill-Namah government was formed in breach of the Constitution. The same issues are now before the Supreme Court. The O’Neill-Namah government has disciplined the two senior judges for going against its regime. This is a major threat to the judiciary. Which other judge now dares to rule agains

On Wednesday, the PNG parliament finally  voted to suspend Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia and Justice Nicholas Kirriwom – following Sir Salamo’s refusal to disqualify himself from overseeing the Supreme Court hearings into the legitimacy of the current government. Parliament’s suspension directly follows repeated assurances from Prime Minister Peter O’Neill that the Judicial Conduct Act 2012 would be deferred for nine months to allow the Constitutional Law Reform Commission to consult with the people of Papua New Guinea. Presumably, the deferment of the implementation of the Act meant that this particular piece of legislation would not be used or acted upon. Disappointingly, those assurances have proven to be false within only a matter of days. Instead we have now witnessed the latest move being played out on the chessboard of what has become a fierce and unsavory battle between the Executive and the Judiciary. It is difficult to describe Peter O’Neill’s usage of the Judic

On Wednesday, the PNG parliament finally  voted to suspend Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia and Justice Nicholas Kirriwom – following Sir Salamo’s refusal to disqualify himself from overseeing the Supreme Court hearings into the legitimacy of the current government. Parliament’s suspension directly follows repeated assurances from Prime Minister Peter O’Neill that the Judicial Conduct Act 2012 would be deferred for nine months to allow the Constitutional Law Reform Commission to consult with the people of Papua New Guinea. Presumably, the deferment of the implementation of the Act meant that this particular piece of legislation would not be used or acted upon. Disappointingly, those assurances have proven to be false within only a matter of days. Instead we have now witnessed the latest move being played out on the chessboard of what has become a fierce and unsavory battle between the Executive and the Judiciary. It is difficult to describe Peter O’Neill’s usag

There are rumours that the Parliament elected government of Peter O'Neill and Belden Namah have moved to have the elections deferred . This is not confirmed but are just rumours, we are monitoring news agencies to confirm if these rumours are true, we will keep you posted on any new developments. There are also rumours that Chief Justice Salamo Injia's residence had armed policeman and cars roving around, again this is not confirmed but are from witnesses. We will keep you posted, Also at this time we want to wish all our readers a Happy Easter. 

There are rumours that the Parliament elected government of Peter O'Neill and Belden Namah have moved to have the elections deferred . This is not confirmed but are just rumours, we are monitoring news agencies to confirm if these rumours are true, we will keep you posted on any new developments. There are also rumours that Chief Justice Salamo Injia's residence had armed policeman and cars roving around, again this is not confirmed but are from witnesses. We will keep you posted, Also at this time we want to wish all our readers a Happy Easter. 

Personal Interest before National Interest, The crooks and thieves have done it again... Papua New Guinea's Parliament has voted to effectively suspend two of the nation's top judges after Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia refused to remove himself from overseeing hearings on the government's legitimacy. Just a week ago, Prime Minister Peter O'Neill indicated that he would seek wider consultation before implementing the controversial laws that allow the suspensions. The motion to suspend Sir Salamo and Justice Nicholas Kirriwom was carried on voices after yesterday's parliamentary session. In court earlier, Sir Salamo declined to disqualify himself from the constitutional hearings. On Tuesday, Justice Korriwom ruled against an application for him to stand down. AAP Papua New Guinea's opposition leader, Dame Carol Kidu, says the government's use of a controversial law to suspend two senior judges sets a dangerous precedent. In parliament, the leader of governmen

Personal Interest before National Interest, The crooks and thieves have done it again... Papua New Guinea's Parliament has voted to effectively suspend two of the nation's top judges after Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia refused to remove himself from overseeing hearings on the government's legitimacy. Just a week ago, Prime Minister Peter O'Neill indicated that he would seek wider consultation before implementing the controversial laws that allow the suspensions. The motion to suspend Sir Salamo and Justice Nicholas Kirriwom was carried on voices after yesterday's parliamentary session. In court earlier, Sir Salamo declined to disqualify himself from the constitutional hearings. On Tuesday, Justice Korriwom ruled against an application for him to stand down. AAP Papua New Guinea's opposition leader, Dame Carol Kidu, says the government's use of a controversial law to suspend two senior judges sets a dangerous precede

Self Interest crooks and thieves - read Matthew 7:16 The Papua New Guinea Speaker, Jeffrey Nape, has certified the Judicial Conduct Act 2012, despite assurances from the government that implementation of the law would be delayed. There’s major disquiet over the legislation which allows the government to suspend judges. The prime minister, Peter O’Neill, said late last week that the law would be subjected to a review by the Constitutional Law Reform Commission. That process was to take nine months. However, the Post Courier reports that Mr Nape signed the law into effect last Friday. Since then Mr O’Neill has reconfirmed his intention for the law to be deferred and for it to be referred to the Commission for awareness and wider consultation under the chairmanship of Gabriel Kapris. A spokesperson says the Speaker’s certifying of the law is conditional and doesn’t reflect a change in the government’s position. Radio NZ

Self Interest crooks and thieves - read Matthew 7:16 The Papua New Guinea Speaker, Jeffrey Nape, has certified the Judicial Conduct Act 2012, despite assurances from the government that implementation of the law would be delayed. There’s major disquiet over the legislation which allows the government to suspend judges. The prime minister, Peter O’Neill, said late last week that the law would be subjected to a review by the Constitutional Law Reform Commission. That process was to take nine months. However, the Post Courier reports that Mr Nape signed the law into effect last Friday. Since then Mr O’Neill has reconfirmed his intention for the law to be deferred and for it to be referred to the Commission for awareness and wider consultation under the chairmanship of Gabriel Kapris. A spokesperson says the Speaker’s certifying of the law is conditional and doesn’t reflect a change in the government’s position. Radio NZ

The government of Papua New Guinea has failed in a bid to have last year's constitutional case about who is the country's legitimate leader reheard, after a judge said allowing it would sanction "legislation by surprise and ambush". However, the court has yet to decide on whether the nation's chief justice, Sir Salamo Injia, and justice Nicholas Kerriwom should step aside amid allegations of bias against the government. In what was supposed to be the first day of hearings into the legality of parliamentary decisions since the government of Peter O'Neill took office, lawyers instead revisited old ground on Monday. Government lawyers argued to have the 2011 case be reheard because parliament passed laws disqualifying former prime minister Sir Michael Somare from parliament. The laws passed three days before the court handed down its December 12 judgment that Sir Michael was unconstitutionally deposed from office

The government of Papua New Guinea has failed in a bid to have last year's constitutional case about who is the country's legitimate leader reheard, after a judge said allowing it would sanction "legislation by surprise and ambush". However, the court has yet to decide on whether the nation's chief justice, Sir Salamo Injia, and justice Nicholas Kerriwom should step aside amid allegations of bias against the government. In what was supposed to be the first day of hearings into the legality of parliamentary decisions since the government of Peter O'Neill took office, lawyers instead revisited old ground on Monday. Government lawyers argued to have the 2011 case be reheard because parliament passed laws disqualifying former prime minister Sir Michael Somare from parliament. The laws passed three days before the court handed down its December 12 judgment that Sir Michael was unconstitutionally deposed from

By STEVEN ANDRE I have cited a copy of the Judicial Conduct Act 2012. I looked at the Act and here is what I have assessed (my personal assessment). The Act appears to have only 5 principal provisions. The preamble to the Act reads: “Being an Act to implement Section 157 of the Constitution, to safeguard, protect or promote the integrity of our legal system based on the principle that an independent, fair, and competent judiciary shall interpret and apply the laws that govern us and that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honour the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system, and for related purposes.” Section 1 aligns the Act to be consistent with the Constitution. Section 2 provides a short definition of some of the words used in the Act. Section 3 imposes a duty on the Judges to uphold the integrity of the judiciary as outlined in the preamble. Section 4 discourages judges from conducting in a manner that

By STEVEN ANDRE I have cited a copy of the Judicial Conduct Act 2012. I looked at the Act and here is what I have assessed (my personal assessment). The Act appears to have only 5 principal provisions. The preamble to the Act reads: “Being an Act to implement Section 157 of the Constitution, to safeguard, protect or promote the integrity of our legal system based on the principle that an independent, fair, and competent judiciary shall interpret and apply the laws that govern us and that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honour the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system, and for related purposes.” Section 1 aligns the Act to be consistent with the Constitution. Section 2 provides a short definition of some of the words used in the Act. Section 3 imposes a duty on the Judges to uphold the integrity of the judiciary as outlined in the preamble. Section 4 discourages judges from conducting in a mann