MPS SEEK SUPREME COURT TO JUSTIFY FACTIONS' ACTIONS


by
ALOIS JEREWAI

Our Parliamentarians now desperately want the Supreme Court to legitimise their respective factions' actions on the floor of the Parliament.

Depending on which faction each MP is part of, the Parliament is now the MOST DESIRED or the MOST UNDESIRED place to be!
IS THIS THE DESIRED PRACTICE, WHEN THE PARLIAMENT, AS A THIRD EQUAL ARM OF OUR WESTMINISTER TYPE GOVERNMENT, HAS ITS OWN PROCEDURES PROVIDED UNDER ITS STANDING ORDERS AND PARLIAMENTARY POWERS AND PRIVILEGES ACT, TO DEAL WITH THE CURRENT CONFLICT RELATING TO THE ADJOURNMENT AND THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENT?
The answer simply is NO.
The Speaker of the Parliament ought now treat this issue as a matter of grave public importance and immediately RE-CONVENE AN EMERGENCY MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENT to resolve this issue in accordance with the Standing Orders as bestowed on him under Section 108 (1) of our Constitution. According to this provision the Speaker is responsible for upholding the dignity of the Parliament, maintaining order in it, regulating its proceedings and administering its affairs..."
Can the Speaker fix an earlier meeting of the Parliament?
Yes. Under Section 3 (2) & (3) of the Organic Law on the Calling of Meetings of the Parliament, the Speaker can re-convene an earlier meeting of the Parliament by giving all MPs 14 days notice, notwithstanding that pursuant to Section 2(1)(a)(i) of that Organic Law, the next meeting of the Parliament had been fixed to be convened at a much later date; e.g. 20 April 2021.
Clearly, the Speaker does not lack the power to bring his House into order.
Will the Speaker take the steps clearly within his powers to do so to bring the People's House ( of which he is custodian) into order?
The answer lies in the NEUTRALITY of the Speaker. Has the Speaker maintained his neutrality in relation to the issue at hand? This will no doubt be a hotly debatable question. I will not dwell on it.
What is demonstrably clear is the NEED FOR SPEAKERS TO MAINTAIN NEUTRALITY AT ALL TIMES to be able to deal with the kind of issues at hand. Speakers now and in the future must understand firstly, that they head the equal third arm of the Government ( the Legislature), and secondly, their roles and responsibilities do not include formations of the Executive Governments ( Prime Minister a d the NEC). If this is understood in its proper context, the Parliament's sanctity as our law-making Institution will be protected of its dignity and integrity.
Should the Speaker re-convene a meeting of the Parliament in accordance with Section 3(3) of the mentioned Organic Law?
The answer is yes he should. If Executive Governments are formed on the floor of the Parliament ( which they do), the Speaker's duty is to compel the Parliament to do so. He must not allow the Parliamentarians to cower behind the curtains of the Judiciary to either firm Government or to remain in Government.
In the context of the above discussion, I know what the Judiciary should do, however, matters being SUB-JUDICE as they are, I will not comment on that aspect until after the issue had been resolved.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

HIGHLANDS FRAUD F*CKS RUNNING GOVERNMENT AGENCY,,,

PNG, VERY RICH YET STILL A VERY VERY POOR COUNTRY

BLIND LEADING THE BLIND, WHY THE PNG ECONOMY STILL SUCKS

AUGUSTINE MANO PNG'S PREMIER CORPORATE CROOK

James Marape's Missteps Openly Exposed at Australian Forum

PNG GOVERNMENT MINISTER IN PORN VIDEO

MARAPE & PAITA ABOUT TO SIGN AWAY PNG GOLD