PNGBLOGS

by MELL LAKA The Attorney General is empowered to brief private lawyers/counsel to act for the State. This occurs when there is need for particular expertise or the Attorney General is unable to undertake the work itself. From Finance Department records a Commission of enquiry found that over the period 2000 to 2006 the State incurred liability in payouts of approximately K100 million in legal fees. The Inquiry saw that there has been no compliance with the Public Finances (Management) Act procedures of expenditure for approval prior to engaging in those brief outs. A  Commission of enquiry after making extensive examination of these payments with ready assistance from all the law firms concerned except Paul Paraka Lawyers which has been the recipient of at least the K41 million in brief out fees for January 2003 to August 2006 noted in NEC records.  Let me illustrate what I mean by excessive legal fee with our so called Chief Secretary of the National Government, Mr. Isaac Lupari

by MICHAEL J PASSINGAN SECURITY DETAIL The Security of the Prime Minister of any country should be concern for the citizens of that country and PNG should not be an exception. Prime Ministers do have a security detail. To my knowledge, prior to August 2011, all the Prime Ministers that PNG had had their security detail. At the most, there would be 5 members of the National Security Unit (NSU) of the Police who would provide security to the Prime Minister. At other times (usually), around two or three officers who would be accompanying the Prime Minister. Since the issuance of the arrest warrant against Peter O’Neill, his personal security detail had been boosted to five (5) unmarked Toyota land cruisers on average for the last two years. I am reliably told by one of those persons that this around-the-clock protection to Prime Minister O’Neill is offered, not only by the members of the NSU, but other police officers and PNG Defence members. For the last four seeks since the d

by MICHAEL J. PASSINGAN The lies continue to adulterate the Bureaucracy, even the Chief Secretary who is understood to be physically weak to contain the pressure of convincing his Lutheran mind. The Chief Secretary was reported by the media yesterday that he defended his action to refer Chief Magistrate Nerrie Eliakim to the Attorney General by saying what he did was procedural and administrative. He claimed that it is his job to refer complaints about public office holders to their appointment authorities. He sounded innocent and bona-fide by saying "I know the timing is not good and everyone thinks it is in relation to the PM'S case but it is not," It makes the thinking lot of us sick to the core when the corrupt pollies and their stooged servants continue to want us believe to their idiocrasy and lameness. LET’S LOOK AT THE CHIEF SECRETARY’S RESPONSE CLOSELY. The Chief Secretary to Government is the Departmental Head of the Department of Prime Minister a

  by JOSEPH MOREA Peter O’Neill’s purging of opposition exercise reached its new height. Yes, it happened to be the Chief Magistrate Ms Nerrie Elliakim this time. In his latest attempt to remove all opposition, Mr O’Neill directed his Chief Secretary Manasupe Zurenuoc to direct his Attorney General to suspend the Chief Magistrate. This comes after the District Court refused to entertain an application by stooged Police Officers to arrest Director of Fraud Squad Mathew Damaru, Timothy Gitua and lawyer McRonald Nale concerning some drummed up charges of perjury. In a series of events leading up to today, the public at large witnessed the following:  Two lawyers Greg Egan and Terence Lambert acting for Task-Force Sweep members     were banned from entry. Two high ranking police officers namely Thomas Eluh and Timothy Gitua were terminated in the most dishonourable way. Unsuccessful attempt to obtain arrest warrant against Mathew Damaru, Timothy Gitua and McRonald Nale

SPROX WALKER I was one of the many people who attended the lea­dership tribunal of Prime Mi­nister Sir Michael So­mare in court room 1 at the Waigani National Court premises recently. As a layman, I understand the different functions of the office of public prosecutor and the Om­budsman Commission. I also understand what the tribunal is and the purpose for its set-up and its conduct of the proceedings. During the course of the tribunal, three issues surfaced and I am troubled by them. First, the composition of the tribunal. Whilst I have no doubt about the academic and professional experiences of the members, I am disturbed by the quality of questions raised during the proceedings. These questions would not have risen if we had our own judges presiding. For the tribunal to understand the crux of the matter before them, they need to have a fair understanding of the constitutional planning committee report (CPC), the Constitution, relevant Organic Laws and enabling legislations. The coun

SPROX WALKER I was one of the many people who attended the lea­dership tribunal of Prime Mi­nister Sir Michael So­mare in court room 1 at the Waigani National Court premises recently. As a layman, I understand the different functions of the office of public prosecutor and the Om­budsman Commission. I also understand what the tribunal is and the purpose for its set-up and its conduct of the proceedings. During the course of the tribunal, three issues surfaced and I am troubled by them. First, the composition of the tribunal. Whilst I have no doubt about the academic and professional experiences of the members, I am disturbed by the quality of questions raised during the proceedings. These questions would not have risen if we had our own judges presiding. For the tribunal to understand the crux of the matter before them, they need to have a fair understanding of the constitutional planning committee report (CPC), the Constitution, relevant Organic Laws and enabling legislations. The