Political impasse grapples PNG

Dark hour of PNG politics

By Patrick Matbob

14/12/2011

 

PNG celebrated an uneasy Christmas after the events of 2011 that has shaken the democratic foundations of the country like never before.

Somare ousted.

Turbulent times are predicted ahead as the country’s three independent organs of state sort out the extent and limits of their powers and influence in governing the country. Despite Peter O’Neal declaring that he is the prime minister and taking legislative and administrative steps to enforce his government’s legitimacy to rule, a big question mark hangs over his head. In his shadow are Sir Michael and his depleted followers. A five-judge Supreme Court ruled (3-2) declaring that O’Neal’s election on August 2 was illegal as there was no vacancy in the prime minister’s seat and restored Sir Michael as the legitimate prime minister. His defiance in ignoring the Supreme Court’s decision and carrying on governing by declaring the supremacy of the Parliament has left many people throughout the country baffled and concerned.

Such has not happened before. PNG politicians have always accepted and respected court decisions although; this did not stop them from looking for loopholes in the law and mounting numerous court challenges in trying to get favorable decisions. But they have never openly defied the courts which has been the bastion of democracy in PNG.

Majority of Papua New Guineans are actually confused and are not able to understand what has happened. Equally there seems to be a general consensus that it is time for Sir Michael to bow out of politics and that the Speaker of Parliament Jeffery Nape must be held responsible for causing and allowing the current situation to happen.

The signs of the weakness in the Parliament as an independent law making body with functions that are separate from the executive and the judiciary became apparent after the 2007 national elections when Jeffrey Nape was elected as Parliament Speaker. While in the PNG system of democracy the Speaker always comes from the government, there are rules and regulations to govern the function of the Parliament which guides the Speaker. Yet Nape’s conduct and the way Parliament was operating convinced political commentators to say the Parliament was being used as a ‘rubber stamp’. Opposition MPs were already complaining about the manner in which the Speaker was conducting the affairs of Parliament.

Early last year outspoken Opposition MP and member for Bulolo Sam Basil complained that Nape’s decisions and actions so far on the floor of Parliament have clearly shown that he was irresponsible and his conducts were not in accordance with the Constitutional Laws, the Act of Parliament and the Standing Orders of the Parliament. “Simply there is no more democratic process in the proceedings of Parliament”, he said. However, today Basil and Nape are on the same side.

Two major amendment bills by the former Somare regime signaled the executive government’s domination of the Parliament when one of the amendments favoring the government was bulldozed through without debate.

The proposed amendments to the laws that establish and guide the functions of the Ombudsman Commission in relation to the leadership code signaled the intention of the Parliament as dictated by the executive government.

The Ombudsman Commission was established at Independence to guard against abuse of power by those in the public sector, assist those exercising public power to do their jobs efficiently and fairly and impose accountability on those who are exercising public power. Although it is a government department, it is independent of government as guaranteed under the Constitution. However, the Parliament had come up with a bill introduced by MP Moses Maladina to amend the national Constitution and the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibility of Leaders. The amendment would also limit the power of the Ombudsman Commission. While on the face of it the amendments looked reasonable, they also appeared at the time when Prime Minister Somare and government MPs including son Arthur Somare were being scrutinized by the Ombudsman Commission about the disbursement of their District Services Improvement Program funds. The proposed amendments raised the question whether the members of Parliament who are affected by the law should be the ones to change the law. The MPs had a conflict of interest.

If it were not for the intervention of civil society organizations, Transparency International PNG, churches, tertiary institution students and other non political organizations, the Parliament would have gone ahead to amend the laws without wide consultation. The move by the executive government also raised questions about the independence of the Parliament. The executive government was dictating events in Parliament and there was no control by the Speaker and the weak Opposition.

The other major issue that exposed the lack of independence within the Parliamentary system was the amendments to the environment laws in relation to the Deep Sea Tailings Placement system being sought by the mining industry in PNG. This issue involved the Chinese Ramu Nickel Mine plan to use DSTP system to dump its mine waste into the Basamuk Bay in Madang. When landowners at Basamuk successfully sought a court injunction to prevent Ramu Nickel from going ahead with the dumping of wastes, the Somare-Temu government turned to the Parliament to amend the environment laws to stop the people. The landowners had been seeking a Supreme Court reference on the amendments claiming that the amendments gave absolute powers to a single officer, in this case the director of Environment and Conservation, which was dangerous as it was subject to abuse. They also said that the Act took away the rights of the landowners to challenge the developers in court and to seek compensation. The amendments also allowed the state and developer to escape liability if they were negligent and the landowners cannot seek review or challenge the government in a court of law. This essential stripped the common law rights of the people to seek protection of the law or compensation for harm done. The Supreme Court has since ruled in favor of DSTP.

To many, the events of August 2 came as no surprise when Peter O’Neal and Belden Namah orchestrated a successful political coup to gain power in the absence of Somare who was ill and seeking medical treatment overseas.

Speaker Nape was a key figure in facilitating the move. Siding this time with the majority breakaway faction of the former Somare regime who had linked up with the Opposition, he declared that the prime minister’s seat was vacant and got the Parliament to elect Peter O’Neal as Prime Minister. Since then the new regime has gone ahead to pass laws and tried to prevent the former Somare regime to challenge the legitimacy of their government. This included trying to suspend the East Sepik Provincial government which was the body challenging the election of Peter O’Neal’s government, and to remove Sir Michael Somare as Member for East Sepik.

It is interesting to note comments by a member of O’Neal’s regime Ano Pala, a former Parliament clerk saying in Parliament that for the first the Parliament has stopped being a ‘rubber stamp’ and has regained its true role in making laws. Yet he was a key member of the former Somare regime that was responsible for denigrating the Parliament into a ‘rubber stamp’ and making it lose its credibility as a legitimate organ of state.

Civil Society organizations, the churches and the people have spoken out urging the two factions to sit down together and resolve the issue. The bishops of the Catholic Church, which is PNG’s largest Christian church, have called on Sir Michael Somare to resign and for Speaker Jeffrey Nape to be removed.

For the majority of people in PNG, the political crisis in PNG will have little effect on their lives. Up to 85 per cent of the people live in rural areas of the country and have little interest in the matter except to harbor a curiosity to know what happened. The reality is that the country’s political affairs have little impact on the daily lives of the people. Throughout PNG and even in Port Moresby, majority of the people are too busy trying to make a living daily to be concerned about what has happened in Parliament. Unlike other countries, there is no popular support for any particular leader, even for Somare, to create major unrests to destabilize the country. Of course, there are the opportunist elements in PNG always ready to thrive on any situation to create chaos so that they can benefit. Such actions have happened during the Sandline crisis and more recently with the anti-Asian and Lae riots. However, police have been able to control the situation well.

The political impasse also has little impact on major projects and businesses and the situation remains normal so far. The trade unions have not carried out their earlier threats to call stop work action in protest of the crisis. As long as the public and private sector operate normally, people will go about their daily business with little concern about the political crisis. It will be up to the political leaders to agree to work together to resolve the impasse and restore the integrity of the Constitution and the rule of law in PNG.

ends