Wednesday, August 13, 2014 Prime Ministers attack on the Ombudsman Commission should be a cause of concern for PNG By Joseph Yandapaki of PNG BLOGS The Prime Minister’s unprecedented attack on the independence and integrity of the Ombudsman Commission over his referral for prosecution under the Leadership Code should be of great concern to all Papua New Guineans. The Ombudsman Commission is a critical independent institution of state and is a foundation-stone of good governance of the nation. The Prime Minister’s deceitful attack on it is designed to undermine its standing ahead of any hearing of his case, and ultimately to prevent any prosecution going ahead under a Leadership Tribunal. His actions constitute a direct threat to the effectiveness of the Ombudsman Commission and its role in national affairs. Ultimately they are a direct threat to the commission’s existence. People should not be surprised by the attack, nor by the slyness of it, the use of half-truths and misinformation, and the blatant disregard for the Constitutional processes and procedures that underpin the Ombudsman Commission. The Prime Minister is well known for these tactics. He constantly uses them in his attempts to pervert the course of justice in the Paraka case. He uses them in his defence of the illegal Oil Search-UBS loan and in his nonsensical justifications of the equally illegal LR Group transaction to purchase two power generators. The common Prime Ministerial feature of all these cases is how he piles lie upon lie upon lie and hopes that no-one will notice. He appears to believe that the more lies he tells, and the bigger the lies, the more people will believe him He certainly appears to believe his own lies. It has become apparent that the Prime Minister is not able to tell the difference between a lie and the truth. He lives in a fantasy world constructed of his own dishonesty and deceit. The key dishonesty in his current attack on the Ombudsman Commission is that the Ombudsman somehow had to table the results of its investigation in Parliament. (“It is disappointing that the Ombudsman Commission has chosen to take this course of action instead of following procedure and tabling its final investigation in Parliament,” PM O’Neill said.) This is a complete lie. There is no requirement under the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission or the Leadership Code of the Constitution for any findings to be tabled in Parliament. The Leadership Code simply states that if the Ombudsman Commission is satisfied that there is a prima facie case “it shall refer the matter to the Public Prosecutor for prosecution before a tribunal established under Section 28(I)(g)” – a leadership tribunal. The Prime Minister’s statement is such a scandalous and blatant lie that it is probably sufficiently dishonorable to warrant a separate reference to a leadership tribunal for bringing the Office of the Prime Minister into disrepute. The Prime Minister also insinuates that the Ombudsman Commission reference is politically motivated and that the Ombudsman Commission’s investigations have been compromised by outside influences. (“This is a case of ‘sour grapes’ by former ministers who have been pushing this issue with the Ombudsman. I will see to it that these claims are fully tested through the court system and if there has been undue interference in this process it will be exposed.”) This is another scandalous assertion carefully designed to bring the Ombudsman Commission into disrepute and to undermine its case against the Prime Minister. Again the assertion is probably dishonorable enough to warrant a separate reference to a leadership tribunal for bringing the Office of the Prime Minister into disrepute. Furthermore, the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission states under Section 24 Proceedings Not To Be Questioned or to be Subject to Review, that “no proceeding of the Commission shall be held bad for want of form, and, except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, no proceeding of the Commission shall be challenged, reviewed, quashed or called into question in any court.” The Prime Minister also states that the Ombudsman Commission has circumvented the legal system and the judiciary. (“This issue is already the subject of judicial review, that was brought about by the former Treasurer, so I am surprised that the Ombudsman is going around the judicial process to refer this matter.”) This statement is also probably dishonorable enough to warrant a separate reference to a leadership tribunal for bringing the Office of the Prime Minister into disrepute. He complains that he has not ben given enough time to respond to the Ombudsman Commission. (“I have not been given adequate opportunity to respond to the Ombudsman before they sought to refer the matter.”) This is the oldest trick in the book – simply ignore the opportunity provided to respond and then claim inadequate opportunity. It is simply another dishonest tactic by the Prime Minister to undermine the case against him and to cast doubt upon the processes followed by the Ombudsman Commission. Most of the Prime Minister’s public comments on his referral are calculated to reflect badly on the integrity and competence of the Ombudsman Commissioners. Section 32 of the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission – Contempt of the Commission – states that “a person who willfully insults a member of the Commission, or willfully interrupts the proceedings of the Commission, is guilty of an offence. Penalty: K500.00 or imprisonment for three months.” Another aspect of the Prime Minister’s despicable attack on the Ombudsman Commission is the role of the Post-Courier. For a start publishing the Prime Minister’s comments in the way it did is possibly equally contemptuous of the Ombudsman Commission. It is highly suspicious that in the first instance of publication – in its online edition – it did not report the primary fact that the Ombudsman Commission had referred the Prime Minister. It waited until it had the Prime Minister’s defence and then published the defence as the primary story. This gives the impression that there was a carefully orchestrated plan involving the Prime Minister, his office and the Post-Courier to undermine the Ombudsman Commission and its case against the Prime Minister. Other sections of the media may have been involved as well, including social media. It would clearly be in the public interest for the Ombudsman Commission to extend its investigation to include staff in the Prime Minister’s Office and the media – in the first instance the Post-Courier – to establish all those responsible for the many breaches of the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission and the Leadership Code in this case. It is time for the Ombudsman Commission and the public to take decisive action to restore the dignity, integrity and reputation of the Office of Prime Minister, and to ensure that it respects the laws of the land and the other institutions of state.
Posted on: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 08:09:47 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015