Ombudsman Commission Annual Report 2006

Mentions of people and company names in this document

The information these results are derived from was last updated in September 2017

Name References in this document Mentions in other documents

We do not intend to suggest or imply that any of the persons, companies or other entities listed above have necessarily broken the law or otherwise acted improperly. Read our full disclaimer

  • About

    Ombudsman Commission Annual Report for 2006

Document content

  • [logo]

    Ombudsman Commission
    of
    Papua New Guinea

    ANNUAL REPORT 2006
    For the period 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2006

    Independent State of Papua New Guinea

    Independent State of Papua New Guinea

  • Page 2 of 117

  • Ombudsman Commission
    of
    Papua New Guinea

    VISION

    ―Lead and promote good Governance and Leadership.‖

    MISSION

    To this end the Constitution clearly states the purposes of establishing the
    Ombudsman Commission:

    (a) to help in the elimination of unfair or otherwise defective legislation and
    practice affecting or administered by governmental bodies; and

    (b) to supervise the enforcement of the Leadership Code; and

    (c) to help in the improvement of the work of governmental bodies and the
    elimination of unfairness and discrimination by them; and

    (d) to ensure that all governmental bodies are responsible to the needs and
    aspirations of the people; and

    (e) To work with the L&JS in ensuring that there is improved accountability
    and reduced corruption

    This constitutional mandate provides the Ombudsman Commission with its
    mission.

    [Ombudsman Commission Strategic Plan 2006 – 2010]

  • Page 3 of 117

  • Page 4 of 117

  • Page 5 of 117

  • Ombudsman Commission
    of
    Papua New Guinea

    ANNUAL REPORT 2006

    For the period
    1 January 2006 to 31 December 2006

  • Page 6 of 117

  • Page 7 of 117

  • i

    LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

    AO Administrative Officer
    APOR Australasian and Pacific Ombudsmen Region
    APP Annual Programme Plan
    ASAU Annual Statements Assessment Unit
    BAC Bachelor of Commerce
    CAIB Complaints and Administrative Investigations Branch
    CCAC Community Coalition Against Corruption
    CEO Chief Executive Officer
    CHRIS Complete Human Resources Information System
    CJ Chief Justice
    CMC Contract Management Committee
    CMS Case Management System
    CPC Constitutional Planning Committee
    CS Correctional Services
    DCJ Deputy Chief Justice
    DPM Department of Personnel Management
    DSG District Support Grant
    ERP External Relations Program
    GBLP Governmental Bodies Liaison Program
    GCL Grand Chief Logohu
    GCMG Grand Cross of St. Michael and St. George
    GG Governor-General
    IAACA International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities
    IOI International Ombudsman Institute
    ISU Intake and Screening Unit
    IT Information Technology
    KStJ Knight of St.George
    LJSP Law and Justice Sector Program
    LJSWG Law and Justice Sector Working Group
    LLB Bachelor of Laws
    LLG Local-level Government
    LLM Masters of Laws
    MBA Masters In Business Administration
    MBE Member of the British Empire
    MD Managing Director
    MOA Memorandum of Agreement
    MOC Members of the Commission
    MOU Memorandum of Understanding
    MP Member of Parliament
    NCD National Capital District
    NCDC National Capital District Commission
    NEC National Executive Council
    NGI New Guinea Islands
    NGO Non-Government Organization
    NHC National Housing Corporation

    List of Abbreviations

  • Page 8 of 117

  • ii

    NJSS National Judicial Staff Services
    OAC Ombudsman Appointments Committee
    OBE Officer of the British Empire
    OC Ombudsman Commission
    OCPNG Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea
    OLDRL Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership
    OLGRICOH Organic Law on the Guarantee of the Rights of Independent Constitutional
    Office-Holders
    OLIPPC Organic Law on the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates
    OLOC Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission
    OLPGLLG Organic Law on Provincial Governments and Local-level Governments
    PNG Papua New Guinea
    POSF Public Officers Superannuation Fund
    PP Public Prosecutor
    PSC Public Services Commission
    PSCOC Parliamentary Select Committee on the Ombudsman Commission
    QPM Queen‟s Police Medal
    RDB Rural Development Bank
    RPNGC Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary
    RTBH Right to be Heard
    SMSS Senior Manager, Support Services
    SRC Salaries and Remuneration Commission
    USP University of South Pacific
    HIV Human Immune-diefficiency Virus
    AIDS Acquired Immune Difficiency Syndrome
    AMS Asset Management System
    BMA Business Management Account

    List of Abbreviations

  • Page 9 of 117

  • iii

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    1 YEAR IN REVIEW ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1

    2 CONSTRAINTS/CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………………. 8

    3 THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION ………………………………………………………………….. …11

    4 OUR STAFF AND SUPPORT STRENGTH……………………………………………….19

    5 ENFORCING THE ORGANIC LAW ON THE OMBUDSMAN
    COMMISSION…………………………………………………………………….……….26

    6 ENFORCING THE LEADERSHIP CODE……………………………………….………..39

    7 DIRECTIONS UNDER SECTION 27(4) OF THE CONSTITUTION……………………56

    8 OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION IN COURT………………………………………………….60

    9 ISSUES OF CONSTITUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE………………………………………..76

    10 EXTERNAL RELATIONS PROGRAM……………………………………………………82

    11 INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENTS…………………………………………………….86

    12 AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT…………………………………………………………89

    13 APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………………..99
    Appendix 1 – List of Leaders referred to the Public Prosecutor since 1975 ………………. 100
    Appendix 2 – List of OLOC Reports produced since 1975 …………………………………….. 103
    Appendix 3 – List of Governmental Bodies under the GBLP up to 2006………………….. 105
    Appendix 4 – Former members of Commission ……………………………………………………. 106

    Table of Contents

  • Page 10 of 117

  • Page 11 of 117

  • CHAPTER ONE

    YEAR IN REVIEW

    The PNG Ombudsman Commission welcomed a visit from the Solomon Islands
    Ombudsman.

    Seen above (from L-R front row) are Ombudsman Peter Masi, Ombudsman from Solomon
    Islands, John Smith Pitabelama, Ombudsman John Nero and Chairman of the Leadership
    Code Commission in Solomon Islands, Emmanuel Kouhota. Standing at the back row (from
    L-R) are Team Leader Victor Milli, Human Resources Manager Eric Kumasan, Secretary
    to the Commission, Mavara Sere, Team Leader Moguguia Mubwabwai, Director
    Operations John ToGuata and Deputy Director CAIB, Joseph Molita.

  • Page 12 of 117

  • 2

    1 YEAR IN REVIEW

    The Ombudsman Commission continues to fulfil its mandate under the Constitution, the Organic Law
    on the Ombudsman Commission and the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of
    Leadership.

    In managing the affairs of the Commission, the members and staff of the Commission tried to achieve
    some impact and measurable output under the 2006 Ombudsplan (Annual Business Plan) and the
    Strategic Plan 2006-2010.

    During the year there were allegations of misconduct and bias made against Chief Ombudsman, Ila
    Geno and Ombudsman, Peter Masi and generally the Commission came under greater scrutiny than
    before. The National Parliament was successful in amending certain laws that relate to evidence
    gathering by the Commission and there still is a period of uncertainty as the Commission awaits
    further action by Parliament as it deliberates on the recommendation of the Parliamentary Select
    Committee on the Ombudsman Commission.

    Despite all these, the Commission continued to carry out its duties as reflected in the following areas.

    Number of complaints handled in 2006

    Under the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission the Commission received 3087 complaints
    through the Intake and Screening Unit (ISU) at the head office and the three regional offices in
    Kokopo, Mt Hagen and Lae. This is 873 complaints less than the projected figure of 3,960 complaints.
    (Read more in Chapter 5).

    The common problem in handling complaints is the lack of timely response from concerned
    Governmental Bodies. Bad decisions by government officials continue to increase and the
    Commission through the Governmental Bodies Liaison Program (GBLP) intends to educate
    Governmental officials the merits of good decision making. Good decisions reduce many instances of
    complaints and enhance concentration of time and resources on real issues of development.

    Reports under the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

    The Commission produced one (1) Major Report under Section 22 of the Organic Law on the
    Ombudsman Commission (OLOC). The Report on the Department of Agriculture and Livestock
    revealed instances where a number of officers were allowed to turn sick leave credits into cash. The
    Department agreed with the Commission that the practice was wrong in law and in the application of
    the General Orders. It is encouraging to note that the Department has begun implementing the
    recommendations of the Commission.

    Leaders referred to the Public Prosecutor in 2006

    In 2006 the Commission referred ten (10) leaders to the Public Prosecutor, namely Hon Chris Haiveta
    MP, Hon Guao Zurenuoc MP, Hon Arthur Somare MP, Hon Melchior Pep MP, Hon Sir Moi Avei
    MP, Hon John Muingnepe MP, Hon Hami Yawari MP, Fred Maliupa MPA, Charles Punaha and Jerry
    Tetaga.They were referred for various allegations of misconduct in office.

    Chapter 1
    Year In Review

  • Page 13 of 117

  • 3

    Leadership Tribunals

    In 2006 there were seven (7) Leadership Tribunals for the following leaders; Hon. Gallus Yumbui,
    Member for Wosera-Gawi, Hon Charlie Benjamin, Member for Manus Open, Hon Andrew Baing,
    Member for Markham Open, Hon Peter Ipatas, Governor and Member for Enga Provincial, Dr Puka
    Temu, Member for Abau Open, Hon Gabriel Kapris, Minister for Works and Member for Maprik
    Open and Sir Moi Avei, Minister for Petroleum and Member for Kairuku-Hiri. All the Leaders were
    found guilty by the Leadership Tribunal for various misconduct offences.

    Hon Peter Ipatas, Dr Puka Temu and Hon Gabriel Kapris were fined K1, 000 respectively for each
    allegation made against them; Hon Andrew Baing was dismissed from office; penalties for Hon Gallus
    Yumbui and Hon Charlie Benjamin were not handed down and the Tribunal looking into Sir Moi‟s
    case was still conducting its inquiry.

    Section 27(4) Direction: Division.2 – Leadership Code

    Directions are issued from time to time by the Commission to enhance investigations and up to the end
    of 2006 the Commission has twenty four (24) Directions currently in force including the Direction on the
    disbursement of District Support Grants to Members of Parliament issued in November.

    It is necessary to issue these directions to prevent possible breaches of the Leadership Code as well as
    preserving the integrity of persons subject to the Leadership Code.

    Amendment to the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership (rules of
    evidence)

    On 8 November 2006 National Parliament voted 73 to 5 and passed an amendment to Section 27(4) of
    the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership (OLDRL) requiring Leadership
    Tribunals to work within the legal framework of the Evidence Act when it comes to determining
    allegations of misconduct in office by leaders.
    The Organic Law as now amended provides that the proceedings of Leadership Tribunals be
    conducted under strict rules of evidence.

    The Ombudsman Commission has yet to make its position known on the amendment which will most
    likely cause the Leadership Tribunals to take on the roles of a criminal court, rather than the
    independent investigatory tribunal as prescribed by the Constitution. It is likely to demand that the
    prosecution carry the onus of proof and a greater number of challenges to the form of charges and to
    the admissibility of evidence.

    Allegations of Misconduct and Bias on the Members of the Commission

    Member for Angoram Open, Hon Arthur Somare, attacked the Ombudsman Commission on the floor
    of Parliament using parliamentary privileges to raise allegations against Ombudsman Peter Masi for
    alleged bias after being referred to the Public Prosecutor by the Commission.

    Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno was also referred to the Ombudsman Appointments Committee (OAC)
    over allegations of misconduct in office by Hon Chris Haiveta MP, who was earlier referred by the
    Commission to the Public Prosecutor on allegations of misconduct in office.

    Chapter 1
    Year In Review

  • Page 14 of 117

  • 4

    The allegations on Mr Geno were later cleared by the Ombudsman Appointment Committee whilst the
    case of Mr Masi is pending scrutiny by the appropriate authority.

    Parliamentary Select Committee on the Ombudsman Commission (PSCOC)

    In late 2005 Parliament established the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Ombudsman
    Commission (PSCOC), the first ever Committee on the Commission since Independence.

    Members of the Commission and senior officers appeared before the PSCOC in 2006 and made
    various presentations on the Ombudsman Commission.

    In July 2006 the Commission made a written submission to the PSCOC, which outlined many matters
    that adversely impact the Commission and made 21 recommendations for improvement in the way the
    OC does its business.

    Although one or two of the Recommendations have found their way into amendments to some of the
    Legislation, the Commission is unaware of the PSCOC‟s response to most of its Recommendations.
    The PSCOC is yet to issue its Final Report to Parliament.

    Governmental Bodies Liaison Program (GBLP)

    The Governmental Bodies Liaison Program is aimed at promoting and building relationships between
    the Ombudsman Commission and Governmental Bodies. In 2002 the pilot project commenced with
    four (4) Governmental Bodies namely Education, Teaching Services Commission, Police and
    Correctional Services.

    In 2006 Gulf Provincial Administration, Milne Bay Provincial Administration, Office of Workers
    Compensation, Judicial Services, Department of Trade and Industry, Office of the Clerk of the
    National Parliament, Department of Agriculture and Livestock, Office of the Secretary of the National
    Executive Council, West New Britain Provincial Administration, Department of Finance and the
    National Intelligence Organisation were added to the list of government bodies under the programme
    which now brings the total to forty-four (44) – see Appendix 3 page 105 for details.

    Police Oversight Function

    In 2005/2006 a Ministerial Committee on Police Review recommended for a Police Oversight
    Function. It was recommended that the Ombudsman Commission play an oversight role on the Police
    Force. In trying to implement the recommendations, the Commission using the existing twining
    agreement with the Commonwealth Ombudsman of Australia sent an officer to undergo on- the-job
    observation of how the Police Integrity System works in Australia.

    A draft Memorandum of Agreement between the Police Force and the Ombudsman Commission was
    prepared to pursue this initiative which has the support of Police Officers around the country, seeing it
    as a step in the right direction.

    In-house and overseas training

    Officers had the opportunity to attend various training in-house, in-country and overseas to enhance
    their skills and expertise.

    Chapter 1
    Year In Review

  • Page 15 of 117

  • 5

    Ten (10) staff of the Commission attended overseas training in the areas of Forensic Accounting,
    Corruption and Anti-Corruption and the Victorian Bar Readers Course in Australia. Investigators
    Course, Induction workshops and Gender and HIV&AIDS workshops – a total of 84 courses were
    conducted for the staff of the Commission.

    In-country training included Train the Trainers Course, Introduction to Human Resource Management,
    Diploma in Laws in Human Resources Management, Information Technology Training, Complaints
    Investigation Training Modules and Records Management Workshop. There were twenty two (22) of
    these training.

    Apart from the above, the OC PNG and Commonwealth Ombudsman of Australia entered into a staff
    exchange partnership under the Twinning Arrangement Program. Under the program Senior
    Investigator Alice Kuipa, Team Leader John Hevie and Deputy Director – CAIB, Joseph Molita were
    attached to the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office while, David Ward from the Commonwealth
    Ombudsman office was attached to the OC PNG office. Jim Farley and Geoff Murphy from the
    Commonwealth Ombudsman Office, Canberra, came to OCPNG prior to the commencement of this
    program to test its viability and to scope the needs.

    Budget submission for 2007

    In compiling the 2007 budget estimates, the Commission took into consideration recommendations in
    the Comprehensive Management Review and made representations to Ms Margaret Elias, Secretary to
    the Department of Personnel Management and Mr Simon Tosali, Secretary for Treasury who are key
    members of the Central Agencies Coordinating Committee (CACC). The Public Services Commission
    was also consulted (s25 of the OLOC) on the planned increase to the Staff of the Commission.

    The Commission‟s Budget of K13.8m was presented to the Department of Treasury on time, attaching
    with it the Annual Business Plan (often referred to as the Ombudsplan). An extensive presentation was
    also made before the Budget Screening Committee in September 2006.

    In November 2006 the Commission was advised that Parliament had approved an appropriation of
    K11.0 million for 2007 – a K1.6 million increase from the 2006 appropriation.

    OC Strategic Plan 2006 – 2010

    The Ombudsman Commission‟s Five Year Strategic Plan 2006-2010 is the road map for the execution
    of its roles and responsibilities over the next five years.

    The Strategic Plan is developmental in approach and takes on board recommendations from the
    Comprehensive Management Review undertaken in 2005. The 2006 Ombudsplan or the
    Commission‟s 2006 Annual Business Plan was the second to be produced and applied under this 5
    year strategic plan.

    The Strategic Plan covers the Goals, Objectives, Strategies and Key Performance Areas for the
    Commission.

    External Relations Program

    The External Relations Program (ERP) is part of the Ombudsman Commission‟s ongoing awareness
    and promotion activity which helps to define, inform, promote and improve relationships with
    stakeholders, the government, the media and the people of Papua New Guinea.
    Chapter 1
    Year In Review

  • Page 16 of 117

  • 6

    The Commission continued to maintain its awareness activities through the print and electronic media
    and through public forums and seminars. The success rate of these awareness activities in 2006 was
    lower compared to previous years. This was due to the Commission placing emphasis on the
    production of its various awareness publications including Annual Reports.

    Some of the activities conducted in 2006 include;

     Information seminars with leaders, Provincial and Local-level Government members, Government
    Bodies, Non Government Organizations and Public Servants;
     Visits to provinces, villages, schools and institutions;
     Publication of a monthly newsletter (Wasdok);
     Media Releases/Legal Nius;
     Speeches and papers;
     OC Publications; and
     Annual Reports

    Law and Justice Sector

    The Ombudsman Commission, as in the previous year continued to maintain links with other Law and
    Justice Sector agencies, AusAID and GoPNG through the Department of National Planning and
    Monitoring during the reporting period.

    In 2006 the Commission implemented a total of 24 programs under the K2.85 million Development
    Budget.

    The Law and Justice Sector Program funding was for the following areas;

     Improved Access to Justice and Just Results in relation to removing obstacles that prevent
    access to just results and also strongly support robust and independent courts and commissions;
     Improved Accountability and Reduced Corruption in relation to ensuring accountability for
    corruption and the abuse and misuse of power; and
     Improved Ability to Provide Law and Justice Services in relation to strengthening formal
    agencies to use resources properly and integrate HIV&AIDS responses into the sector and
    agencies.

    Partnership related activities

    The Commission continued its partnership activities as a member of the Community Coalition Against
    Corruption (CCAC) and in 2006 the coalition took part in three (3) radio programs and held three (3)
    meetings. The coalition is made up of government watch-dog agencies as well as non-government
    watch-dog organisations like Transparency International and the Media Council of PNG.

    Under the tri-parte arrangements between Transparency International PNG, the Electoral Commission
    and the Ombudsman Commission, the group‟s campaign in 2006 was on awareness and preparation
    for the 2007 National Elections; good leadership and good governance; and Limited Preferential
    Voting. A total of fifteen (15) provinces were visited during the awareness programme.

    Chapter 1
    Year In Review

  • Page 17 of 117

  • 7

    Solomon Islands Ombudsman visit

    Solomon Islands Ombudsman John Smith Pitabelama and the Chairman of the Leadership Code
    Commission of Solomon Islands Emmanuel Kouhota were in PNG on a two day study tour of the OC
    PNG.

    During their short visit in August they learnt how OC PNG handles complaints and the processes in
    referring leaders to the Public Prosecutor as well as observing Leadership Tribunals. They also visited
    other Law and Justice Sector agencies.

    International engagements of the Members of the Commission

    The Members of the Commission attended various international conferences, workshops and meetings
    in 2006.

    Mr Geno attended the 23rd Australasian and Pacific Ombudsman Regional Conference in Western
    Australia, Pacific 2020 seminar in Sydney, the Twining Program review in Canberra, International
    Ombudsman Institute (IOI) Board of Directors meeting in Barcelona and the 7th World Bank East Asia
    Pacific Region Anti-Corruption Advisory Group meeting in Washington D.C.

    He also made public presentations at the First Pacific Youth Festival in Papeete, Tahiti; the University
    of South Pacific (USP) Centre, Honiara, Solomon Islands and the Fiji Parliament, in Suva.

    Ombudsman John Nero also attended the 23rd Asia Pacific Ombudsman Regional Conference in
    Western Australia, Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime, London, the 6th National
    Investigation Symposium in Manly, Sydney and the 2nd Twinning Program meeting between OC PNG
    and the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office, Canberra.

    He headed the Research Team comprising senior technical officers to research a new Case
    Management System in Australia and New Zealand for OC PNG.

    Ombudsman Peter Masi went on a public speaking engagement in Vanuatu and later attended the 1st
    Annual Conference and General Meeting of the International Association of Anti-Corruption
    Authorities (IAACA) in Beijing, China and also attended the 2nd Twinning Program meeting between
    OC PNG and Commonwealth Ombudsman Office, Canberra.

    Professional memberships of the Commission

    The Ombudsman Commission is an affiliate to various international organizations and through these
    memberships it has cemented international relationships that foster good working relations with other
    Ombudsman offices.

    At present the Commission is a member of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) based in
    Ontario, Canada; a member of the Australasia and Pacific Ombudsman Regional Forum (APOR)
    which is a division of the IOI. It is considering a request to become a member of the International
    Association of Anti-Corruption Agency.

    

    Chapter 1
    Year In Review

  • Page 18 of 117

  • CHAPTER TWO

    CONSTRAINTS/CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    On a quarterly basis the Commission reviews its performance. Seen above is Ombudsman John
    Nero (left) making notes from presentations while line managers (in the background) pay
    attention to the presenters.

    Chapter 2
    Constraints/Challenges and Recommendations

  • Page 19 of 117

  • 9

    2 CONSTRAINTS/CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Introduction

    The Ombudsman Commission is obliged under its statute to present to the National Parliament not
    only a report on the Commissions functions and workings for the year, but also of importance are the
    challenges the Commission faced in 2006.

    For the first time the Commission presents to the relevant authorities a list of Recommendations for
    them to consider and support so that there is improvement within the organisation for the greater good
    of public administration in Papua New Guinea.

    The constraints and challenges

    Constraints and challenges are good for any vibrant organisation. Identifying constraints and turning
    those into opportunities assists executives to always be on alert and to use those opportunities to
    strategise and make organisations relevant for the day. The Ombudsman Commission is a vibrant
    organisation and over the years it has tried to look at challenges as opportunities because it must
    continue to ensure that ordinary people of Papua New Guinea are better served by governments and
    the bureaucracy.

    2006 constraints and challenges

     GoPNG Budget Appropriation

    The level of GoPNG budget appropriation continued to hinder implementation of the Organic
    Law on the Ombudsman Commission; the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of
    Leadership, the Organic Law on the Provincial and Local-level Government, the Organic Law
    on the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates and the Discriminatory Practices Act.

     Disproportionate monthly allocation of funds severely affected Ombudsman
    Commission‘s investigations

     2005 Comprehensive Management Review on the Ombudsman Commission by Deloitte
    Touche Tohmatsu

    Major recommendations that would impact the way business was to be conducted at the
    OCPNG was delayed by 12 months due to financial reasons and the inability of the
    Commission to prepare, implement and sustain these recommendations.

     Anxiety of waiting on National Parliament to act

    In late 2005, the National Parliament established the Parliamentary Select Committee on the
    Ombudsman Commission (PSCOC). The Commission made verbal presentations and a written
    submission with recommendations to the PSCOC that outlined many matters that adversely
    impacted its work.

    Chapter 2
    Constraints/Challenges and Recommendations

  • Page 20 of 117

  • 10

     Leaders and civil servants do not understand the role of the Ombudsman

    The Ombudsman Commission is continually being perceived as not helpful to the Government,
    Politicians, Chief Executives and Public Servants rather than being seen and valued as a
    partner within the system of government that must be supported in improving and enhancing
    quality of leadership and good governance in Papua New Guinea.

    The Commission puts forward five (5) recommendations

    The five points highlighted below are recurring issues that continually affect the efficient workings of
    the Commission annually and need to be properly addressed by the relevant authorities.

    1. Funding level to the Commission to be increased in order to give justice to the people of
    Papua New Guinea through the Constitution, the two main Organic Laws, 11 subsidiary
    functions, Commission of Enquiry Report into Fighting Corruption in PNG, Police Integrity
    Review Report and the 2005 OCPNG Comprehensive Management Review.

    2. The Commission is given the full twelve months funding during the first quarter of each year.

    3. Government organisations, Chief Executives and Public Servants must promptly respond to
    Ombudsman Commission enquiries and investigations so that complaints and grievances are
    dealt with in a timely manner.

    4. The National Parliamentary Committee on the Ombudsman Commission is granted a
    permanent status hence its roles and responsibility is to implement and enforce all reports
    from the Ombudsman Commission.

    5. The National Parliament has yet to adopt and enforce the untabled Kamulo Doso Forestry
    Report of 2002, the detailed Annual Reports of 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the adoption of a
    report on the Department of Agriculture and Livestock in 2006 on public servants turning
    sick-leave credits into cash.


    

    Chapter 2
    Constraints/Challenges and Recommendations

  • Page 21 of 117

  • CHAPTER THREE

    THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    The Ombudsman Commission has made it its aim to produce two reports a year – a Summary
    and a Detailed Annual Report.

    Pictured above is Secretary to the Commission Mavara Sere, Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno,
    Ombudsman Peter Masi, Ombudsman John Nero and Public Relations Manager Bonner Tito
    having a chat outside the Government House before presenting the 2005 Annual Report to the
    Governor-General.

  • Page 22 of 117

  • Page 23 of 117

  • 3 THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    MEMBERS OF THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    The Ombudsman Commission is headed by a Chief Ombudsman and two Ombudsmen. The members
    of the Commission for this reporting period are Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno, Ombudsmen Peter Masi
    and John Nero.

    Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno, OBE QPM

    Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno hails from Karawa village, Hood Lagoon,
    Central Province.

    He attended the London Missionary Society School in Karawa and Hood
    Lagoon Primary School at Keapara. He completed his secondary
    education at Sogeri Secondary School in 1967 and joined the Royal Papua
    New Guinea Constabulary in 1968 as a direct entry cadet. Mr Geno
    matriculated and completed a Diploma in Police Science at the University
    of Papua New Guinea from 1974 to 1975.

    The Chief Ombudsman has 24 years experience with the Police Force initially as a detective, rising to
    the level of Chief Superintendent, Director of Criminal Investigations, Deputy Commissioner and
    Commissioner of Police in 1990. He was appointed Commissioner and Chairman of the Public
    Services Commission in 1992. Mr Geno was appointed an Ombudsman in December 1998 and
    assumed duties as Chief Ombudsman on 1 January 2001.

    Ombudsman Peter Masi

    Ombudsman Peter Masi comes from Branda village, Angoram District, East Sepik Province.

    Mr Masi completed his secondary education in 1972. He attended Goroka Teachers College in 1973
    and left in 1975. Mr Masi completed a Diploma in Public Administration at the Administrative
    College of Papua New Guinea. He worked in East Sepik Province from 1975 to 1982 as a Patrol
    Officer and then left East Sepik Province to work in the Western Highlands Province, reaching the
    position of Acting Secretary of the Western Highlands Provincial Administration for three months in
    1994.

    He was Assistant Secretary of the Law and Order Division of the Western Highlands Provincial
    Administration prior to his appointment as an Ombudsman. Mr Masi commenced his appointment as
    an Ombudsman on 23 May 2001.

    Chapter 3
    The Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 24 of 117

  • 14

    Ombudsman John Nero, BAC MBA

    Ombudsman John Nero comes from Kasena village, Asaro District,
    Eastern Highlands Province.

    He completed his secondary education at the Asaroka Lutheran High
    School in 1982 and Aiyura National High School in 1984 and worked
    with the accounting and finance division of the Rural Development Bank
    from 1985 to 1986. Between 1987 and 1990, Mr Nero pursued tertiary
    studies at the University of Papua New Guinea and graduated with
    Bachelor in Commerce (BAC). He joined the Finance and Planning
    Department as a Finance Inspector for four and a half years conducting
    audits and special investigations of governmental bodies under the Public Finances (Management) Act
    1995.

    In September 1995 he joined the Ombudsman Commission as a Senior Investigator with the
    Leadership Division and became team leader in November 1999. He was the Deputy Director
    (Leadership) in April 2002 until his acting appointment as Ombudsman in February 2005 and
    substantive appointment in May. He has been in the employ of the Commission for ten years and at
    various times was acting Director of Operations.

    As a qualified accountant, Mr Nero brings to the panel of Ombudsmen a wealth of specialist expertise
    and skills in inspections, auditing and investigation of the government expenditure and accounting
    system. His contributions and guidance of the Commission‟s finances, budgeting and corporate
    functions are invaluable.

    Ombudsman Nero holds a Masters in Business Administration, (MBA) from the Queensland
    University in Brisbane, Australia, having graduated in 1999 and is an active member of the Certified
    Practising Accountants, CPA PNG.

    WHY WAS THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION ESTABLISHED?

    In general terms, the Commission was established to:

     guard against the abuse of power by those in the public sector;

     assist those exercising public power to do their jobs efficiently and fairly;
     impose accountability on those who are exercising public power; and
     guard against discriminatory practices by any person.

    Section 218 of the Constitution lists the purposes for which the Ombudsman Commission was
    established:

    (a) to ensure that all governmental bodies are responsive to the needs and aspirations of the people;

    Chapter 3
    The Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 25 of 117

  • (b) to help in the improvement of the work of governmental bodies and the elimination of
    unfairness and discrimination by them;

    (c) to help in the elimination of unfair or otherwise defective legislation and practices affecting or
    administered by governmental bodies; and
    (d) to supervise the enforcement of Division III.2 (Leadership Code).

    THE CONSTITUTION AND THE TWO ORGANIC LAWS

    The investigative powers of the Ombudsman Commission are exercised under the Constitution and two
    Organic Laws:

     the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission; and

     the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership

    Section 11 of the Constitution states that the Constitution and the Organic Laws are the Supreme Laws of
    Papua New Guinea. Organic Laws therefore have a higher status than Acts of Parliament. If there is any
    inconsistency between the provisions of an Act and those of an Organic Law, the latter will prevail.
    Likewise if there is any inconsistency between the Constitution and an Organic Law, the Constitution will
    prevail.

    The fact that two Organic Laws have been specifically enacted to provide for Ombudsman Commission
    investigations reflects the very high status of such investigations. It also has significant practical
    consequences. If compliance with a direction issued or summons by the Commission under one of its
    Organic Laws would involve the breach of an Act of Parliament, the Commission‟s direction will have
    precedence. For example, if the Commission issues a summons for the Internal Revenue Commission to
    produce certain documents, the secrecy provisions of the Income Tax Act and the Customs Act have to
    “give way” to the summons.

    THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    The Chief Ombudsman and the two Ombudsmen are appointed by the Governor-General, acting on the
    advice of the Ombudsman Appointments Committee (Constitution, Section 217(2)). This Committee
    consists of:

     the Prime Minister as Chairman;

     the Chief Justice;

     the Leader of the Opposition;

     the Chairman of the Permanent Parliamentary Committee on Appointments; and

     the Chairman of the Public Services Commission.

    Chapter 3
    The Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 26 of 117

  • 16

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    The Constitution and the Organic Law on the Guarantee of the Rights and Independence of
    Constitutional Office-holders (OLGRICOH) provide for the accountability of the members of the
    Ombudsman Commission.

    They are accountable to Parliament and like other Leaders are subject to the Leadership Code.

    Section 220 of the Constitution also imposes administrative duty on the Commission to report to
    Parliament on the operation of the Commission every twelve (12) months.

    PRIMARY FUNCTIONS

    The Commission has three primary functions and, in addition, a number of complementary functions.

    FUNCTION SOURCE OF POWER

    1. Investigation of alleged wrong conduct Constitution, Sections 219(1)(a) &
    and defective administration by 219(1)(b); Organic Law on the
    governmental bodies. Ombudsman Commission

    2. Investigation of alleged discriminatory Constitution, Section 219(1)(c);Organic
    practices, by any person or body. Law on the Ombudsman Commission;
    Discriminatory Practices Act.

    3. Investigation of alleged or suspected Constitution Section 219(1)(d); Organic,
    misconduct in office under the Law on the Duties and Responsibilities
    Leadership Code. of Leadership.

    COMPLEMENTARY FUNCTIONS

    In addition to its primary functions, the Commission has a number of complementary functions.

    FUNCTION SOURCE OF POWER

    1. Power to make special references to the Supreme Court on Constitution, Section 19.
    questions of constitutional interpretation

    2. (Implied) power to protect and enforce the Basic Rights and Constitution, Section 57.
    freedom under the Constitution.

    3. Power to advise (jointly with the NEC) the Queen and Head Constitution, Sections 87(3)&(4)
    of State, to consent to the Governor-General holding another
    office or position or engaging in another calling.

    4. Power to help enforce the Organic Law regulating political Constitution, Sections 129 &130;
    parties, political donations and the protection of elections Organic Law on the Integrity of
    from outside or hidden influences. Political Parties and Candidates.

    5. Power given to Chief Ombudsman to participate in judicial Constitution, Section 183; Organic
    appointments etc, by virtue of his membership of the Judicial Law on the Judicial and Legal

    Chapter 3
    The Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 27 of 117

  • and Legal Services Commission. Services Commission.

    6. Power given to Chief Ombudsman to participate in the Constitution Section 190(2)(e).
    appointment of Public Services Commissioners by virtue of
    his membership of the Public Services Commissioners‟
    Appointment Committee.
    THE SERVICE OF THE COMMISSION

    Section 25 of the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission (OLOC requires the Commission to
    appoint a Secretary and Counsel to the Commission. The Commission in 2002 made an administrative
    decision to amend the organisational structure and create a position of Director Operations. The three
    Officers form the Senior Executive to the Commission:

    Office of the Secretary

    The Office of the Secretary is headed by the Secretary to the Commission Mr Mavara Sere who comes
    from Hanuabada village, National Capital District. He has served the Commission for more than 15
    years and holds a Bachelor of Arts major in Commerce degree from the University of Papua New
    Guinea.

    Office of Counsel

    The Office of Counsel is headed by the Counsel to the Commission, Mr Nemo Yalo who comes from
    Yankuri Village, in the Erave District of Southern Highlands Province. Mr Yalo joined the
    Commission in 2001 as a Legal Officer and has been with the Commission for five years. He holds a
    Bachelor in Law from Bond University in Australia.

    Operations Division

    The Operations Division is headed by Director Operations Mr John ToGuata, and he comes from
    Wairiki village in the East New Britain Province. Mr ToGuata oversees the Leadership and the
    Complaints and Administrative Investigations Branches. He was Assistant Commissioner for Police
    before he joined the Commission.

    Mavara Sere Nemo Yalo John ToGuata, CBE QPM
    Secretary to the Commission Counsel to the Commission
    Director Operations

    ORGANISATIONAL REVIEW

    In 1999 the Commission undertook an internal administrative review of its organisational structure.
    Apart from the minor amendment in 2002 there have been no other changes.

    Chapter 3
    The Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 28 of 117

  • 18

    The service of the Commission comprises of the offices of the Commission excluding the Members of
    the Commission (MOC). The organizational structure below illustrates the chain of command and the
    number of offices in the service of the Commission.

    In 2005 the Ombudsman Commission embarked on a Comprehensive Management Review. Deloitte
    Touche Tohmatsu was engaged for a three month period to review among others the Commission‟s
    structure. The review team proposed as part of its recommendations a new structural facelift with 19
    new positions to provide the Commission with additional resources to enable it to become more pro-
    active and more effective. In 2007 the Commission hopes to implement these recommendations.






























    

    Chapter 3
    The Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 29 of 117

  • CHAPTER FOUR

    OUR STAFF AND SUPPORT STRENGTH

    Ombudsman John Nero, Senior Manager Support Services Samoa Kedea,
    Internal Auditor Gabe Hekoi and IT Manager Alexia Luke in a meeting.

  • Page 30 of 117

  • 20

    4 OUR STAFF AND SUPPORT STRENGTH

    The Support Services Branch plays a strategic role in the Ombudsman Commission‟s overall
    operations through managing its Human Resources, Finance, Information and Technology and the
    Logistics functions. The Branch integrates these functions by providing effective administrative and
    logistical support and manages its staff to carry out the duties of the Ombudsman Commission in
    accordance with the Ombudsplan targets.

    HUMAN RESOURCES UNIT

    In 2006 Human Resources Unit activities were realigned through funding assistance from the
    Commission‟s recurrent budget and through the developmental budget from the Law and Justice
    Sector Program.

    The main key performance areas of the HR Unit were Staff Recruitment, Training and Development,
    Personnel Administration, Salary and Leave Administration, Performance Management, Contract of
    Employment, Complete Human Resources Information System, Registry and Archive Management,
    Staff Welfare and Disciplinary matters including Staff Grievances. Two important activities added to
    the key result areas in 2006 were Law and Justice Sector Program and the Twinning Arrangement
    program.

    Staff establishment of the Commission

    The Commission‟s organisational structure had a staff establishment of 124 funded positions,
    excluding the two special Project Officers and the three Members of the Commission. The
    Commission had 103 staff on strength at the beginning of January 2006 and twenty-one (21)
    vacancies. The vacancies were caused due to officers resigning, non-renewal of contracts and
    retirements. At year end staff on strength had increased with 18 positions being filled which is an
    improvement from previous years.

    Gender distribution in each Branch in 2006

    The Commission sees Gender Equity as a non-issue and considers officers on merit. The Commission
    appoints both male and female officers on contract positions based on objective performance. In 2006
    nine female officers held middle management contract positions thereby meeting Gender Equity
    objectives.

    Training and Development

    In 2006 the Commission‟s training and development activities took greater emphasis on equal training
    opportunities for the betterment of staff knowledge, skills and competencies, and the improved
    behavioural attitude of the officers.

    The training program focused on immediate skill development with particular emphasis on
    Investigative Training. The engagement of a Training Consultant and the use of the Commission‟s
    own officers in running investigation training modules provided professional advancement for
    officers. The training and development of officers was targeted at bridging competency skill levels to
    be more efficient and effective in attaining 2006 Ombudsplan targets.

    Chapter 4
    Our Staff and Support Strength

  • Page 31 of 117

  • 21

    Law and Justice Sector Programs

    The Law and Justice Sector APP activities also had a greater impact on the capacity building programs
    of the Commission. In 2006 more Agency based management development programs and sector
    training needs programs supplemented the development requirements through LJS and APP activities.
    One Legal Officer of the Commission attended the Victorian Bar Readers Course.

    Twinning Program

    The Twinning Program commenced in 2006 with three placements from the Commission and an
    exchange officer from the Commonwealth Ombudsman. Two reviews were completed, one in
    Australia and the other in PNG. This was complemented with a Management Workshop in Canberra
    where two Ombudsmen and Director Operations attended with their counterparts from Canberra.

    One of the outcomes of the Twinning Arrangement is the awareness on the role of the Police oversight
    function and its aim to establish an MOA between the Police Department and the Ombudsman
    Commission to build a mutual working relationship.

    In-house and in-country training

    In 2006 the Commission‟s estimated target was 7 days per training per person per annum. By the end
    of December 2006 the training summary indicated 16 days per training days for male and 21 days per
    training days for female officers. This is a reflection of an improvement in male training days,
    compared to 14 days per training days for male in 2005 where as in female per training days, it
    increased from 15 days per training days for the same period.

    Benchmark Study

    In 2006 a benchmark study was carried out to determine motor vehicle allowance which covered six
    statutory organizations. These were PNG Harbours Board, Bank of Papua New Guinea, Auditor-
    General, Magisterial Services, National Forest Authority and the National Research Institute. The HR
    Unit had provided the information in terms of comparative salary and allowances information to the
    Commission for its review.

    Personnel Administration

    Staff issues, such as leave matters, resumptions, salary advice, job applications and other personnel
    matters continue to consume time and attention. Contract, disciplinary and irregular administrative
    processes also require a lot of time and resources to attend to and can be of cost to the Commission.

    FINANCE UNIT

    The Finance Unit comes under the umbrella of the Support Services Division and administers the
    financial affairs of the Ombudsman Commission.

    Role

    The Finance Unit plays a very important role within the Support Services Division. It administers
    payroll services of the Commission including processing leave pays and contract gratuities.

    Chapter 4
    Our Staff and Support Strength

  • Page 32 of 117

  • 22

    Other functions include the procurements of office stationaries, office furniture and equipment,
    preparations of travel arrangements for duty travelling officers. The Unit also attends to and processes
    other commitments and expenditures and produces monthly expenditure and income reports, bank
    reconciliation and preparation of the quarterly reviews.

    Accomplished Assignments

    (a) Asset Management System

    The Commission, through the AusAID Law and Justice Sector Program (LJSP) produced its Fixed
    Assets Register for 2005 using the Asset Management System (AMS).

    The project is in its infancy stage and is being finalised. It is also worth mentioning that after
    producing the 2005 AMS Reports, some discrepancies in the closing balance figures reported in the
    2005 Accounts were identified and corrective measures have been taken to account for all assets as at
    31st December 2006. It is evident that corrective measures taken and entered on AMS are correctly
    reflected on Fixed Asset Reconciliation produced by the AMS.

    (b) CHRIS21™

    The CHRIS21™ software was purchased through Law and Justice Sector Funding in early August
    2006. The Finance and Human Resources Units have been running the payroll in parallel with the
    phased out CHRIS5™ for the payrolls in November and December 2006. The parallel run has been
    successful based on production of same figures reflected on both old and new versions of CHRIS.

    The payrolls for January and February 2007 will be run on the CHRIS 21™.

    Finance Report

    In the period 1st January to 31st December 2006, the Ombudsman Commission‟s Recurrent Grants
    totalled K9,400,000.00, in line with the Commission‟s appropriation for 2006. Of this K8,078,515.00
    was spent leaving a balance of K1,321,485.00. A significant underspending achieved is alluded to
    Treasury‟s inconsistency in its monthly remittance of grant and this in turn affected the monthly cash
    flow projections on planned expenditure programs, thus leaving significant unspent cash balance. An
    example of this scenario is best illustrated when on 12 October 2006, an amount of K1,298,400.00
    was deposited into the Commission‟s bank account. Following that and on 24 November 2006,
    another deposit of K1,294,400.00 was made into the account, thus creating a significant unspent cash
    balance at the end of the year.

    Business Management Account continues to operate and accounts for cash investment for earning
    interest income purposes. As at 31st December 2006 the balance of BMA was K 2,749,161.00.

    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY UNIT

    The Commission embraced 2006 as a technological year to explore and reap the benefits of
    information technology services following a major systems network upgrade implemented at the end
    of 2005.

    The systems upgrade involved the introduction of the latest MS Windows™ server 2003 with Active
    Directory services, deployment of Windows XP Professional as standard desktop operating system, re-

    Chapter 4
    Our Staff and Support Strength

  • Page 33 of 117

  • 23

    design and establishment of new external network to facilitate internet and email services and
    installation of new hardware components.

    Communication

    Security of information holds a high priority in managing day to day affairs of the Commission.

    The Information Technology Unit manages two networks; internal LAN and external network while
    maintaining an air-gap between these two networks to preserve the confidentiality of information.

    Local Area Network (LAN)

    The Commission‟s LAN supports more than a hundred clients comprised of Head office network
    linking with Regional offices in Lae, Kokopo and Mt.Hagen through the Virtual Private Network
    (VPN) services.

    The head office in Port Moresby replaced 80 Hewlett Packard computers purchased in 2001 with the
    latest Dell computers. New Dell computers were rolled out in each regional site with an inclusion of a
    server.

    Internet

    The traditional means of accessing internet services via dial-up account was replaced by a wireless
    leased line service. The Commission maintains an Internet network comprised of a mail server, an ISA
    server loaded with web filtering software, a mail filtering software and more than 10 computers
    networked throughout the commission head office.

    Virtual Private Network

    The Virtual Private Network (VPN) continues to serve messaging services between OC Head office
    and the three regional offices. IT staff utilized the VPN link to provide IT support and troubleshoot
    problems encountered at regional offices. This saved costs incurred on IT Support Visit to regional
    sites.

    In April 2006, the Commission engaged services of an independent consultant company to review the
    current VPN infrastructure. This is in preparation for the development of a new Case Management
    System which relies heavily on VPN link.

    Case Management System

    The aim of this activity is to replace the current Case Management System (CMS) due to technical
    defects and to improve the Commission‟s investigation output as identified under the Comprehensive
    Management Review. About K150,000.00 was earmarked for the implementation of the new system.

    Tasks accomplished under this activity were:

    1 CMS Market Research to Ombudsman offices in Australia and New Zealand in search of a
    suitable CMS that is applicable to PNG Ombudsman Commission,

    Chapter 4
    Our Staff and Support Strength

  • Page 34 of 117

  • 24

    2 Engagement of CMS developer, LANWorx™ Limited of New Zealand to produce final report
    of findings on a Detailed Design Specification in consultation with the Leadership Branch,
    Complaints & Administrative Branch and Office of Counsel from 15th to 27th October 2006.

    3 Updating of current SQL 2000 licenses to SQL 2005 licenses

    4 Procurement of additional hardware resources to assist with training and testing of CMS in
    2007.

    5 Funding of SQL training for IT staff to better support and manage CMS database

    6 Engagement of KH Consultants to review current VPN link settings and test connectivity
    between head office and regional sites during normal business hours.

    Implementation of this activity in the 12 month period has been satisfactory. The funds projected for
    implementation of this activity was K200,000.00. Due to major needs identified to procure additional
    hardware, a surplus of K200,000.00 was transferred into this activity in the last quarter and wound
    down by end of the year.

    Business application

    The core business application operating on MS Windows™ 2003 platform also includes the Case
    Management System which comes in three suites –

    1 Complaints Management System (CMS),
    2 Annual Statements Managements system and
    3 Leadership Investigations Systems.

    Independent systems fully integrated and available on OC LAN include;

     Complete Human Resource Information System (CHRIS21™)
     Asset Management System (AMS)
     PngInLaw Database

    CHRIS5™ upgrade to CHRIS21™

    The upgrade of the Commission‟s payroll system was completed in December 2006. The old
    application CHRIS5™ is now replaced by a new product CHRIS21™ due to its user friendly features
    and its ability to generate more customized reports.
    After seven years of serving Human Resources and Payroll section; CHRIS5™ finally becomes
    obsolete and is out of the Commission system when it completes two successful parallel runs against
    CHRIS21™ by January 2007.

    Asset Management System (AMS)

    The Asset Management System (AMS) was installed and implemented on the Commission LAN. It is
    fully utilized by Finance staff to record, update and track Commission assets.

    Chapter 4
    Our Staff and Support Strength

  • Page 35 of 117

  • 25

    It was anticipated each regional office will be granted access to run reports and enquire details of
    assets only for its respective site. Mt Hagen office has been granted access while Lae and Kokopo will
    have access in early 2007.

    LOGISTICS UNIT

    The Logistics unit has twelve staff, comprising of Manager Logistics, AO Technical Services, 2 office
    attendants, 5 drivers, 2 security officers and AO Reception and is responsible for maintaining the fleet
    of vehicles, the security systems (external & internal), Radio network, Telephone System (PABX),
    Office allocation, Lease Agreements for Staff accommodation and office space allocation, Asset
    Management System and all other duties that relates to Logistics.

    Changes

    In 2006 the Logistics Unit had three different managers including the incumbent and due to high staff
    turnover a lot of important matters were not adequately addressed which led to the Commission
    resources not properly utilised.


    

    Chapter 4
    Our Staff and Support Strength

  • Page 36 of 117

  • CHAPTER 5

    ENFORCING THE ORGANIC LAW ON THE OMBUDSMAN
    COMMISSION

  • Page 37 of 117

  • 27

    5 ENFORCING THE ORGANIC LAW ON THE OMBUDSMAN
    COMMISSION

    The traditional role of the Ombudsman Commission

    The Ombudsman Commission is an institution that is required to provide a quick, flexible means of
    redress for aggrieved citizens affected by a form of administrative injustice.

    In its traditional role therefore, the Ombudsman Commission is seen as the institution that is available
    to assist ordinary citizens throughout the country who feel aggrieved by actions of the bureaucracy or
    any governmental body.

    Purposes of the Ombudsman Commission

    Section 218 of the Constitution states that the purposes of establishing the Commission are:

    (a) to ensure that all governmental bodies are responsive to the needs and aspirations of the
    People; and

    (b) to help in the improvement of the work of governmental bodies and the elimination of
    unfairness and discrimination by them; and

    (c) to help in the elimination of unfair or otherwise defective legislation and practices affecting or
    administered by governmental bodies; and

    (d) to supervise the enforcement of Division III.2 (Leadership Code).

    Whereas the Constitutional Planning Committee focused on the need for the Commission to assist
    individual citizens in achieving administrative justice, the Constitution went one step further. It
    envisages a much broader role for the Commission to actively “help” in the work of governmental
    bodies.

    The Constitution ensures that governmental bodies are responsive, efficient and effective in carrying
    out their statutory functions. The Ombudsman Commission is entrusted with the responsibility to lift
    the overall standards of public administration in Papua New Guinea. It does not exist simply to assist
    individual citizens but has a much broader constitutional mandate to protect the interest of its citizens
    against abuse by government agencies and departments.

    This was a profound vision of our forefathers who planned and wrote the Constitution.

    INVESTIGATING WRONG CONDUCT

    The ombudsman‟s traditional function allows the Commission to investigate issues, either on its own
    initiative or on a complaint by a person affected by administrative practices and decisions of
    governmental bodies that may be unreasonable, unjust or oppressive.

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 38 of 117

  • 28

    An investigation of alleged wrong conduct by a governmental body is carried out under the Organic
    Law on the Ombudsman Commission. This Organic Law is also used for a discriminatory practices
    investigation.

    COMPLAINTS

    The Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission provides that any person can make a complaint about
    any matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission. The Commission is obliged to consider every
    complaint it receives and has the discretion whether to investigate a complaint or not.

    OWN INITIATIVE INVESTIGATIONS

    Section 219(1)(a)(ii) and (c) of the Constitution empowers the Ombudsman Commission to conduct
    investigations on its own initiative, in addition to conducting investigations in response to specific
    complaints that it receives.

    The power to investigate on its own initiative is another way in which the Constitution and the
    Organic Law have conferred a considerable degree of independence on the Commission.

    The Ombudsman Commission exists, not only to impose accountability, but also to expose corruption
    and to positively assist the public, particularly public servants and governmental bodies to do their
    jobs properly.

    The wider purpose of the existence of the Ombudsman Commission has a clear conceptional basis in the
    Constitution.

    Statistical analysis of complaints received

    Each year the Commission receives thousands of complaints from people all over the country through
    our Head Office in Port Moresby and at our respective regional offices in Lae, Mt Hagen and Kokopo.
    The statistics below indicate the total number of complaints received in 2006

    In 2006 the Ombudsman Commission received 3087 complaints, a reduction by 22% from the annual
    estimated target of 3960 set for the year.

    Figure 1: Trends in complaints received in the last 10 years – 1997 -2006
    Total

    4500

    4000 3823
    3526 3526
    3500 3299
    3087
    2924 2943 2943
    3000

    2500
    2076 Total
    1894
    2000

    1500

    1000

    500

    0
    1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 39 of 117

  • 29

    Figure 2: Compositions of Complaints received in 2006

    2006

    1522
    1600

    1400

    1200

    1000
    718
    800 2006
    485
    600 362

    400

    200

    0
    HQ LAE MT.HAGEN KOKOPO

    Complaints & Administrative Investigation Branch

    The Complaints and Administrative Investigative Branch (CAIB) comes under the Operations
    Division and is headed by a Deputy Director. The Complaints and Administrative Investigations
    Branch comprises 3 Investigation Units: the Anti-discrimination and Human Rights Unit, an Intake
    and Screening Unit and the three Regional Offices.

    The Intake and Screening Unit (ISU) is based at head office in Port Moresby and three Regional
    Offices in Lae, Morobe Province, Kokopo, East New Britain Province and Mt Hagen, Western
    Highlands Province. CAIB receives complaints, makes assessments and carries out investigations
    under the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission. Complaints are received from the Public. It
    is one of the two main functional areas of the Commission as it relates to the enforcement of the
    relevant Constitutional provisions and Organic Laws.

    The CAIB investigates alleged wrong conduct on the part of government bodies and alleged
    discriminatory laws and practices under the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission.

    The Branch also gives priority to investigating complaints that identify structural and procedural
    deficiencies in the Papua New Guinea public administration and individual cases of serious abuse of
    powers particularly where there are no alternative and satisfactory means of redress.

    In 2006 the CAIB received 3087 complaints through the Intake and Screening Unit at Head-Quarters
    and the three Regional Offices. Of this total the head office in Port Moresby received and dealt with
    1522 complaints. Of the three regional offices Mt. Hagen office received and dealt with 485
    complaints, Lae office received 718 complaints and Kokopo received 362 complaints.

    The Branch completed one report under S22 of the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission
    against the Department of Agriculture and Livestock (DAL) for granting sick leave credits to two
    senior officers of the Department who were not sick.

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 40 of 117

  • 30

    Table 1: Investigations

    A total of 112 case files were opened for investigations in 2006, with 147 carried over from 2005.
    Therefore in 2006 the Branch handled 259 investigation files. A total of 145 files were closed during
    the year.

    Office statistics HQ Highlands Momase Islands TOTAL
    No. Investigations opened 112 32 2 3 149
    Carry-over from 2005 147 0 0 5 152
    No. Investigations closed 145 32 2 2 181
    Ombudsplan target 198 24 24 24 270
    Cases opened as % of target 57% 0% 8% 13% 55%
    Cases closed as % of target 73% 133% 8% 8% 67%
    Current investigations open 114 0 0 6 120

    Governmental Bodies Liaison Program (GBLP)

    The Governmental Bodies Liaison Program is aimed at promoting and building relationships between
    the Ombudsman Commission and Governmental Bodies. In 2002 the pilot project commenced with
    four (4) Governmental Bodies namely Education, Teaching Services Commission, Police and
    Correctional Services.

    In 2006 Gulf Provincial Administration, Milne Bay Provincial Administration, Office of Workers
    Compensation, National Judicial Staff Services, Department of Trade and Industry, Office of the Clerk
    of the National Parliament, Department of Agriculture and Livestock, Office of the Secretary of the
    National Executive Council, West New Britain Provincial Administration, Department of Finance and
    the National Intelligence Organisation were added to the list of government bodies under the
    programme and brings the total to forty four (44) to date.

    Various workshops were conducted with Government Departments and Provincial Administrations.
    Through these workshops a lot of the senior public servants and Provincial Administrators were made
    aware of the roles and functions of the Ombudsman Commission.

    Police Oversight Project

    The branch commenced the Police Oversight Project which was coordinated by Team Leader John
    Hevie. In 2006 the Commission conducted four regional conferences with Provincial Police
    Commanders, Police Station Commanders and other police personnel on the proposed idea of an
    oversight function as per recommendation 29 of the Police Review of 2004. After lengthy discussions
    it was agreed that the way forward was to begin with a MOA between the two organizations, which
    would set the pace for an independent external agency to oversight police investigations on
    complaints. The Commission is of the view that the assistance rendered to the RPNGC to institute
    accountability and transparency measures also enables the Commission to fulfill its constitutional
    responsibility under S218 of the Constitution.

    Highlands Regional Office

    The Highlands Regional Office was mindful of the fact that 2007 was a national election year. It is for
    this reason, the message on good governance and leadership was emphasised time and again to all key

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 41 of 117

  • 31

    groups visited by the Commission officers during ERP forums in 2006 within the region.

    People have great expectations on the leadership qualities of elected representatives, whether or not
    these leaders deliver in the next five years is of even greater significance to the electorate and its
    people. This message was driven out to the communities by the regional officers, with the support of
    head office staff that accompanied the team on a number of field visits.

    No trips were taken to Enga and Southern Highlands Provinces due to security reasons.

    Despite varying problems experienced by the Regional Office associated with IT, unhygienic office
    environment, water and the continued power interruptions, the office managed to satisfactorily deal
    with a total of 485 cases for the year, a deficit of 27% from the annual estimated target of 660. The
    Highlands Regional Office hopes to improve on this in its 2007 performance.

    Momase Regional Office

    The year 2006 commenced slowly but ended at a hectic pace as evidenced by the number of cases
    handled by the office in an otherwise short timeframe.

    The year witnessed the continuation of the quest to strengthen dialogue with governmental bodies in
    the region under the auspices of Governmental Bodies Liaison Program (GBLP). To this end,
    meetings were held with key officials from within provincial administrations, heads of national
    agencies in Madang, East Sepik and Sandaun provinces during the provincial visits.

    In what has become an integral part of the Commission‟s constant interface with the public, specific
    times were set aside for the public to meet with Commission officers in all the provincial visits
    conducted in the region. In the Vanimo leg of the provincial visit contact with the Catholic Church
    was forged whereby Catholic Radio Network hosted a talk back program. This was followed by
    meetings held in the Lido Parish Chapel and with a non government organization in town. A visit was
    made to Wutung village to publicize the Commission‟s work. In Wewak a local FM radio station aired
    materials on the Commission. In Madang a visit to Bogia station resulted in a meeting with the public.
    In Morobe the provincial radio service Kundu FM hosted a talk back show on the work of the
    Commission.

    Awareness visits to educational institutions like Madang Teachers College, Tusbab Secondary School,
    Divine Word University (Kaindi) campus and PNG University of Technology formed an essential
    feature of the Commission‟s field visits.

    Finally, it was again a challenging year as the office had to contend with issues of compliance by
    governmental bodies. However, in the midst of such constraints public expectation placed on the
    Regional Office to ventilate grievances remained enormous. The Momase Regional Office received
    718 complaints in 2006.

    New Guinea Islands Regional Office

    In 2006 the New Guinea Islands Regional Office received 362 complaints compared to 512 in 2005.
    Although this was below the expected target the decrease was attributed to understaffing. The
    provincial trips conducted in the region covered West New Britain and Manus Provinces. Apart from
    receiving complaints, these trips were used to educate the general public on the roles and functions of
    the Commission, and inform the public of their rights and responsibilities under the Constitution, and
    to ensure that the Government Body Liaison Programs was working effectively.
    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 42 of 117

  • 32

    A total of 27 public awareness programs were conducted in these two Provinces and the East New
    Britain Province.

    Although in 2006 the office was faced with many challenges it still managed to perform the core
    constitutional functions in serving the people of the region.

    ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS UNIT
    The Commission added another unit to its operations, the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Unit
    (ADHRU). This unit is located at the ground floor of the Deloitte Tower in Port Moresby and became
    fully operational in May 2005. The Unit is an initiative of the Ombudsman Commission and the
    United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and was initially set up as a project funded by the
    UNDP.

    The targeted output of the projects is:

     To strengthen the capacity of the Ombudsman Commission Anti-Discrimination and Human
    Rights Unit to undertake the protection and enforcement of human rights;
     Increase public awareness on human rights issues through nationwide mass media campaign
    and;
     To advocate for a long-term institutional arrangement for human rights protections.

    In 2006 the unit received 19 cases and completed 16 cases while 3 cases were carried over to 2007.
    The Unit conducted External Relations Programs (ERP) promoting human rights awareness and visits
    to three of the four regions in the country. New Ireland Province (NGI Region) in June, Milne Bay
    (Southern Region) in September and Madang (Momase Region) in November 2006. The unit visited
    Educational Institutions, public servants, NGOs, Civil Society Organisations, Police and Corrective
    Services Institutions, village communities, and womens‟ groups.

    Intake & Screening Unit

    The Intake and Screening Unit (ISU) concept created in 1999 also serves the Southern Region. The
    Unit is located on the Ground Floor of Deloitte Tower, in Port Moresby. The Unit‟s role is to receive,
    assess and process and account for, all enquiries, complaints and allegations, that are received by the
    Commission‟s Head Office in Port Moresby.

    The purpose of the Unit is to obtain sufficient information to:

     Enable details obtained during the initial contact to be entered into the Case Management
    System (CMS);
     Assess and determine the appropriate course of action;
     Where appropriate, advise the complainant of the outcome; and
     To refer the file with recommendation to the Director – CAI for investigation or for his
    attention.

    In 2006 ISU recorded 1522 cases which is a 5% increase from 2005, but a reduction by 23% from its
    annual target of 1980.

    During the year officers of the Unit conducted awareness on the roles and functions of the
    Ombudsman Commission and its Governmental Bodies Liaison Program with complaints gathering

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 43 of 117

  • 33

    trips to Milne Bay, Oro, Manus, Western and Gulf Provinces.

    Although the ISU did not achieve its target for the year, it however continued to assist the people by
    providing a user friendly complaints handling mechanism for the general public. Out of the total
    number of complaints received, 11% were against private organizations which the Commission has no
    jurisdiction over.

    Table 2: ISU Closure Classifications

    Code Classification Total %
    5a No jurisdiction 168 11
    Declined – adequate remedy available – explanation given to
    5b complainant 582 38
    5c Declined – rights of appeal available – explanation given to complainant 101 7
    5d Declined-out of time-explanation given to complainant 68 4
    5e Declined-insufficient interest-explanation given to complainant 10 1
    5f Declined-frivolous & vexatious- explanation given to complainant 32 2
    5g Declined-low priority- explanation given about limited resources 44 3
    6 Declined – transferred to other government under GBLP 408 27
    61 Transferred internally to other Sections 109 7
    Total 1522 100

    COMPLAINTS CASE SUMMARIES

    The following are some of the complaints that were lodged with the Ombudsman Commission in 2006
    which were successfully dealt with. These complaints were dealt under the Organic Law on the
    Ombudsman Commission.

    Tenant at fault with NHC

    A complainant had acquired a house unlawfully from the National Housing Corporation (NHC)
    without following proper procedures. He wanted a second property but when NHC found that he had
    outstanding rental fees, the transfer of the property could not proceed until he paid up his outstanding
    lease rentals. He failed to advise the Commission that this matter had gone before the courts for a
    ruling. When the Commission referred the matter to NHC, the Commission was advised that the
    complainant was a defaulter and that the matter was before the courts to deal with. The case was
    closed as the matter was before the courts to deal with.

    Enquiry on the financial and administrative affairs of the business arm of a provincial
    government

    The Ombudsman Commission received a report from a Governor of a province seeking the
    Commission‟s assistance to conduct an investigation into the business arm of the Provincial
    Government. The report alleged that a person was recruited as a casual employee by the then
    Provincial Administrator and in a short period of time was promoted to an Investment Analyst position
    and eventually as Company Secretary and General Manager without the positions being advertised in
    the open market.

    The report also alleged that the officer became signatory to all company Bank Accounts and used the
    position to benefit himself and two previous Provincial Administrators at the expense of the company

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 44 of 117

  • 34

    and the people. It is also alleged that he had negotiated for the purchase of shares, outsourced
    accounting functions of the company to a private accounting firm, misappropriated company funds,
    failed to have the company‟s books audited, and wrote off loans to the Provincial Government which
    eventually led to the company‟s liquidation.

    The actions of the former General Manager of the company and the two former Provincial
    Administrators implicated in the Investigation Report breached provisions of the Organic Law on the
    Provincial and Local-level Government, Public Finance (Management) Act, Public Service
    Management Act, Public Services General Order and the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership. Despite the allegations, the Provincial Administration failed to take
    any action on them and referred the matter to the Commission for redress.

    The Commission could not proceed to take any action as it had no jurisdiction to hold the three
    Leaders responsible for misappropriation of public funds since they were no longer in leadership
    positions. Furthermore, it would have been a duplication of inquiry and squandering of resources,
    needless to say when the investigation on the same case had already been done by a private
    investigation firm. Hence the Commission through the Government Liaison Program referred the
    matter to the Provincial Administration to have it resolved administratively.

    The Provincial Administration implemented the recommendation of the Investigation Report as
    advised and notified the Commission that it had referred the implicated officers to the Fraud Squad to
    be arrested and charged for misappropriation of public funds.

    Pilot claims of unpaid entitlements

    A complainant claimed that he was employed by the Central Provincial Government on contract which
    was executed on 19 November 1999 as an Operations Manager and pilot with the business arm of the
    Central Provincial Government (CATL).The contract of employment was for a term of (12) months
    and to be renewed after the expiry date, however, the complainant did not renew his contract because
    he was not paid his outstanding salaries. He claimed that he was entitled to a gross salary of K30,000
    per annum, which was K1,250 per fortnight before tax and that he was paid salaries ranging from
    K250 to K350 per fortnight in cash.

    As Operations Manager and Pilot, he was required to set up the company and had worked to produce
    the Operations Manual, Dangerous Goods Manual, DFR, PAX-Manifest, and Maintenance Control
    Manual. He claimed that the company owed him K20,000.00 for setting up the Company and
    producing vital documents and papers to have CAA approve the establishment of the company.
    Information revealed that he was paid K10,000.00 on 12 July 2004 for outstanding salaries and
    another K10,000.00 for his rented accommodation. The Complainant sought Commission assistance to
    claim the balance of K10,000.00 as outstanding salaries which was still owing to him.

    The Commission referred this matter to the Central Provincial Administration and after exchanges of
    correspondence, the Administrator advised the Commission that he had asked the complainant to
    provide to him the original flight manual before the balance of his claim was fully settled. The
    Commission advised the Complainant accordingly and closed the case.

    Payment of final entitlements after many years

    A complainant alleged he had been unjustly terminated on 26 December 2001 and was not paid any
    form of service entitlements after working for the Department of Works as a foreman on causal
    capacity for twenty-three years. His personnel file was kept by the Department of Works, Vanimo
    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 45 of 117

  • 35

    Provincial Office, for the last four years. He had no formal education and was never made a permanent
    public servant throughout the duration of his employment.

    The Commission referred this matter to the Department of Works on 8 August 2006. The complainant
    later came to the Commission and advised that he had received the unpaid service entitlement of
    K12,589.09 from his former employer, the Department of Works.

    The Commission was concerned that it took four years for the Department of Works to deal with this
    case and resolve it and that action was only taken because the Commission had intervened.

    Settlement of K1.8 Million plus NHC outstanding rental arrears by Department of Finance

    A tenant of the National Housing Corporation lodged a complaint with the Commission on behalf of
    other tenants against the NHC for unfairly issuing them Notice of Rental Arrears and subsequent
    Eviction Notices even though their rentals were deducted fortnightly by the Department of Finance for
    remittance to the NHC.

    Upon investigations, the Ombudsman Commission discovered that while the rentals were being
    deducted fortnightly, these monies were not remitted to the NHC even after NHC‟s attempts to address
    the issue with the Deparment of Finance. The NHC directed its tenants to pay the outstanding rentals
    or vacate the properties they resided in. The tenants brought the matter to the Ombudsman
    Commission for redress.
    The Ombudsman Commission discussed the matter with the Department of Finance and discovered
    that the New Concept Payroll system did not have a code that would enable the rentals deducted to be
    remitted to the NHC. Hence, the Secretary of Finance undertook two remedial actions to resolve the
    matter, which included the creation of a code in the concept payroll system for the rentals deducted, to
    be remitted to the NHC to avoid similar problems in future; and a total of K1, 830, 841 outstanding
    rental arrears was transferred to the NHC. The NHC has not had any problems with the remittance of
    its rental arrears by the Department of Finance to date.

    With the involvement of the Ombudsman Commission the problem between the Department of
    Finance and the NHC was resolved. The NHC and its tenants were very grateful for the assistance of
    the Commission.

    Issuance of passport by the Department of Foreign Affairs

    A flight attendant lodged a complaint against the Department of Foreign Affairs for refusing to issue
    her a PNG Passport to travel to and from Australia in her job as a flight attendant with Airlines PNG.
    The Complainant is of a mixed Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea parentage. The Department
    had classified her as a Solomon Islands citizen and refused to issue her a PNG passport. However,
    Child Clinic Records and Birth Certificates showed that she was born at the Port Moresby General
    Hospital and had lived and worked in PNG since then. This information was sufficient proof that she
    was a PNG citizen.

    The Commission referred the matter to the Director of Immigrations and a passport was issued to her.
    She wrote back and thanked the Commission for the assistance.

    Money misappropriated from trust account reimbursed

    A spokesman for a landowner group in Milne Bay complained to the Ombudsman Commission that
    the Milne Provincial Government had misappropriated K300,000.00 of landowner funds without the
    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 46 of 117

  • 36

    consent of the signatories of the Trust Account. The Provincial Government had used the money as
    security to secure a loan from RDB to obtain K2.4million for the development of a Village Oil Palm
    Project.

    The Commission referred the complainant to the Provincial Administrator and after exchange of
    letters the Provincial Administrator advised that the money had been repaid in full into the Trust
    Account. On receipt of the relevant documents the case was closed.

    Payment of claims by MVIL

    Two police officers who were victims of a motor vehicle accident complained to the Ombudsman
    Commission that the Motor Vehicle Insurance Limited failed to pay their insurance claims.The
    Commission raised the matter with the MVIL. After careful consideration, MVIL advised the
    Commission that it had decided to award the two officers K5, 000.00 & K4, 000.00 respectively for
    injuries sustained.

    The complainants were advised accordingly but they rejected the amount offered by MVIL and instead
    engaged a lawyer to pursue the matter further.

    Prisoner remanded in prison despite lapse of Warrant of Committment

    A complainant was imprisoned on 19 April 2002 for 8 years for unlawful murder in 1998.

    Four years of the sentence was suspended upon conditions of execution of a report by officers from
    Community Base Correction in Alotau for him to be released back into the community on probation.

    The report prepared by the Community Based Correction and Corrective Services Institution was
    completed in August 2004 and submitted to the National Court Judge for deliberation; however, no
    immediate action was taken. In May 2006 he approached the Ombudsman Commission officers during
    a visit to Milne Bay and requested the Commission to intervene for his release.

    The Commission findings revealed that the prisoner‟s four year sentence had lapsed on 19 April 2006,
    while he was waiting for the response from the National Court. The Commission then advised the
    Commanding Officer of Giligili Correctiional Services to release the prisoner on the grounds that the
    Warrant of Commitment had lapsed.

    The Commanding Officer approached the National Court Judge on circuit in Alotau and requested for
    the prisoner to be released from the jail. A Notice of Discharge was issued in May 2006 and the
    prisoner was finally released from Giligili CS Gaol.

    Teacher displace from his position

    A high school teacher at Busu Secondry School in Lae, Morobe Province, who complained to the
    Commission of being displaced two weeks into the first term of the academic year without any lawful
    authority, was eventually resolved following the Commission‟s intervention. He was advised by the
    Principal to report to the Provincial Program Advisor (PPA) who instructed him to seek alternative
    postings at Grace Memorial Secondary School or Dregerhafen High School. He sought assistance
    from the Commission after all attempts at obtaining a satisfactory explanation to his displacement
    failed.

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 47 of 117

  • 37

    The Commission intervened on 2 June 2006 and the matter was resolved after the Provincial Program
    Advisor (PPA) stepped in to sort out an alternative posting for the complainant.

    Alleged lack of assistance to apply for probation

    A prisoner at the Boram Gaol lodged a complaint in February 2006 alleging that Community Based
    Correction officers had failed to assist him apply for probation. The complainant was jailed for break
    and enter and stealing and was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.

    The Commission referred the complainant to the Director of Community Based Correction within the
    Department of Justice and Attorney General. In March 2006 the Commission received a response
    which adviced that while the complainant was included in the pre-sentence report presented to the
    Court by the Community Based Correction Office, it was the sole discretion of the Courts on who
    qualified for probation. Accordingly, this advice was conveyed to the complainant.

    This is a case of a citizen raising a complaint without lack of understanding and awareness on set
    Community Based Correction procedures.

    Extension of work permits and entry permit visas by Department of Labour & Department of
    Foreign Affairs

    A complaint was lodged by a company in relation to extension of Work Permits and Entry Permit
    Visas for two of its foreign employees. It was alleged that there was unfair issuance of Visas and
    Work Permits, the illegal double charging and apparent lack of attendance and long delays in sorting
    out the problem. The complaint was made against the Departments of Labour and Employment and
    Foreign Affairs.

    The Commission enquired into the matters and despite the lengthy delay, most of which was due to
    the lack of prompt response from both Departments, the Commission was able to resolve the problem
    and correct the anomalies made by the Departments respectively.

    The Commission investigations found that the Immigration Office had errored when issuing Visas for
    the two foreigners. This was corrected and the complainants did not have to pay a fine previously
    imposed on them by the Immigration Office. The complainants were also advised that refunds would
    be made upon production of relevant documents by the company.

    This case is one of the many success stories in which the Commission‟s intervention has brought
    about successful redress to complaints against two key government agencies by private entrepreneurs.

    Illegal payment of sick leave credits to two public servants who were not sick

    This was an own initiative investigation by the Ombudsman Commission into an anonymous
    complaint against the Department of Agriculture and Livestock (DAL) for granting sick leave credits
    to two senior officers of the Department. It was alleged that the two officers, applied and were paid
    lump sum payments for accrued sick leave credits on behalf of their spouses who were not employees
    of the department.

    The Ombudsman Commission in the course of its investigations interviewed a number of witnesses
    and also obtained and examined the personnel files of the two officers.

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 48 of 117

  • 38

    The Commission‟s investigations confirmed the allegations that both officers were improperly granted
    sick leave by DAL, that they took to care for their sick wives. It was also confirmed that both officers
    received large sums of money for accrued sick leave credits contrary to the provisions of the Public
    Service General Order on Leave Entitlements.

    The preliminary report under Section 17(4) of the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission
    (OLOC) was sent out to the officers implicated in the report for their comments on the preliminary
    findings. Upon receipt of the comments, the final report under Section 22 of the OLOC was presented
    to the Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Livestock, the Minister for Agriculture and Livestock
    and the Chief Secretary to Government.

    In the final report the Ombudsman Commission recommended for the practice to cease immediately;
    for disciplinary action to be instituted against the two officers with a view to recouping State monies
    paid out as sick leave entitlements; and that a circular be issued advising all officers of the cessation of
    such practices.

    The Ombudsman Commission was advised by the Minister for Agriculture and Livestock that the
    recommendations would be considered and implemented.

    Replacement of salary cheque after 4 years

    An elementary school teacher complained to the Ombudsman Commission about an alleged delay in
    the reimbursment of his outstanding salary cheque totalling K9, 207.56 which he had returned to the
    Department of Education in March 2003 after being advised that an overpayment had been noted in
    the payment of his outstanding salaries.

    Following the return of the cheque, there was no action from the Department to neither correct nor
    verify the mishap. Numerous follow-up visits made by the complainant to the Provincial Education
    office came to no avail.

    The complaint was then registered with the Ombudsman Commission and after formal enquiries were
    carried out by officers of the Commission the teacher was finally repaid his outstanding salary
    entitlement of K9,207.56 on 18th December 2006 after four years of anguish.

      

    Chapter 5
    Enforcing the Organic Law on the Ombudsman Commission

  • Page 49 of 117

  • CHAPTER 6

    Enforcing the Leadership Code

    Chapter 1 CPC
    Quality of Leadership

    22. The future of our country will depend not only on
    the system of government established and the various
    institutions designed to further and protect the well –
    being of our people, but also on the quality of leadership
    shown by those who are placed in positions of power and
    authority, by election or otherwise. We have includ ed in
    our proposals a Code which such people will be expected to
    observe, and which will be enforceable by the
    Ombudsman Commission and an appropriate judicial
    tribunal. It is hoped thereby to avoid the kind of
    corruption, too often seen abroad, that stems from the
    failure to put the public and national interest before
    personal advantage.

    23. It is not enough however that the people should be
    free from the incidence of corruption among those in
    power and authority. They should seek in their leaders a
    commitment to the national goals set out in the
    Constitution; and they should have the right to expect
    that anybody who aspires to public office should devote
    his energies and talents to the furtherance of these aims
    in the interests of the people.

  • Page 50 of 117

  • 40

    6 ENFORCING THE LEADERSHIP CODE

    Where to find the Leadership Code

    It is not possible to refer to just one piece of legislation in PNG called “the Leadership Code” and read
    it. The Leadership Code is found in two Constitutional Laws:
     the Constitution; and
     the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

    Recently the Parliament added to the Leadership Code duties, responsibilities and misconduct in office
    offences through enactment of other Constitutional Laws. These included the Integrity Law and the
    Organic Law on Provincial Governments and Local Level Governments.

    What makes the Leadership Code unique is that it is not just a set of idealistic principles that leaders
    are required to aspire to. It is a law and is enforceable and widespread in its operation.

    The Constitution contains general statements of principle while the Organic Law imposes more
    specific duties and responsibilities. Section 27 of the Constitution is headed “responsibilities of
    office”. It states that Leaders must ensure that they do not place themselves in a position in which they
    could have a conflict of interests. It speaks of leaders not demeaning their office or position and not
    allowing their public or official integrity to be called into question. It implores Leaders not to
    endanger or diminish respect for and confidence in the integrity of government in Papua New Guinea.
    In many instances, if Leaders are in breach of these fundamental principles of good governance they
    can also be described as acting corruptly.

    In 2006 the Ombudsman Commission referred ten Leaders to the Public Prosecutor in addition to the
    ten cases still pending with the Public Prosecutor that were referred by the Ombudsman Commission
    in the previous years.

    These cases are either reported in previous annual reports and/or are reported in Chapter 8 of this
    report.

    The cases reported in this chapter are categorised as (1) cases carried over from previous years and (2)
    2006 referrals.

    1 CASES CARRIED OVER FROM PREVIOUS YEARS

    The leaders who had been referred for prosecution in previous years are:

    1 Mr Danny Kakaraya (01.08.03).
    2 Justice Mark Sevua (01.10.04).
    3 Mr Peter Ipatas MP (11.10.04)
    4 Mr Gallus Yumbui (16.11.04)
    5 Mr Charlie Benjamin(17.01.05)
    6 Mr Gabriel Kapris (24.06.05)
    7 Mr Ano Pala (15.08.05)
    8 Dr Puka Temu (22.08.05)
    9 Mr James Yali (31.08.05)
    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 51 of 117

  • 41

    10 Mr Andrew Baing (29.09.05)

    The background of the above referrals are reported in detail in the Annual Reports for the years
    2003 to 2005 and will be briefly mentioned in this report.

    DANNY KAKARAYA

    Overview

    Offices Managing Director, Mineral Resources Development Corporation
    Ltd, (an office subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of Section
    26(1)(g) of the Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 1 August 2003
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal Not made
    Result Matter is pending

    The details of this case are reported in 2005 Annual Report and in Chapter 8 of this report.

    JUSTICE MARK SEVUA

    Overview

    Offices Judge of the Supreme and National Court of Justice (an office
    subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of Section 26(1)(e) of the
    Constitution); (Section 221(a) of the Constitution); Judge
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 1 October 2004
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal Not made
    Result Matter is pending

    The details of this case are reported in 2004 Annual Report. At the end of 2006 this matter is still
    pending.

    PETER IPATAS

    Overview

    Offices Member for Enga Provincial; Member, Enga Provincial Assembly
    and Governor, Enga Province (offices subject to the Leadership
    Code by virtue of Sections 26(1) (c) (d) and 104(1) of the
    Constitution) and 10(3) (a) of the Organic Law on Provincial
    Governments and Local-level Governments.
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 11 October2004
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal February 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 16 March 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Panuel Mogish (chairman) and senior magistrates Mr
    Daniel Wakikura and Mr Sasa Inkung (members)
    Date of referral to tribunal 4 April 2006
    Legal Public Prosecutor Mr Nicholas Miviri, Senior State Prosecutor, assisted by, Richard
    representation Baim of Ombudsman Commission
    Leader Mr B Lomai, of Lomai Lawyers
    Hearing dates 4, 21 April 2006; 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 17 and 18 May 2006; 22 June
    2006; 11 July 2006, 4 August 2006

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 52 of 117

  • 42

    Decision and recommendation Guilty of 16 out of 23 allegations of misconduct in office – tribunal
    recommended a fine of K1000 for each of the allegations the
    Leader was found guilty of. The penalty was imposed on 4 August
    2006
    Date recommendation given 4 August 2006
    Implementation of recommendation 4 August 2006
    Judicial review On 17 June 2005 the leader applied for leave for judicial review
    before the National Court to review the decision by the Ombudsman
    Commission to refer him to the Public Prosecutor. On 21 July 2005
    the National Court declined the application. The Leader was
    eventually referred to the Leadership Tribunal on 4 April 2006

    Soon after the Tribunal decision, the Public Prosecutor applied for
    leave for judicial review before the National Court to review the
    decision by the Leadership Tribunal which application was
    declined.
    Result The decision of the Tribunal dated 4 August 2006 recommending a
    fine of K1000 for each of the allegations the Leader was found
    guilty of, remained unchanged

    Mr Ipatas faced 23 allegations of breach of the Leadership Code arising from the four categories of
    allegations.

     applied public funds to pay his private legal bills;
     applied 1999 Provincial Support Grants to his personal use and benefit;
     misapplied 2000 Provincial Support Grants; and
     made false declarations to the Ombudsman Commission in his annual statements for the
    periods 1994/95, 1995/96, 1996/97, 1997/98, 1998/99 and 1999/00.

    The Tribunal concluded that Mr Ipatas owned those companies, derived income from them and had
    investments. However he failed to disclose those facts to the Ombudsman Commission as required by
    the Organic Law.

    In total Honourable Peter Ipatas MP was found guilty of 16 out of 23 allegations. He was found not
    guilty of 7 allegations.

    The Tribunal also found that there was serious culpability or blameworthiness on the part of the
    Leader in relation to counts 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23. However it
    ruled that public policy and public good does not require dismissal from office and recommended that
    the leader be fined a total of K16,000.00. The total payment of K16,000.00 was made within 7 days.
    This matter was concluded in 2006.

    GALLUS YUMBUI

    Overview

    Offices Member for Wosera-Gawi Open, Member, East Sepik Provincial
    Assembly (offices subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of
    Sections 26(1) (a) (b) (1) (c) (d) and 104(1) of the Constitution and
    10(3) (a) of the Organic Law on Provincial Governments and Local-
    level Governments.
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 16 November 2004
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 7 October 2005
    Date of appointment of tribunal November 2005
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Gregory Lay (chairman) and Senior Provincial

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 53 of 117

  • 43

    Magistrates Mr Iova Geita and Mr Lawrence Kangwia
    Date of referral to tribunal 7 December 2005
    Legal representation Mr Chronox Manek, Public Prosecutor, assisted by Richard Pagen
    and Tabitha Suwae from Ombudsman Commission
    Mr Stanley Liria, of Liria Lawyers
    Hearing dates 7, 8 December 2005; 6 February 2006, 9, 14, 15, 16 March.2006;
    11.April 2006; 23 May 2006, 2 June 2006; 28 September 2006
    Decision and recommendation Guilty of misconduct on allegations 1, 2, 5 and 6 and not guilty of
    allegations 3 and 4 which was contained in the Public Prosecutor‘s
    reference dated 7 December 2005.
    The recommendation on penalty was pending at the end of 2006
    Result Matter carried over to 2007

    Mr Yumbui was referred to the Public Prosecutor by the Ombudsman Commission on 16 November
    2004. Details of this referral is reported in 2004 Annual Report.

    On 7 December 2005 the Public Prosecutor, Chronox Manek referred Mr Yumbui to the Tribunal
    presenting 6 allegations of misconduct in office under the Leadership Code. The Tribunal sat in Port
    Moresby and Wewak and in 2006 found the Leader guilty of four out of six allegations. At the end of
    2006 the penalty decision was still pending.

    CHARLIE BENJAMIN

    Overview

    Offices Member for Manus Open; Member, Manus Provincial Assembly
    (offices subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of Sections 26(1)
    (c) (d) and 104(1) of the Constitution) and 10(3) (a) of the Organic
    Law on Provincial Governments and Local-level Governments.
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 17 January 2005
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 28 February 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 6 March 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Sao Gabi (chairman) and Principal Magistrate Mr
    Jeremiah Singomat and Senior Provincial Magistrate Mr Jimmy
    Tapat
    Date of referral to tribunal 4 April 2006
    Legal Public Prosecutor Mr Jack Pambel, Deputy Public Prosecutor, assisted by Richard
    representation Pagen and Tabitha Suwae from Ombudsman Commission
    Leader Mr Edward Manu, of Manu Lawyers
    Hearing dates 5 and 19 April 2006; 15 May 2006; 3 and 15 July 2006; 7, 17 and 21 August 2006;
    4 September 2006; 20 December 2006
    Decision and recommendation The matter was part-heard at the end of 2006
    Result Matter carried over to 2007

    Details

    The Ombudsman Commission referred Mr Benjamin to the Public Prosecutor on 17 January 2005.
    Details of the referral are reported in the 2005 Annual Report.

    On 5 April 2006 the Deputy Public Prosecutor, Mr Jack Pambel referred six categories of allegations
    containing a total of nineteen charges of misconduct in office to the Tribunal.

    On 20 December 2006 in a unanimous decision, the Tribunal found Mr Benjamin guilty of all 19
    allegations contained in the Public Prosecutor‟s reference dated 4 April 2006. However, for allegation
    7 the Tribunal ruled that although the Bank Statements do not show an entry of K1 million and as such

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 54 of 117

  • 44

    accepted Mr Benjamin‟s explanation that he never received the funds. Nevertheless, the Tribunal ruled
    Mr Benjamin was guilty of failing without reasonable excuse to furnish complete acquittals for and
    failed to properly acquit K1,350,000.00 of public monies under the Rural Action Program for the years
    1998 to 2002.

    The Tribunal then adjourned to 10 January 2007 to hear submissions on penalty and asked Counsels to
    file written submissions before 10 January 2007.

    The matter is carried over to 2007.

    GABRIEL KAPRIS

    Overview

    Offices Minister for Works and Member for Maprik Open; Member, East
    Sepik Provincial Assembly (offices subject to the Leadership Code
    by virtue of Sections 26(1)(a)(c)(d) of the Constitution) and 104(1)
    of the Constitution and 10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on Provincial
    Governments and Local-level Governments.
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 27 June 2005
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 27 June 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 15 September 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Kubulan Los (chairman) and Senior Provincial
    Magistrates Mr Orim Karapo and Mrs Noreen Kanasa as
    members
    Date of referral to tribunal 17 October 2006
    Legal Public Prosecutor Mr Pondros Kaluwin, Senior State Prosecutor, assisted by Howard
    representation Maliso and Tabitha Suwae from Ombudsman Commission
    Leader Mr Rimbink Pato, of Pato Lawyers (now Steeles Lawyers)
    Hearing dates 30 October 2006; 7, 9, 13 November 2006
    Decision and recommendation Guilty of misconduct on both allegations 1 and 2.
    The recommendation on penalty was a fine of K1,000.00 for each
    allegation
    Result The Leader was fined a total of K2,000.00 for the allegations he
    was found guilty

    Details of the referral are reported in the 2005 Annual Report.

    This matter concluded in 2006 with the Tribunal finding Mr Kapris guilty and recommended a total
    fine of K2,000.00 for the two allegations he was found guilty of.

    PUKA TEMU

    Overview

    Offices Member for Abau Open, Constitution, Section 26(1)(c)
    Member, Central Provincial Assembly Constitution, Section
    26(1)(d) 26(1)(a)(c)(d) of the Constitution) and 104(1) of the
    Constitution and 10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on Provincial
    Governments and Local-level Governments
    Minister for Lands & Physical Planning Constitution, Section
    26(1)(a)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 27 June 2005
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 12 April 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 23 May 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice George Manuhu (chairman) and Senior Magistrates
    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 55 of 117

  • 45

    Mr Jack August and Ms Betty Kup as members
    Date of referral to tribunal 12 July 2006
    Legal Public Prosecutor Mr Pondros Kaluwin, Senior State Prosecutor, assisted by Andrew
    representation Sea and Tabitha Suwae from Ombudsman Commission
    Leader Mr Rimbink Pato, of Pato Lawyers ( Steeles Lawyers)
    Hearing dates 21 June 2006; 12, 26 July 2006, 2, 10, 24 August 2006
    Decision and recommendation Guilty of misconduct in office on allegations 1, 2 3 and 4.
    The recommendation on penalty was a fine of K500 for each
    allegation
    Result The Leader was fined a total of K2,000.00

    Details of the referral are reported in the 2005 Annual Report.

    The Public Prosecutor‟s reference contained 6 allegations all dealing with the Leader‟s failure to
    furnish Annual Statements for the periods 2000 to 2004 when they fell due. He had ignored reminders
    time and again. The Leader pleaded guilty to 4 allegations and was fined K500 for each charge.

    ANDREW BAING

    Overview

    Offices Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Member for Markham Open;
    Member, Morobe Provincial Assembly (offices subject to the
    Leadership Code by virtue of Sections 26(1)(c) and 26(1)(d) of the
    Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 29 September 2005
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 12 April 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 23 May 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Allan David (chairman) and Senior Magistrates Mr
    Mark Selefkariu and Mr Vincent Linge as members
    Date of referral to tribunal 22 June 2006
    Legal Public Prosecutor Mr Ravunama Auka, Deputy Public Prosecutor, assisted by Rosie
    representation Johnson and Avara Uvisa from Ombudsman Commission
    Leader Mr Zachary Gelu, of Patterson Lawyers
    Hearing dates 20, 22 June 2006, 17 July 2006; 15, 16, 17 August 2006; 14, 22, 26
    September 2006; 6 November 2006; 4, 15, 20 December 2006
    Decision and recommendation Guilty of 3 allegations; not guilty of 2 allegations – recommended
    dismissal from office
    Result Dismissal from office for three years commencing 21 December
    2006

    Details

    The Ombudsman Commission referred the Leader to the Public Prosecutor on 29 September 2005
    after finding prima facie case of guilty of misconduct in office. Full details of the referral are reported
    in the 2005 Annual Report.

    In 2006 the Public Prosecutor referred 5 allegations of misconduct to the Tribunal to conduct its own
    inquiry. Mr Baing was referred to the Tribunal on allegations of:

    1 Misappropriation of K250,000.00 of District Support Grant (DSG) in the year 2002; and
    2 Failure to comply with two separate directions issued by the Ombudsman Commission
    pursuant to Section 27(4) of the Constitution.

    Mr Baing denied the allegations.
    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 56 of 117

  • 46

    Findings of the tribunal

    The Tribunal conducted its inquiry over ten sitting days and on 4 December 2006 delivered its
    decision with the following findings:

    Allegation No 1: That it is satisfied that the two DSG cheques were improperly and illegally issued
    under the Leader‟s name and secondly that the Leader improperly and illegally received and deposited
    them into his personal Super Saver Account. He is guilty.

    Allegation No 2: That it could not believe the evidence presented by the Leader. The Tribunal was of
    the view that public funds allocated to a few individuals for various projects were questionable and
    lacked credibility affecting the credibility of the witnesses. The allegation was proven.

    Allegation No 3: That the manner in which Mr Baing drew those funds “clearly show that he had no
    interest or regard to ensure that the public funds were properly spent and accounted for”. It further
    stated: “We conclude that the manner in which the Leader conducted numerous unverifiable cash
    transactions, their frequency, at various locations some of them appear to be suspicious, all these go to
    show impropriety on the part of the Leader. We conclude that the funds were used for the benefit of
    the Leader”. Mr Baing was found guilty.

    Allegations 4 and 5: The Tribunal found the Leader not guilty on the basis that Mr Baing was not
    personally served the direction issued by the Ombudsman Commission. Therefore, it was not fair to
    allege that Mr Baing failed to comply with the direction and that he failed to cooperate with the
    Ombudsman Commission.

    On 20 December 2006 the Tribunal recommended Mr Andrew Baing‟s dismissal from office as the
    Member of Parliament for Markham Open Electorate and Member of Morobe Provincial Assembly.

    In recommending the maximum penalty, the Tribunal said that Mr Baing was responsible for the
    disbursement of the funds from his personal Super Savers bank account. He is the sole signatory. The
    District Support Grant cheques were issued, received and deposited improperly and illegally. A
    substantial part of the funds were applied to his benefit and to the benefit of his associates.

    Mr Baing had failed to properly acquit those funds and there is no one else to blame except himself. The
    Leader cannot blame the Ombudsman Commission as he has. He is the one who made the withdrawals
    and conducted the EFTPOS transactions as alleged. He failed to apply public funds to meaningful
    development projects in Markham Open Electorate. He is the one who is culpable and his culpability is
    serious.

    2006 REFERRALS TO THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

    CHRIS HAIVETA

    Offices Member for Gulf Provincial; Member Gulf Provincial Assembly
    (offices subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of Sections
    26(1)(d) of the Constitution and 10(3) Organic Law on Provincial
    Governments & local Level Governments
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 30 January 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 30 August 2006
    Date of appointment of Tribunal 15 September 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Timothy Hinchliffe (Chairman) and Senior
    Magistrates Mark Pupaka; Steven Abisai

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 57 of 117

  • 47

    Result Matter carried over to 2007

    Details

    On 16 July 1992 the Hon Chris Haiveta, MP took office as the Member for Gulf Provincial in the
    National Parliament by virtue of Section 104(1) of the Constitution; and thereby became a leader by
    virtue of Sections 26(1)(c) of the Constitution and Section 1 of the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership. In 1995 Mr Haiveta became a member of the Gulf Provincial Assembly
    by virtue of Section 10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on Provincial Governments and Local-level
    Governments. He has been the Member for Gulf Provincial in the National Parliament since then.

    On 30 January 2006 the Ombudsman Commission referred Mr Haiveta to the Public Prosecutor after
    finding prima facie case of guilty of misconduct in office.

    The referral related to Mr Haiveta‟s (1) failure to furnish on time Annual Statements for the periods
    1993/1994 to 2001/2002; (2) misapplication of Provincial Support Grants (PSG); (3) failure to acquit
    PSG Funds 1999-2001; (4) misapplication of K524,000.00 of public funds in 2001; and (5)
    misapplication of K250,000.00 PSG Funds in 2002.

    On 30 August 2006 the Public Prosecutor requested the Chief Justice to appoint a Leadership Tribunal to
    inquire into the allegations agaist Mr Haiveta. The Chief Justice appointed a Tribunal comprising of Mr
    Justice Timothy Hinchliffe as the Chairman and Senior Magistrates Mark Pupaka and Steven Abisai
    as members. The Public Prosecutor referred Mr Haiveta to the Tribunal on 15 September 2006. At the
    end of 2006 the Tribunal was still conducting its inquiry and adjourned to 2007. The matter was
    incomplete at the end of 2006 and was carried over to 2007.

    GUAO ZURENOUC

    Overview

    Offices Member for Finschhafen Open; Member, Morobe Provincial
    Assembly (offices subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of
    Sections 26(1)(c) and 26(1)(d) of the Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 15 February 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal Not made
    Result Matter carried over to 2007

    Details

    In July 2002 Mr Zurenuoc took office as the Member for Finchhaffen Open in the National Parliament
    by virtue of Section 104(1) of the Constitution; and thereby became a leader by virtue of Section
    26(1)(c) of the Constitution and Section 1 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of
    Leadership. Mr Zurenouc became a member of the Morobe Provincial Assembly by virtue of Section
    10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on Provincial Governments and Local Level Governments. Prior to
    becoming a member of Parliament in July of 2002, Mr Zurenuoc had held various senior positions in
    the Public Service since 1992. Mr Zurenuoc‟s last appointment was that of the Secretary for the
    Department of Lands & Physical Planning.

    The Commission received information that Mr Zurenuoc had breached the duties imposed on him
    under Section 27 of the Constitution and on 27 January 2006 after having deliberated on the matters
    and concluded that there was prima facie case that Mr Zurenouc was guilty of misconduct in office,
    the Ombudsman Commission referred Mr Zurenuoc to the Public Prosecutor on allegations of:

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 58 of 117

  • 48

    1 misuse of the Department of Lands and Physical Planning Top Management funds for
    procurement of office stationaries;

    2 double dipping into motor vehicle allowance; and

    3 misuse of public funds intended for his farewell function.

    The Commission concluded that Mr Zurenouc had committed misconduct in office under Sections
    27(5)(b) of the Constitution and Sections 5 and 13 of the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership. At the end of 2006 the matter was still with the Public Prosecutor.

    ARTHUR SOMARE

    Overview

    Offices Member for Angoram Open, Constitution, Section 26(1)(c) and
    104(1)
    Member, East Sepik Provincial Assembly Constitution, Section
    26(1)(d) and Section 10(3) of the Organic Law on Provincial
    Governments and Local-level Governments
    Minister for National Planning & Rural Development,
    Constitution, Section 26(1)(a)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 1 March 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 30 August 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 15 September 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Kubulan Los (chairman) and Senior Provincial
    Magistrates Mr Orim Karapo and Mrs Noreen Kanasa as
    members
    Date of referral to tribunal Not made
    Result Matter carried over to 2007

    Details

    In July 1997 Mr Somare was elected as the Member for Angoram Open in the National Parliament by
    virtue of Section 104(1) of the Constitution. He was re-elected to the office in 2002; and thereby
    became a leader by virtue of Sections 26(1)(c) of the Constitution and Section 1 of the Organic Law
    on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership. He also became a member of the East Sepik
    Provincial Assembly by virtue of Section 10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on Provincial Governments
    and Local Level Governments.

    In 2003 Mr Somare was appointed Minister for State Enterprises and Communications. He was also
    appointed as the Minister for National Planning & Monitoring in 2005. He is currently the Minister for
    Public Enterprise, Information and Development Co-operation.

    The Commission received information that Mr Somare had breached the duties imposed on him under
    Section 27 of the Constitution and on 1 March 2006 after having deliberated on the matters and
    concluded that there was prima facie case that Mr Somare was guilty of misconduct in office, the
    Ombudsman Commission referred Mr Somare to the Public Prosecutor on allegations of:

    1 failure to submit on time to the Ombudsman Commission his Annual Statements for the
    periods 16 July 1998 to 15 July 1999; 16 July 1999 to 15 July 2000; and 16 July 2000 to 15
    July 2001 when they fell due; and

    2 misapplication and alleged failure to acquit DSG Funds for 2002.
    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 59 of 117

  • 49

    It is alleged that Mr Somare committed misconduct in office under Sections 27(5)(b) of the
    Constitution and Sections 4, 5, 13 and 23 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of
    Leadership.

    Although the Public Prosecutor had requested the Chief Justice on 30 August 2006 to appoint a
    Leadership Tribunal, to inquire into the allegations, the Tribunal comprising of Mr Justice Kubulan
    Los as Chairman and Senior Magistrates Mr Orim Karapo and Mr Noreen Kanada as Members could
    not proceed as Mr Somare had successfully sought and was granted leave by the National Court on 7
    December 2006 for judicial review.

    At the end of 2006 the matter had not been heard and carried over to 2007.

    MELCHOIR PEP

    Overview

    Offices Member for Dei Open; Member, Western Highlands Provincial
    Assembly (offices subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of
    Sections 26(1)(c) and 26(1)(d) of the Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 1 March 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal Not made
    Result Matter carried over to 2007

    Details

    On 18 July 2002 Mr Melchior Pep was elected as the Member for Dei Open in the National Parliament
    by virtue of Section 104(1) of the Constitution; and thereby became a leader by virtue of Sections
    26(1)(c) of the Constitution and Section 1 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of
    Leadership. He also became a member of the Western Highlands Provincial Assembly on 29 July
    2002 by virtue of Section 10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on Provincial Governments and Local Level
    Governments.

    The Commission received information relating to alleged breach of Salaries and Remuneration
    Commission (SRC) Determinations, misappropriation of public funds by him between August 2002
    and August 2003 and his adjudged insolvency in 2004.

    The Commission then conducted investigations into allegations of misconduct in office in relation to:

    1 double dipping motor vehicle allowances;
    2 improper awarding of road contract to Wellcos Engineering Ltd;
    3 misapplication of K79,100.00 in pay cash cheques contrary to guidelines; and
    4 the Leader‟s adjudged insolvency and failure to disclose liability to the Ombudsman
    Commission in 2004.

    The Commission found that there was prima facie evidence that Mr Pep was guilty of misconduct in
    office and on 1 March 2006 referred Mr Pep to the Public Prosecutor. The Commission concluded that
    Mr Pep had breached Sections 27(5)(b) of the Constitution and Sections 4, 5 and 13 of the Organic
    Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

    This is Mr Pep‟s second referral to the Public Prosecutor. He was first referred to the Public
    Prosecutor in 1992 and found guilty of misconduct in office by a Leadership Tribunal. He was

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 60 of 117

  • 50

    dismissed from office as a Member of Parliament for Dei Open Electorate and was barred from
    holding any leadership office for 3 years.

    At the end of 2006 the request by the Public Prosecutor‟s to the Chief Justice on the appointment of a
    Leadership Tribunal had not been made and the matter was subsequently carried over to 2007.

    MOI AVEI

    Overview

    Offices Member for Kairuku-Hiri Open, Constitution, Section 26(1)(c)
    Member, Central Provincial Assembly Constitution, Section
    26(1)(d)
    Minister for Petroleum, Constitution, Section 26(1)(a)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 9 March 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal 30 August 2006
    Date of appointment of tribunal 15 September 2006
    Composition of tribunal Mr Justice Timothy Hincliffe (Chairman) and senior magistrates
    Mr Steven Abisae and Mr Mark Pupaka as members
    Date of referral to tribunal 31 October 2006
    Legal Public Prosecutor Mr Chronox Manek, Public Prosecutor and Anthony Kupmain,
    representation Senior State Prosecutor, assisted by Richard Pagen, Ephraim
    Manhi and Rosie Johnson from the Ombudsman Commission
    Leader GJ Shepard and F Griffins of Young & Williams Lawyers
    Hearing dates 31 October 2006; 13, 17, 21, 27, 28 November 2006; 21 December
    2006
    Decision and recommendation Matter not completed in 2006 and carried over to 2007
    Result Carried over to 2007

    Details

    Sir Moi Avei first entered Parliament in 1992 and has held various senior ministerial portfolios
    including, Minister for Higher Education; Minister for Science and Technology; Minister for Planning
    and Implementation; Minister for Bougainville Affairs; Minister for Petroleum and Energy and
    Deputy Prime Minister. In 2002 Sir Moi was again successful in the National Elections which saw him
    taking the office as the Member for Kairuku-Hiri Open and became a member of the Central
    Provincial Assembly. The Ombudsman Commission received information and conducted investigation
    into allegations of misconduct in office in relation to:

    1 misapplication of his electorate‟s 2002 District Support Grants between January and October
    2002; and

    2 failure to properly acquit the application of 2002 District Support Grants; and

    3 failure to pay rent to National Housing Corporation (NHC) for a house he continued to occupy
    despite the fact that he was receiving housing allowance paid to him through his salary every
    fortnight by the National Parliament; and

    4 failure to disclose to the Ombudsman Commission the outstanding rentals owing to NHC as
    liabilities. Section 4 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership
    requires persons subject to the Leadership Code to disclose their liabilities, such as loans or
    outstanding bills.

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 61 of 117

  • 51

    On 9 March 2006 after concluding that there was prima facie evidence that Sir Moi was guilty of
    misconduct in office, the Commission referred Sir Moi to the Public Prosecutor for breaches of Section
    27(5)(b) of the Constitution and Sections 4(6)(a) and 23 of the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership.

    On 30 August 2006 the Public Prosecutor wrote to the Chief Justice for an appointment of a
    Leadership Tribunal.

    On 15 September 2006 the Chief Justice appointed the Leadership Tribunal comprising of Mr Justice
    Timothy Hinchliffe as Chairman and Senior Provincial Magistrates Mr Steven Abisai and Mr Mark
    Pupaka as members. And on 31 October 2006 the Public Prosecutor formally referred Sir Moi Avei to
    the Tribunal which sat for 6 days in 2006 and adjourned to 2007.

    JOHN MUINGNEPE

    Overview

    Offices Member for Bulolo Open, Constitution, Section 26(1)(c)
    Member, Morobe Provincial Assembly Constitution, Section
    26(1)(d)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 26 June 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal At the end of 2006 the matter was still pending
    Date of appointment of tribunal Not made
    Composition of tribunal –
    Date of referral to tribunal Matter not referred to tribunal
    Result As at 31 December 2006 the Public Prosecutor had not made a
    decision whether to bring proceedings so no request had been
    made for appointment of a tribunal

    Details

    On 6 July 2002 Mr Muingnepe took office as the Member for Bulolo Open and became a member of
    the Morobe Provincial Assembly. He had previously held leadership positions as a member of the
    official personal staff of a number of different Ministers over a period of five years.

    On 5 June 2006 after having conducted an audit of Mr Muingnepe‟s Annual Statements the
    Ombudsman Commission found that Mr Muingnepe had failed to submit six Annual Statements for
    the periods; 27 July 1993 to 26 July 1994; 27 July 1994 to 26 July 1995; 27 July 1995 to 26 July 1996;
    30 July 2001 to 29 July 2002; 30 July 2003 to 29 July 2004; and 30 July 2004 to 29 July 2005 and
    referred Mr Muingnepe to the Public Prosecutor.

    The Ombudsman Commission‟s statement of reasons contained only one category of allegations of
    misconduct in relation to Mr Muingnepe‟s failure to lodge Annual Statements. The allegations centred
    on breaches of Section 27 of the Constitution and Sections 4 and 23 of the Organic Law on the Duties
    & Responsibilities of Leadership.

    At the end of 2006 the matter remains in the hands of the Public Prosecutor.

    HAMI YAWARI

    Overview

    Offices Member for Southern Highlands Provincial; Governor, Southern

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 62 of 117

  • 52

    Highlands Province; Member, Southern Highlands Provincial
    Assembly (offices subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of
    Sections 26(1)(b), 26(1)(c) and 26(1)(d) of the Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 26 June 2006
    Date of request for appointment of tribunal At the end of 2006 the matter was still pending
    Date of appointment of tribunal Not made
    Date of referral to tribunal Matter not referred to tribunal
    Judicial review On 28 June 2006 Mr Yawari filed his originating documents
    seeking leave of the National Court to review the Ombudsman
    Commission‘s decision to refer him to the Public Prosecutor. On
    10 November 2006 his application for leave to seek judicial review
    was heard by His Honour Deputy Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia
    who rejected the application for leave on the grounds that the
    administrative and constitutional processes have not yet been
    exhausted and it would be inappropriate for the Court to assume
    the functions of the Public Prosecutor and the Leadership
    Tribunal to deal with the issue
    Result At the end of 2006 the Public Prosecutor was still looking at the
    matter

    Details

    On 5 May 2003 Mr Yawari took office as the Member for Southern Highlands Provincial in the National
    Parliament. He thus became the Provincial Governor and a member of the Provincial Assembly.

    The Commission conducted investigations on alleged breaches of the Leadership Code and on 9 June
    2006 referred Mr Yawari to the Public Prosecutor on five categories of allegations, namely:

    1 misappropriation of public funds in the form of Special Support Grants (SSG funds) belonging to
    Kutubu Local-level Government Special Purposes Authority (KLLGSPA); and

    2 applying to his personal use substantial proceeds of the public funds in the form of SSG funds
    paid out of KLLGSPA account to Foe Association Incorporated; and

    3 failure to disclose other sources of income and his various personal bank accounts to the
    Ombudsman Commission; and

    4 failure to settle liabilities as and when they were due and failure to disclose the same to the
    Ombudsman Commission; and

    5 failure to settle liabilities as and when they were due and failure to disclose the same to the
    Ombudsman Commission.

    On 28 June 2006 Mr Yawari filed originating documents in the National Court seeking leave to review
    the Ombudsman Commission decision to refer him to the Public Prosecutor. His application was
    refused by the Court. This matter is reported in Chapter 8.

    At the end of 2006 Mr Yawari‟s matter was still with the Public Prosecutor.

    FRED MALIUPA

    Overview

    Offices President, Usino Local-level Government, Member of Provincial

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 63 of 117

  • 53

    Assembly(office subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of Section
    26(1)(d) of the Constitution and Section 10(3)(a) of the Organic Law on
    Provincial Governments and Local-level Governments)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 4 July 2006
    Status at end of 2006 As at 31 December 2006 the Public Prosecutor had not made a decision
    whether to bring proceedings so no request had been made for
    appointment of a tribunal

    Details

    On 12 July 2002 Mr Maliupa was elected as the Councillor for Usino-Rural Local-level Government
    in the 2002 Local-level Government General Election and later voted in as President of Usino Rural
    Local-level Government. Consequently he became a member of the Madang Provincial Assembly.

    The Ombudsman Commission on its own initiative conducted investigations into suspected
    misconduct in office by Mr Maliupa in relation to his arrest, charge, subsequent guilty finding by the
    District Court in Madang for the assault of the District Administrator for Madang, Mr George Chapok
    and the conviction and sentence to six (6) months imprisonment.

    The Commission found that Mr Maliupa had breached Section 27(5)(b) of the Constitution and
    referred him to the Public Prosecutor on 4 July 2006.

    At the end of 2006 the matter remains in the hands of the Public Prosecutor.

    CHARLES PUNAHA

    Overview

    Offices Director General, Papua New Guinea Telecommunication Authority
    (―PANGTEL‖) (office subject to the Leadership Code by virtue of
    Section 26(1)(e) of the Constitution))e became a leader and fall within
    the category set out in Section 26(1)(g) of the Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 5 September 2006
    Status at end of 2006 As at 31 December 2006 the Public Prosecutor had not made a decision
    whether to bring proceedings

    Details

    On 24 April 2002 the National Executive Council (NEC) appointed Mr Punaha as Chief Executive
    Officer of PANGTEL.

    The Ombudsman Commission conducted an audit of Mr Punaha‟s Annual Statements and found that
    he failed to submit four Annual Statements for the periods: 29 April 2001 to 28 April 2002; 29 April
    2002 to 28 April 2003; 29 April 2003 to 28 April 2004; and 29 April 2004 to 28 April 2005. The
    allegations against Mr Punaha centres on breaches of Section 27 of the Constitution, Sections 4 and 23
    of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership and on 5 September 2006 the
    Commission referred Mr Punaha to the Public Prosecutor.

    As at the end of 2006 the matter therefore remains in the hands of the Public Prosecutor.

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 64 of 117

  • 54

    JERRY TETAGA

    Overview
    Offices Chairman of the Public Services Commission (office subject to the
    Leadership Code by virtue of Section 26(1)(e) of the Constitution)
    Date of referral to Public Prosecutor 8 December 2006
    Status at end of 2006 As at 31 December 2006 the Public Prosecutor had not made a decision
    whether to bring proceedings. So no request had been made for
    appointment of a tribunal

    Details

    On 24 December 1998 Mr Tetaga was appointed Acting Chairman of the Public Services Commission
    (PSC) for a period of one (1) month commencing 21 December 1998. That appointment was extended
    two more times and on 23 February 1999 his term was extended until further notice.

    On 25 March 1999 Mr Tetaga was appointed a member of the National Library and Archives Board
    for a three (3) year term.

    On 28 May 2002 Mr Tetaga was appointed Chairman of the PSC for a term of five (5) years with
    effect from 27 April 2002.

    The Ombudsman Commission on its own initiative conducted investigations into the manner in which
    he, as the Chairman of the PSC, obtained advance of his vehicle allowances to purchase his official
    vehicles contrary to the SRC Determination.

    Mr Tetaga‟s referral contains two categories of allegations which centres on breaches of the relevant
    Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) Determinations .and breaches of Sections 27(5) of the
    Constitution and Section 5 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.
    At the end of 2006 the matter remains in the hands of the Public Prosecutor.

    SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATIONS CARRIED OUT IN 2006

    The Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership (OLDRL) was enacted to enforce
    the Leadership Code. The Leadership Code applies to all the Leaders specified under Section 26 of the
    Constitution. It is morally and legally binding on the Leaders and firmly enforced.

    The Leadership Division conduct investigations into breaches of the provisions of the OLDRL and if
    prima facie evidence is established, the Leader is reffered to the Public Prosecutor for prosecution
    before the Leadership Tirbunal.
    The chart below shows twenty two (22) allegations were received by the Commission against various
    leaders in 2006. These allegations are currently being investigated by the Commission.

    Offences MPs Dept Const Over Statutory Prov Minis- LLG MPG
    Heads Office seas Authority Admini Terial
    Holders Missi strators Staff
    on
    CEO BOA
    RD
    Misappropriation 6 1
    of public funds
    Abuse of power 4 2
    Conflict of interest 2
    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 65 of 117

  • 55

    Bribery 1 1
    Corrupt deals 1
    Improper conduct 1
    Acquired personal 1
    benefits
    Other 3
    TOTAL 18 1 2 1 1

    Annual Statements

    Section 4 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership states that the leader
    must submit his Annual Statement within three months after becoming a person to which the
    Leaderhip Code applies.

    The table below shows the number of Annual Statements sent and received from various categories of
    leaders in 2006.

    Activity MP Dept Const O S Statutory PA MPA Other
    Head Office Mission Authority Satutory
    Holder Bodies
    CEO Board
    AS sent 109 22 36 13 35 17 20 42 18
    AS received with in 3 93 14 30 10 28 10 12 33 11
    months
    AS received after 3 16 8 6 3 7 7 8 9 7
    months
    AS not submitted – – – – – – – – –
    RTBH issued 16 8 6 3 7 7 8 9 7

    Requests were made by some leaders for an extension of time to submit Annual Statements beyond the
    statutory period of three months which the Commission declined with advice to the leaders that the
    Commission had no jurisdiction to allow any extension under the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership.

    A. Director/Shareholders – Section 8 OLDRL

    In 2006, only three leaders sought exemption under section 8 of the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership to become Director or to hold shares in family companies, national and
    foreign companies. The Commision dealt with each request on merits.

    B. Overseas Trips – Section 12

    A total of 97 requests for exemption for overseas trips were received by the Commission in 2006. All
    96 request both private and official were dealt with on merits. Leaders on official trips were advised to
    declare gifts and or benefits they may have received during the trip as acceptance of the items may
    constitute misconduct in office.

      

    Chapter 6
    Enforcing the Leadership Code

  • Page 66 of 117

  • CHAPTER 7

    DIRECTIONS UNDER SECTION 27(4) OF THE CONSITUTION

  • Page 67 of 117

  • 57

    7 DIRECTIONS UNDER SECTION 27(4) OF THE CONSTITUTION

    INTRODUCTION

    1 POWER TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS

    The Ombudsman Commission is empowered under Section 27(4) of the Constitution to give directions
    either generally or in a particular case, to ensure the attainment of the objects of the Leadership Code.
    Section 27(4) – is part of the section of the Constitution – Section 27 – that is the fulcrum on where
    the Commission‟s supervision and enforcement of the Leadership Code depends.

    Section 27 states:
    Responsibilities of Office

    (1) A person to whom this division applies has a duty to conduct himself in such a way, both
    in his public or official life and his private life, and in his associations with other persons,
    as not—

    (a) To place himself in a position in which he has or could have a conflict of interests
    or might be compromised when discharging his public or official duties; or
    (b) To demean his office or position; or
    (c) To allow his public or official integrity, or his personal integrity, to be called into
    question; or
    (d) To endanger or diminish respect for and confidence in the integrity of
    government in Papua New Guinea.

    (2) In particular, a person to whom this division applies shall not use his office for personal
    gain or enter into any transaction or engage in any enterprise or activity that might be
    expected to give rise to doubt in the public mind as to whether he is carrying out or has
    carried out the duty imposed by subsection (1).

    (3) It is the further duty of a person to whom this division applies—

    (a) To ensure, as far as is within his lawful power, that his spouse and children and
    any other persons for whom he is responsible (whether morally, legally or by
    usage), including nominees, trustees and agents, do not conduct themselves in a
    way that might be expected to give rise to doubt in the public mind as to his
    complying with his duties under this section; and
    (b) if necessary, to publicly disassociate himself from any activity or enterprise of any
    of his associates, or of a person referred to in paragraph (a), that might be
    expected to give rise to such a doubt.

    (4) The Ombudsman Commission or other authority prescribed for the purpose under
    Section 28 (further provisions) may, subject to this division and to any organic law made
    for the purposes of this division, give directions, either generally or in a particular case, to
    ensure the attainment of the objects of this section.

    (5) A person to whom this division applies who—

    (a) Is convicted of an offence in respect of his office or position or in relation to the
    performance of his functions or duties; or

    Chapter 7
    Directions under Section 27(4) of the Constitution

  • Page 68 of 117

  • 58

    (b) Fails to comply with a direction under subsection (4) or otherwise fails to carry
    out the obligations imposed by subsections (1), (2) and (3), is guilty of misconduct
    in office.

    Failure to comply with a direction issued under section 27(4) of the Constitution may attract the
    following consequences:

     In respect of a leader, misconduct in office under section 27(5)(b) of the Constitution and
    liability to prosecution before an appropriate tribunal and subject to penalties under section
    28(1)(g)(ii) of the Constitution, section 27(5) of the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership and Section 2 of the Leadership Code (alternative penalties)
    Act, including dismissal from office.

     In respect of any other person, enforcement proceedings in the National Court under Section
    23 of the Constitution.

    2 SECTION 27(4) DIRECTIONS ISSUED IN 2006

    In 2006 it was necessary for the Ombudsman Commission to use Directions to prevent possible
    breaches of the Leadership Code and issued three Directions under Section 27(4) of the Constitution
    which are listed below.

    (i) UPNG PAYOUT

    On 22 February 2006 the Ombudsman Commission issued a direction in relation to the payouts to staff at
    University of Papua New Guinea. The Commission investigated the UPNG Council‟s decision to make
    submission to the National Executive Council to approve about K4,728,000.00 of public money as
    payment for “damages” to the Registrar, Bursar, Pro-Vice Chancellor, Vice Chancellor and Executive
    Officer.

    This Direction remained effective at the end of 2006.

    (ii) PAPUA NEW GUINEA LAND BOARD DECISION

    On 27 November 2006 the Ombudsman Commission issued a direction when it received complaints
    about allegation of impropriety of certain decisions and actions of the PNG Land Board during its
    meeting No 09/2006 that was published in the National Gazette No: G160 of 17 August 2006.

    The Direction prevented all members of the Land Board from reporting or making recommendations
    to the Minister for Lands regarding the Board‟s considerations or determinations of the state leases
    located in Kimbe, West New Britain Province.

    The Direction further prevented the Minister for Lands and Physical Planning from accepting from the
    Land Board any report or recommendations in respect of the state leases subject of the Direction.

    (iii) DEVELOPMENT FUNDS

    The Ombudsman Commission obtained information giving rise to serious concerns as to the release,
    disbursement, transfer and receipt of public money in the form of Electoral and Discretionary funds and
    various development funds under District Services Improvement Program.

    Chapter 7
    Directions under Section 27(4) of the Constitution

  • Page 69 of 117

  • 59

    In November 2006 the Ombudsman Commission issued a direction directing the relevant public
    authorities that all public funds allocated under the Rural Action Program and the District Services
    Improvement Program should not be released, disbursed, transferred and or received unless and until
    there was compliance with the relevant provisions of the Public Finances (Management) Act, and the
    terms and conditions of Financial Instruction No 2 of 2005 dated 9 June 2005 and Financial Instruction
    No 01/2006 dated 7 August 2006 or any relevant Financial Instructions and the relevant guidelines that
    related to each of the respective programs.

    This Direction remained effective at the end of 2006.

      

    Chapter 7
    Directions under Section 27(4) of the Constitution

  • Page 70 of 117

  • CHAPTER 8

    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION IN COURT

  • Page 71 of 117

  • 61

    8 OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION IN COURT

    OVERVIEW

    In 2006 the Ombudsman Commission was involved in a number of litigation matters which are
    categorised as:

     cases resolved during the year; and
     cases pending – those unresolved at the end of the year.

    CASES RESOLVED IN 2006

    For cases which were commenced prior to 2006, this report provides a brief outline on the final
    outcome at the end of 2006 as cases resolved. Each case is summarised as follows.

    1 OS No 239 OF 2003; MAO ZEMING V JUSTICE TIMOTHY HINCHLIFFE AND
    SENIOR MAGISTRATES FRANK MANUE AND PATRICK MONOLUK AS THE
    LEADERSHIP TRIBUNAL

    National Court, Injia DCJ, 18, 27 January 2006 and 6 February 2006

    On 10 February 2006 the National Court (Injia DCJ) dismissed Mr Mao Zeming‟s application for
    judicial review of his dismissal from the office as the Member of Parliament for Tewae-Siassi Open
    Electorate. The Tribunal (consisting of His Honour Justice Hinchliffe as Chairman and Senior
    Magistrates Frank Manue and Patrick Monouluk) had recommended Mr Zeming‟s dismissal from
    office on 27 May 2003. On 29 May 2003 Mr Zeming was dismissed from holding public office by the
    Governor-General.

    The National Court (Injia DCJ) declined to quash the Tribunal‟s findings and dismissed the
    application with costs to the Respondents.

    Brief background of the case is reported in the Commission‟s 2003, 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports.

    2 OS 414 OF 2004; MICHAEL NALI V THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE ELENAS
    BATARI (AS CHAIRMAN) AND THEIR WORSHIPS SENIOR MAGISTRATE
    NIALLIN KITEIAP AND SENIOR MAGISTRATE THOMAS VOGUSANG
    CONSTITUTING THE LEADERSHIP TRIBUNAL

    National Court (N3015), Salika J, 20 April 2005 and 10 March 2006

    On 20 April 2005 the National Court heard an application for judicial review by Mr Nali asking the
    Court to review the decision of the Leadership Tribunal (consisting of His Honour Mr Justice Batari as
    Chairman and Senior Magistrates Ms Nialin Kiteiap and Mr Thomas Vogusang as members). The
    Tribunal had found him guilty of misconduct in office and recommended that he be dismissed from
    office as the Member of Parliament for Mendi Open Electorate.

    Background of this case is reported in the 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports

    On 10 March 2006 the National Court dismissed all grounds except for the ground where the Court

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 72 of 117

  • 62

    found that there appeared to be a real appearance of bias and error of law on the part of the Leadership
    Tribunal by it holding that the weight to be given to the leader‟s evidence should be discounted
    because of the order of the evidence given in the leaders defence.

    The Court‟s view was that, if the tribunal thought the calling of other witnesses first and the Leader
    last was inappropriate it ought to have made a ruling on that point and gave directions or orders when
    the tribunal queried it right at the outset instead of allowing Mr Nali to proceed. It was inappropriate
    for the Tribunal to make the statement and that was a fundamental flaw which affected the validity and
    integrity of the decision as it offended the applicant‟s rights to a fair trial.

    The Court for this reason upheld the application for review and quashed the decision of the Tribunal
    and ordered that a new Tribunal be appointed to rehear the allegations.

    At the end of 2006 the Court‟s order for a new Tribunal was still pending.

    3 OS (JR) NO 259 OF 2006; KEN NORAE MONDIAI AND PNG ECO FORESTRY
    FORUM INC V WAWOI GUAVI TIMBER COMPANY LIMITED AND PAPUA NEW
    GUINEA FOREST AUTHORITY N3061

    National Court, Lay J, 4 July 2006

    On 10 May 2006 the Ombudsman Commission filed application in the National Court to be joined as a
    party in the Court proceedings initiated by Ken Norae Mondiai and PNG Eco Forestry Forum Inc
    against Wawoi Guavi Timber Company Ltd and Papua New Guinea Forest Authority (PNGFA)

    The basis upon which the Commission applied to be joined as a party to these judicial review
    proceedings was that it had prepared a report called the Kamula Doso Report and had made
    recommendations which had not been followed by the Second Defendant, namely PNGFA. In that
    respect, it was a party with sufficient interest.

    The substantive proceedings before the Court was to do with the implementation of a decision by the
    PNGFA by which Wawoi Guavi Timber Company Ltd may receive by way of extension to a Timber
    Permit, a timber concession of twice the size of the original concession area. Mr Mondiai claims that
    the extension was granted unlawfully and in breach of many provisions of the Forestry Act 1991.

    On 19 May 2006 the Ombudsman Commission told the Court that it had prepared a report into the
    matter and made recommendations to the PNGFA which it is alleged that PNGFA has not
    implemented. The Commission‟s application is that it was created by the Constitution and Organic
    Law with powers to investigate reports and make recommendations.

    On 4 July 2006 the Court ruled that it could not extend the Ombudsman Commission‟s powers as it
    was a matter for the Parliament. The Court further held that there is no legislative authority for the
    Ombudsman to join in the action as a party with sufficient interest as it‟s power of enforcing the
    recommendations contained in its‟ reports is confined by Section 219(6) of the Constitution to
    investigate and make recommendations to the Parliament and the relevant authorities. The
    Ombudsman Commission could not bring proceedings, nor did it have any legal right to enforce.
    Section 219(6) Constitution states:

    “Except as provided by or under Division III .2 (leadership code), the Commission’s powers of
    enforcement are limited to publicity for its proceedings, reports and recommendations, to the
    making of reports and recommendations to the Parliament and other appropriate authorities as
    provided by an Organic Law, and to the giving of advice.”

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 73 of 117

  • 63

    The Court ruled that the Ombudsman Commission did not have a “sufficient interest” within its
    constitutional functions and could not be made a party to the proceedings. The matter was therefore
    resolved.

    4 OS 450 OF 2006 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
    PURSUANT TO ORDER 16 RULE 3 OF THE NATIONAL COURT RULES
    APPLICATION BY HON NIPA HAMI YAWARI

    National Court, Injia DCJ, 10 November 2006

    Mr Yawari sought to have the National Court review the Ombudsman Commission‟s decision to refer
    him to the Public Prosecutor on 1 June 2006. The National Court (Sir Salamo Injia DCJ) heard the
    application ex parte on Friday 10 November 2006 and refused Hon Hami Yawari‟s Application.

    Background

    On 28 June 2006 Mr Yawari filed his originating documents seeking leave.

    Mr Yawari sought ten (10) declaratory orders from the Court. The thrust of the application was to ask
    the National Court to issue declaratory orders that the Ombudsman Commission be permanently
    prevented or refrained from conducting any investigation against the leader in relation to the receipt
    and use of equity funds entitled to him and other landowners from Kutubu Oil and Gas Projects.
    Furthermore, the Leader sought declaratory orders that the Ombudsman Commission lacks jurisdiction
    to investigate the Leader for alleged misconduct in relation to those funds.

    The Ombudsman Commission investigated Mr Yawari for alleged misconduct in office in relation to
    five categories of allegations. They are:

    1 misappropriation of public funds in the form of Special Support Grants (SSG funds) belonging
    to Kutubu Local-level Government Special Purposes Authority (KLLGSPA); and

    2 applying to his personal use substantial proceeds of the public funds in the form of SSG funds
    paid out of KLLGSPA account to Foe Association Incorporated; and

    3 failure to disclose other sources of income and his various personal bank accounts to the
    Ombudsman Commission; and

    4 failure to settle liabilities as and when they were due and failure to disclose the same to the
    Ombudsman Commission; and

    5 failure to settle liabilities as and when they were due and failure to disclose the same to the
    Ombudsman Commission.

    Mr Yawari‟s grounds seeking leave to apply for judicial review are:

    1 Breach of principles of natural justice adopted under Section 41, 59 and 60 of the Constitution;

    2 The Wednesbury principle of unreasonableness;

    3 Failure to comply with Section 20(2) of the OLDRL which requires the Ombudsman
    Commission to obtain information from any person whom the Commission considers can
    assist and may make whatever inquiries it thinks fit; and
    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 74 of 117

  • 64

    4 Want of jurisdiction.

    Mr Yawari‟s application was dismissed on the grounds that he had not fully exhausted all other
    available avenues before coming to the court. The Court ruled that the applicant had ample
    opportunity to object to the Ombudsman Commission‟s referral by raising the matter with the Public
    Prosecutor or had that failed he could raise the issue at the tribunal that may be appointed to further
    investigate the allegations against him.

    This matter was resolved in 2006.

    5 OS NO 818 OF 2006 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW BY
    ARTHUR SOMARE

    National Court, Hinchliffe J, 8, 10, 15 November 2006

    Background

    The Hon. Arthur Somare, MP through his Lawyers, Posman Kua and Aisi Lawyers sought to review
    the decision of the Ombudsman Commission to refer him to the Public Prosecutor. Its main ground of
    review is breach of natural justice in that:

    (a) The Ombudsman Commission was not impartial and independent. Mr Somare argued that “the
    investigation purportedly conducted by the Ombudsman Commission was not fair, was fraught
    with bias and prejudice on the part of Ombudsman Peter Masi and Director of Operations John
    ToGuata in that the investigation was conducted with the involvement of Mr John ToGuata who
    made certain overtures against him in public forums in Angoram and Yangoru in the East Sepik
    Province. He claimed that the overtures had implications against the Leader and his father Sir
    Michael Somare and the ultimate decision by the Ombudsman Commission to refer Mr Somare
    to the Public Prosecutor for prosecution was bias and prejudice.

    (b) That the Ombudsman Commission failed to conduct its investigation thoroughly in that it denied
    him a fair hearing. That Ombudsman Masi who is from Angoram had conflict of interest when
    he chaired and conducted interviews of the Leader without legal representation when the Leader
    had requested for his lawyers to be present and that Ombudsman Masi had a personal interest in
    the investigation.

    Therefore the Commission‟s actions was in breach of the natural justice principles pursuant to Section
    59 of the Constitution when the Ombudsman Commission refused to take affirmative actions to
    appoint an independent investigator pursuant to Section 19 of the OLDRL despite a written request on
    19 April 2006 by the Leader.

    The Ombudsman Commission‟s referral relates to two categories of allegations.

    Category 1 relates to Mr Somare‟s failure without reasonable excuse to give to the Ombudsman
    Commission on time his Annual Statements:

    (i) 16 July 1998 to 15 July 1999; and
    (ii) 16 July 1999 to 15 July 2000; and
    (iii) 16 July 2000 to 15 July 2001.

    Under Category 2, the Commission alleged that in March 2002 Mr A Somare received K250,000.00
    DSG discretionary component from the Office of Rural Development. He deposited the K250,000.00

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 75 of 117

  • 65

    into his electorate‟s trust account held at the Australia and New Zealand Bank Ltd, Waigani Branch
    and applied the funds in the form of unverifiable cash cheques to individuals; made cheque payment of
    various amounts for various activities; and made cheque withdrawals for which no details are
    available.

    After having given Mr A Somare his notice to be heard, the Commission considered Mr A Somare‟s
    response and formed the view that he is prima facie guilty of committing misconduct in office under
    the Leadership Code in relation to the allegations put to him.

    On 8 November 2006 the National Court (Hinchliffe J) was scheduled to hear Mr Arthur Somare‟s
    application for leave to seek judicial review of the Ombudsman Commission decision to refer him to
    the Public Prosecutor for allegations of misconduct in office. However, Mr Kua indicated that there
    was a preliminary issue which he needed to raise with the Court. The issue was whether the defendants
    should appear at Leave Application stage as the National Court Rules specifically states that in a
    Leave Application only the Applicant will be heard.

    Mr Kua therefore objected to Mr Nemo Yalo Counsel to the Commission, appearing for the Chief
    Ombudsman Mr Ila Geno, Ombudsman Peter Masi, Ombudsman John Nero and the Ombudsman
    Commission of Papua New Guinea as First Defendants and the State as Fourth Defendant. Mr Kua
    also objected to the Public Prosecutor Mr Chronox Manek appearing on behalf of himself.

    Justice Hinchliffe heard submissions from Counsels and reserved his decision until 10 November
    2006.

    On 10 November 2006 Justice Hinchliffe ruled that traditionally, and according to the National Court
    Rules Leave Applications should be heard ex parte. However His Honour stated that there has been
    confusion since the enactment of Claims By and Against the State Act 1996. Under Section 8 of the
    Act the State is required to be served and it is given right to enter appearance at leave applications.

    The Court ruled that the Public Prosecutor, despite being named as a defendant and despite being
    served the documents he does not have a right to appear. In respect of Counsel, Mr Yalo, His Honour
    ruled that he has no right to appear for the First Defendants. However Mr Yalo can appear for the State
    (4th Defendant) because he has been properly instructed by the Attorney-General to do so, pursuant to
    Section 8 of the Claims By and Against the State Act.

    Mr A Somare also sought interim orders that the Public Prosecutor not refer Mr Somare to the
    Leadership Tribunal and the Tribunal not commence inquiries or investigations into allegations against
    him.

    Mr Somare is further seeking substantive orders that the Ombudsman Commission be permanently
    stopped from investigating and referring him to the Public Prosecutor on the same facts now subject of
    his referral; and the Public Prosecutor or any person acting in that capacity be permanently prevented
    from proceeding with the matter relating to him.

    On 15 November 2006 Hinchliffe J delivered his decision on the application by Mr Arthur Somare for
    leave to seek judicial review of the Ombudsman Commission‟s decision.

    The Court granted the Orders sought in the following terms:

     The Leadership Tribunal appointed to inquire into the allegations of misconduct by Honourable
    Arthur Somare scheduled to commence on 13 November 2006 at 09:30am be stayed until final
    determination of the judicial review and any appeals arising from it; and
    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 76 of 117

  • 66

     The Public Prosecutor and his officers are restrained from presenting the referral and the charges
    against Mr Somare until the final determination of the proceedings and any appeals arising from
    it;

     The Leadership Tribunal is restrained from convening the hearing and receiving the referral and
    charges from the Public Prosecutor and his officers until further ordered.

    The Leadership Tribunal appointed to investigate allegations against Mr Somare was set to commence
    proceedings at 09:30am on 13 November 2006. However, with the judicial review still pending, the
    Tribunal was not able to commence its inquiry. At the end of 2006 the judicial review application was
    still pending.

    6 OS NO 503 OF 2006; MANORBURN EARTHMOVING LTD V BANK OF PAPUA
    NEW GUINEA

    Background

    The claims of Manorburn arise from 12 roading contracts awarded to it by the State between 1996 and
    1999. None of these contracts which were funded by the World Bank exceeded K200,000.00. Those
    contracts were mostly completed by April 1999.

    On 15 October 1999 Manorburn through their lawyers stated the total sum outstanding on all claims at
    that date was K804,053.94 and pressed for payment. The State replied that apart from K10,000.00 all
    contract payments had been met in full and the claims now asserted were outside of contract entitlements.
    The State denied liability.

    In March 2000 Manorburn commenced proceedings WS No 285 of 2000 in the National Court. Claiming
    “damages to be particularized”.

    On 23 November 2000 the Acting Solicitor-General Mr Zachery Gelu advised the Secretary for Works
    that Manorburn had quantified its claim at K804,053.94 and requested instruction whether to settle on
    that figure or ask for Court assessment.

    By December 2000, however, the claim suddenly escalated to K12.05 million, (that is 15 times the
    particularized claim of a month before) and on 14 December 2000 the Acting Solicitor-General Mr Gelu
    advised the Secretary for Finance, by a feat of unexplained economics, that he had determined the claim
    and agreed to a settlement of K8.2 million only 10 times the particularized claim).

    No independent assessment had been done. No evidence or documentation of claimed loss was offered or
    considered. There was only a letter restating the claim of actual contract entitlements at K1.3 million
    damages at K1.5 million, 6 years loss of business profits said to be K5.4 million and a further K4.5
    million for the loss of an expected contract with another organization. The law of contract does not
    recognize claims of business losses outside of contract.

    Notably, it was not until two months later, in February of 2001 that Mr Gelu received a minute from a
    junior staff officer advising that the settlement proposed by the Acting Solicitor-General at K8.2 million
    (dropping the unrelated contract claim of K4.5 million) was in the State‟s interest.

    The proceedings in WS No 285 of 2000 were commenced on 16 March 2000 by Manorburn Ltd
    (Plaintiff) at the National Court against the Independent State of Papua New Guinea (Defendant)
    claiming; among others, losses and damages from failure by the State to pay a number of road contracts.
    The road projects were implemented in Oro Province.
    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 77 of 117

  • 67

    The State did not take action to defend its interests. On 11 August 2000 the National Court entered a
    default judgment in the proceedings WS No 285 of 2000 stating, ―with damages to be assessed‖,
    against the Defendant and the Order was entered on 21 August 2000.

    On 12 November 2001 the National Court ordered the plaintiff to, among others, provide a list of
    documents by way of Discovery all the documents it seeks to rely upon and tender for the trial for the
    assessment of damages. Further that the plaintiff to supply full particulars referred to in its Statement of
    Claim within the next 21 days.

    On 31 July 2002 a Deed of Settlement was executed between the Plaintiff and the Solicitor-General,
    Zachary Gelu, purportedly acting for and on behalf of the Defendant for settlement and payment of K8.6
    million to be made by the State to the Plaintiff.

    On 2 August 2002 Posman Kua Aisi (PKA) Lawyers at that time were the Lawyers on record acting for
    the State. They expressed serious concern on the terms of the Deed of Settlement stating that it seriously
    compromised the State‟s interests.

    On 13 August 2002 the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Discontinuance of the ―whole of its claims for
    damages‖ in the proceedings WS No 285 of 2000 and this was consented to by the Defendant through its
    Lawyers.

    Following the execution of the Deed of Settlement the Department of Finance paid a total of K4 million
    to Manorburn Ltd. Among other payments K500,000.00 of the K4 million was paid on 4 October 2002.
    Of the K4 million an amount of K1 million was placed at Bank of PNG (BPNG) Treasury Bills.

    This K1 million at BPNG was subject of a Consent Order taken out by the parties. The Consent Order in
    the matter of SCA No 116 of 2002 was filed on 13 June 2003. The Consent Order stated that the K1
    million held at BPNG by way of treasury bills together with interests shall be rolled over from time to
    time until the final determination of the proceedings WS No 1343 of 2002.

    The validity of the settlement was immediately disputed by the Attorney-General Mr Damem as
    fraudulent and having been made without his instruction or authorization. It was in any case in breach of
    the Public Finances (Management) Act 1995. On his instructions WS No 1343 of 2002 was commenced
    on those grounds on 17 October 2002. Despite this action, K2,000,000.00 in three instalments was
    authorized by the Solicitor-General Mr Gelu and paid out under the disputed Deed.

    On 17 October 2002 PKA lawyers filed a Writ of Summons No 1343 of 2002 on behalf of the State.
    They named Solicitor-General Zachery Gelu as the First Defendant and Manorburn Ltd as the Second
    Defendant. PKA claimed in its Writ, among others, that the claim was not verified and not properly
    assessed, the claim by Manorburn Ltd had no factual basis and that there was fraud on the part of the two
    parties. The State claimed that Mr Gelu knew that Manorburn Ltd could not substantiate its claim at trial
    and thus to avoid this they colluded to enter into and executed a Deed of Settlement.

    On 21 October 2002 the National Court issued a number of orders. Among others, the Court said that the
    payment due under the Deed of Settlement be paid by the plaintiff into the trust account of the Registrar
    of the National Court.

    On 25 October 2002 the Supreme Court issued orders that the Orders of the National Court issued on 21
    October 2002 in the proceedings WS 1343 of 2002 be stayed until the final determination of any
    application for leave to appeal or notice of appeal filed against those orders.

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 78 of 117

  • 68

    His Honour Justice Kandakasi (National Court) on 12 December 2002 delivered a judgment in the
    substantive proceedings WS No 1343 of 2002 and issued various orders. In its preliminary decision the
    Court said that the Attorney-General could not sue the Solicitor-General over the exercise of his
    administrative functions though he might take disciplinary action for misconduct.

    On 16 December 2002 PKA on behalf of the State filed an appeal in the Supreme Court (SCA 116 of
    2002). On 15 August 2003 the Supreme Court granted the appeal and ruled that the Attorney General is
    the authority that instructs the Solicitor-General. In other words the Solicitor-General must act on
    instructions from the Attorney-General. It ordered that the orders of the trial Judge made on December
    2002 are set aside.

    Following the Supreme Court decision Counsel for the State amended WS No 1343 of 2002 to claim a
    declaration the deed was a nullity. But in March of 2005, before the matter was heard, the Acting
    Attorney-General Mr Fred Tomo without explanation or reason withdrew Counsel‟s authority to act and
    the file was reclaimed by his office.

    On 31 March 2005 Mr Francis Kuvi, Acting Solicitor-General wrote to Mr Thaddeus Kambanei
    Secretary for Finance advising that he had consulted Mr Tomo and that he agreed that a sum of
    K6,600,000.00 should be paid to Manorburn Ltd. He argued that the Default Judgment and the Deed of
    Settlement remain in force since 31 July 2002.

    In respect of the Deed of Settlement the advice is wrong because the Supreme Court clearly enunciates
    that the Solicitor-General only acts on instructions from the Attorney-General. It follows that the Deed
    entered into by the Solicitor-General without instructions from the Attorney-General is void. Even if it
    were valid it does not comply with the Public Finances Management Act, on the basis of the principle
    communicated by the Supreme Court in NCDC v Yama Security Services Ltd; SC 707 (2003).

    On 11 April 2005 the Prime Minister wrote a letter to Mr Thaddeus Kambanei instructing the Secretary
    to raise one off payment of K6,600,000.00 to Manorburn Ltd.

    Direction by the Ombudsman Commission

    On 1 July 2005 the Commission issued a direction under Section 27(4) of the Constitution preventing
    the payment of public funds to Manorburn Ltd. Separate directions were issued to the Minister for
    Finance and Treasury, Minister for Justice, Attorney-General, Solicitor-General, Governor of BPNG
    and Secretary for Finance and Treasury.

    This Direction was necessary because the Ombudsman Commission saw it necessary to conduct
    investigations under the Leadership Code and the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of
    Leadership relating to suspected misconduct in office by persons to whom that Law applies arising from
    the circumstances surrounding an alleged payment of about K2 million of public money in respect of the
    proceedings in the National Court known as WS 285 of 2000, Manorburn Limited v The Independent
    State of Papua New Guinea and WS 1343 of 2002, The Independent State of Papua New Guinea v
    Zachary Gelu, the Solicitor-General and Manorburn Ltd, and any other related proceedings.

    The Commission reasonably believed that the Deed of Settlement was entered into by the Plaintiff and
    Mr Zachary Gelu with full knowledge that the Defendant had absolutely no liability whatsoever
    arising from the Plaintiff‟s claims in WS No 285 of 2000 or any other related claim as is reflected in
    the terms of the Deed of Settlement.

    The Ombudsman Commission was satisfied that it was not inquiring into a decision by a court for the
    purposes of Section 219(5) of the Constitution.
    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 79 of 117

  • 69

    The Ombudsman Commission believed that the joint advice or instruction by the Acting Attorney-
    General and the Acting Solicitor-General dated 31 March 2005 are improper because the National
    Executive Council had decided on 25 July 2003 that, among others:

    1 The Solicitor-General in consultation with the Attorney-General were directed to settle any future claims
    for amounts up to K1,000,000.00 provided they were satisfied that the claims were genuine; and

    2 All amounts for out of Court settlement in access of K1,000,000.00 are to be approved by the NEC prior to any
    payment being made by the Department of Finance.

    The Ombudsman Commission reasonably believed that the amount for settlement is in access of K1
    million and that the National Executive Council had not approved such settlement, and alternatively the
    Acting Attorney-General and the Acting Solicitor-General have no lawful authority to authorise or
    approve such payment.

    The Commission directed that those responsible authorities were not to make any payment towards the
    settlement of Manorburn‟s claims. However, it appears that prior to the Direction of 1 July 2005 K4
    million had been paid out to Manorburn Ltd. Only K1 million out of the K4 million has been caught
    by the Direction and is held at BPNG.

    The Ombudsman Commission noted that over a period of time the parties went to Court on a number
    of occasions both at the National Court and the Supreme Courts. However the Plaintiff (State) in WS
    No 1343 never pursued its case, having withdrawn its instructions from PKA.

    Following the Supreme Court decision in SCA No 116 of 2002 the States Lawyers amended their Writ
    of Summons in WS No 1343 of 2002 to challenge the validity of the Deed of Settlement.

    The Attorney-General instituted WS No 1343 of 2002 to challenge the unlawful settlement without
    reason withdrew authority from Counsel acting for the State to bring the case to trial.

    Mirupasi Lawyers acting for Manoburn Ltd applied to the National Court on 7 April 2006 to have the
    matter WS No 1343 of 2002 dismissed for want of prosecution. The National Court granted the Orders
    and the State‟s action was dismissed.

    Mirupasi Lawyers wrote to Gadens Lawyers, (BPNG) requesting BPNG to release the funds under its
    control.

    On 19 May 2006 Gadens Lawyers responded to Mirupasi Lawyers stating that the funds held at BPNG
    cannot be released because the Commission‟s Direction is in force. They advised Mirupasi Lawyers to
    bring the issue to the Ombudsman Commission.

    Noting that the Ombudsman Commission‟s Direction was an obstacle Mirupasi Lawyers initiated
    proceedings against the Ombudsman Commission in order to access the K1 million held at BPNG.

    On 15 August 2006 the Ombudsman Commission filed its notice of intention to defend the
    proceedings.

    On 4 September 2006 the Ombudsman Commission and Manorburn Earth Moving Ltd agreed and
    consented to discontinue the proceedings with the order that Manouburn Earth Moving Ltd is entitled to
    the K1 million plus interests held by way of Treasury Bills at the BPNG. This is because the National
    Court had resolved the matter on 7 April 2006.

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 80 of 117

  • 70

    CASES PENDING AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2006

    There were thirteen cases pending at the end of 2006. These are cases which have not been heard or
    cases where a hearing has been held, but judgment is reserved. As full reports of the cases were
    reported in the Commission‟s previous Annual Reports, the matters are briefly mentioned in this
    Report. Those cases are:

    1 WS NO. 40 OF 2000 – KUMBAKOR v HITOLO, GENO AND PENTANU
    Unheard

    This is a defamation action commenced by the Member for Nuku Open, Mr Andrew Kumbakor in
    2000 as a result of the Ombudsman Commission‟s press release on a leadership investigation
    concerning Mr Kumbakor. He was then Minister for Rural Development.

    At the end of 2006 a date for the trial had not been set.

    2 OS NO. 582 OF 2000 – ALFRED MANASE TRADING AS PATO LAWYERS v
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND THE STATE

    National Court
    Unheard

    Full reports of this case were reported in the 2000. 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports.
    The case had not been set down for trial and has been outstanding since.

    3 SCR NO. 3 OF 2001 – SUPREME COURT REFERENCE NO 3 OF 2001 SPECIAL
    REFERENCE BY THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL RE PROPOSED BOUGAINVILLE
    AMNESTY

    Supreme Court

    Amet CJ, Los J, Hinchliffe J, Sheehan J and Injia J
    24 September 2001, 16, 18 January 2002-
    Special reference

    This Section 19 Reference was filed by the Attorney-General in 2001 seeking a binding opinion on
    whether the circumstances of the Bougainville crisis and the peace process gave rise to matters that
    might prejudice the security, defence or international relations of Papua New Guinea in a way that
    would warrant a direction being given to the Public Prosecutor under Section 176(3)(b). It was
    envisaged that the National Executive Council would advise the Governor-General, who would then
    give a direction to the Public Prosecutor not to prosecute any person alleged to have committed crimes
    during the period of the crisis.

    Intervention

    The Ombudsman Commission and the Public Prosecutor applied for leave to intervene in the reference
    on the basis that it had a real and substantial interest in the resolution of significant constitutional
    issues relating to the powers and functions of the Public Prosecutor (in particular to do with the
    constitutional independence of the Public Prosecutor and the ability of the National Executive Council
    to give directions to the Public Prosecutor as to the discharge of his functions) and the Bougainville
    situation. The application was granted.

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 81 of 117

  • 71

    The Court published a summary judgment on 18 January 2002 and advised that full reasons will be
    published at a later date. By 31 December 2006 the Court had not published its full decision.

    [The Details of the case was reported in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports of the
    Commission].

    4 WS NO. 113 OF 2003 – PETI LAFANAMA v THE STATE

    National Court
    Unheard

    On 30 January 2003 Mr Peti Lafanama, the former Governor for Eastern Highlands Province
    commenced proceedings in the National Court seeking damages in excess of K7 million for
    negligence against the State in relation to his referral by the Ombudsman Commission to the Public
    Prosecutor on 21 September 2001 and his subsequent dismissal from public office for misconduct in
    office on 21 May 2002. Mr Lafanama claimed that the State, through its agents, the Ombudsman
    Commission and the Public Prosecutor had been negligent in dealing with the leadership matter
    concerning him. As a result of that alleged negligence, he claimed he had lost his position as Governor
    for Eastern Highlands Province, the consequence of which is that he looses his salary and other
    entitlements.

    The Commission liaised with the Solicitor-General‟s office for permission to provide its lawyers to
    take carriage of the defence of the case on behalf of the State the reason being that the allegations of
    negligence are mainly against the Commission and it would be in a better position to defend the case.
    As at 31 December 2006 this case is still pending.

    5 OS No 479 OF 2003 APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO
    ORDER 16 RULE 3 OF THE NATIONAL COURT RULES APPLICATION BY DAN
    KAKARAYA

    National Court
    Sakora J, 15 July 2005
    Decision pending

    Full report and status of this matter is reported in the Ombudsman Commission‟s 2003, 2004 and 2005
    Annual Reports.

    The judgement remains outstanding at the end of 2006 despite the Court giving its undertaking to
    deliver it in August 2005.

    6 SCA NO. 17 OF 2004 BEWA TOU AND POWES PARKOP -v- ILA GENO & ORS V
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION (APPEAL AGAINST CONTEMPT JUDGMENTS BY
    JUSTICE SAKORA IN WS No 756 OF 2001)

    Supreme Court

    Full report on this matter was reported in the 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports.

    As at 31 December 2006 Mr Parkop has not progressed this matter and that no date has been set for
    the hearing of the substantive appeal.

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 82 of 117

  • 72

    7 WS NO 201 OF 2004 – FLETCHER MOROBE CONSTRUCTION LTD V
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION
    National Court

    This matter is reported in full in the Commission‘s Annual Reports for the years 2004 and 2005.

    The Proceedings in this matter has been stayed by an Order of the National Court consented to by the
    parties and the dispute, the subject matter of the Proceedings, has been referred to arbitration in
    accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act and in accordance with the provisions of Section
    13 of the Contract.

    By 31 December 2006 the matter is pending.

    8 SCA NO 99 OF 2004 – PETER IPATAS & NENELE PROPERTIES LTD v
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    Supreme Court
    Not heard

    Brief background of this matter has been reported in the 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports.

    As at 31 December 2006 the status of this matter remains unchanged and has not been heard.

    9 SPECIAL SUPREME COURT REFERENCE NO 3 OF 2005 (SCR NO 3 OF 2005)
    PUBLIC PROSECUTOR‘S POWERS TO REQUEST THE CHIEF JUSTICE TO
    APPOINT A LEADERSHIP TRIBUNAL

    Decision pending

    This Special Reference filed on 30 August 2005 relates to the Public Prosecutor‟s power to request the
    Chief Justice to appoint a Leadership Tribunal relating to alleged misconduct in office by a
    Constitutional Office-holder.

    The Reference arose as a result of a ruling by a Leadership Tribunal inquiring into alleged misconduct
    in office by Mr Raho Hitolo. Mr Hitolo was an Ombudsman when he was investigated by the
    Ombudsman Commission and referred to the Public Prosecutor.

    Full report on this matter is reported in the 2005 Annual Report.
    At the end of 2006 the decision from the Supreme Court was still pending.

    10 SPECIAL SUPREME COURT REFERENCE NO 4 OF 2005 (SCR NO 4 OF 2005)
    PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ORGANIC LAW ON THE DUTIES AND
    RESPONSIBILITIES OF LEADERSHIP

    The Ombudsman Commission on 1 November 2005 filed a Special Reference under Section 19 of the
    Constitution relating to Hon Kappa Yarka‟s Private Member‟s Bill proposing to amend Section 27(5)
    of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

    The purpose of this Special Reference is to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court on the validity
    of the proposed law which proposes that Members of the Parliament, who are found guilty of
    misconduct in office by an appropriate leadership tribunal, shall be exempt from dismissal from

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 83 of 117

  • 73

    office, or other penalty by amendment of Section 27(5) of the Organic Law on the Duties and
    Responsibilities of Leadership.

    Full detail of this matter is reported in the 2005 Annual Report.

    As at 31 December 2006 this case remains unresolved.

    11 SPECIAL SUPREME COURT REFERENCE NO 5 OF 2005 (SCR NO 5 OF 2005); IN
    THE MATTER OF FORESTRY (AMENDMENT) ACT 2005

    The Ombudsman Commission on 3 November 2005 filed a Special Reference under Section 19 of the
    Constitution in relation to Forestry (Amendment) Act 2005.

    Background

    The background information on this matter is reported in the 2005 Annual Report.

    At the end of 2006 the Reference was yet to be heard by the Supreme Court. This matter therefore
    remains outstanding.

    12 OS No 520 OF 2006; RICHARD PAGEN V OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    This matter stems from a Commission decision to appoint Mr Roderick Kamburi as Deputy Director
    of Leadership (DDL) Branch.

    Back ground

    On 14 July 2006 Mr Pagen, through his Lawyers, Manda Lawyers, filed an Originating Summons No
    520 of 2006, Statement pursuant to Order 16 Rule 3(2), Mr Pagen‟s affidavit and Notice of
    Application for Leave for Judicial Review. These documents were served on the Commission on 1
    August 2006.

    On 3 August 2006 Counsel filed Notice of Intention to Defend and other relevant documents to defend
    the proceedings. Although Application for Leave for Judicial Review is usually made ex parte (one
    party application) Counsel found it necessary to defend it on the basis of one of the remedies that Mr
    Pagen was seeking. That is, to prevent Mr Kamburi from performing his duties in the position of DDL
    whilst the substantive issues were determined.

    Manda Lawyers took issue as to why the Commission filed Notice of Intention to Defend when
    Application for Leave for Judicial Reviews is usually made ex parte. Counsel explained that it was to
    point out to the Court that the interim order sought to prevent Mr Kamburi from performing his duties
    would unnecessarily hinder the work of the Commission. Besides, there was no real prejudice caused
    to Mr Pagen if Mr Kamburi continues to perform at his present level pending the determination of the
    substantive issue.

    Following the Commission‟s contention, on 5 September 2006, Manda Lawyers filed Affidavit of Mr
    Pagen, Amended Originating Summons, and Amended Statement pursuant to Order 16 Rule 3(2).
    These documents were served on the Commission on or about 6 September 2006.

    Mr Pagen seeks to challenge the Commission‟s decision of 23 March 2006 to appoint Mr Kamburi as
    DDL affirming its earlier decision of 16 January 2006.

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 84 of 117

  • 74

    The various reliefs Mr Pagen seeks are contained in his amended originating documents. These are
    restated as follows:

    Reliefs sought

    1 Interim order restraining the Commission from threatening or preventing Mr Pagen from
    continuing to perform his duties as an officer of the Commission.

    2 Mandatory order requiring the Ombudsman Commission to furnish to Mr Pagen or his
    Lawyers all documents that are relevant to the issues.

    3 An order to bring to the Court the Commission‟s decision of 23 March to appoint Mr Kamburi
    as DDL and have it quashed.

    4 A declaration that the appointment of Mr Kamburi as DDL is of no effect. In other words Mr
    Pagen is asking the Court to declare the decision of the Commission to appoint Mr Kamburi
    null and void.

    5 An order that the Commission‟s Human Resources Unit engage an independent recruitment
    agency to recruit DDL from the three candidates initially short-listed, out of which Mr
    Kamburi was appointed.

    6 A declaration that the Commission‟s decision of 23 March (minus Ombudsman Nero) was an
    unlawful act. That was arbitrary and contrary to normal recruitment process and therefore it
    should be null and void.

    7 A declaration that the decision of the Commission was bias having been unduly influenced by
    Ombudsman Nero arising from the prior disharmonious relationship between him and Mr
    Pagen. Alternatively, there was perceived bias in circumstances contrary to the principles in
    John Nilkare v Ombudsman Commission [1999] PNGLR 333 and accordingly the decision be
    declared null and void.

    8 A declaration that the decision of the Commission was an unlawful act and arbitrary and or
    disproportionate to the particular circumstances of the appointment within the meaning of
    Section 41 of the Constitution. Therefore it is null and void. Here Mr Pagen is asking the court
    to declare that taking into account the facts of the case the Commission‟s decision is harsh and
    oppressive or that under the circumstances, the decision is not reasonably justifiable in a
    democratic society having proper regard for the rights and dignity of mankind. Therefore the
    decision must be declared unlawful.

    9 A declaration that the Commission‟s decision was made in excess of its jurisdiction when the
    Commission failed to give its reasons for its decision.

    This matter was mentioned on 7 and 19 September 2006 and further adjourned to 3 October 2006. At
    the end of 2006 the matter was still unresolved.

    13 OS NO 818 OF 2006 APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW BY
    ARTHUR SOMARE (NO.2)

    On 15 November 2006 the National Court (Hinchliffe J) handed down its decision on the application
    by Mr Arthur Somare for leave to seek judicial review of the Ombudsman Commission‟s finding of
    guilty of misconduct in office and its subsequent referral to the Public Prosecutor on 3 March 2006.
    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 85 of 117

  • 75

    The decision by the Court granting leave to Mr Somare is discussed above under cases resolved
    (No.5).

    The substantive application for judicial review has not been heard and is still pending.

    Table 8.1 shows the cases that were pending at the end of 2006.

    Cases Pending as@ 31 December 2006

    No Name Court Reference Dates Status

    1 Kumbakor -v- Hitolo, Geno & Pentanu National Court 19.01.00 At the end of 2006 the matter was still pending
    WS 40 of 2000
    2 Alfred Manase Trading As Pato Lawyers National Court 28.09.00 At the end of 2006 the matter was still pending
    v Ombudsman Commission (No 2) OS 582/2000
    3 Supreme Court Reference No 3 of Supreme Court September Summary of judgment delivered in January
    2001; special reference by the SCR 3 of 2001 2001– 2002 – full judgment yet to be published.
    Attorney-General re proposed Amet CJ, Los J, December
    Bougainville amnesty Hinchliffe J, Sheehan J, 2002
    Injia J
    4 Lafanama -v- State National Court 30.01.03 At the end of 2006 the matter was still pending
    WS No 112 of 2003
    5 Kakaraya -v- OC–Application for National Court 06.10.04 This matter was heard on 15.07.05, At the end of
    Judicial Review OS 479 of 2003 2006 the decision was still pending.
    6 Bewa Tou & Powes Parkop -v- Ila Geno SCA No 17 of 2004 02.02.04 Await date for settlement of the Appeal Book.
    & Ors
    7 Fletcher Morobe -v- Ila Geno & Ors WS No 201 of 2004 05.03.04 This matter is under going alternative dispute
    resolution.
    8 Peter Ipatas & Nenele Properties Ltd -V- SCA No 99 of 2004 15.07.04 Pending
    Oc

    9 Public Prosecutor & Or -v- Yama SCM No 5 of 2005 16.03.05 Pending

    10 Supreme Court Reference No 3 of 2005 Supreme Court 30.08.05 Decision pending
    Public Prosecutor‟s power to request the SCR No 3 of 2005
    Chief Justice to appoint a Leadership Kapi CJ, Ingia DCJ,
    Tribunal – Reference by the Ombudsman Sakora J, Jalina J,
    Commission of Papua New Guinea Kirriworm J.
    11 Supreme Court Reference No 5 of 2005 Supreme Court 03.11.05 Pending
    Forestry (Amendment) Act 2005 SCR No 5 of 2005
    12 Richard Pagen -V- Ombudsman OS No 520 of 2006 14.07.06 Judicial Review pending
    Commission & Ors
    13 Hon Arthur Somare -V- Ila Geno & Ors OS 818 of 2006 06.11.06 Judicial Review pending

      

    Chapter 8
    Ombudsman Commission in Court

  • Page 86 of 117

  • CHAPTER 9

    ISSUES OF CONSTITUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

    Constitutional Planning Committee Report

    Chapter 11

    An “Ombudsman” for Papua New Guinea – the Ombudsman Commission, its
    powers and functions

    17. Papua New Guinea’s ombudsman should be available to assist
    ordinary people throughout the country who feel aggrieved by
    actions or omissions of the bureaucracy or of any institution of
    government. We consider that our ombudsman should also have the
    important responsibility of supervising and enforcing the Leadership
    Code, to ensure that our leaders do not compromise national,
    provincial or local interests for personal and selfish ends. Our
    ombudsman should have the necessary powers to investigate charges
    of corruption or other types of abuse of public office, and to ensure
    that appropriate action is taken against those who break the
    provisions of the Code.

  • Page 87 of 117

  • 77

    9 ISSUES OF CONSTITUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

    INTRODUCTION

    This Chapter reports on some constitutionally significant events that occurred in 2006.

    The Ombudsman Commission has a myriad of roles and functions. However it has a primary duty to
    ensure good governance and good leadership through the enforcement of or the supervision of the
    enforcement of the various constitutional laws and Acts of the Parliament.

    The Commission also has a general special supervisory role along with a number of other
    constitutional institutions such as the Courts, Auditor-General, the Public Accounts Committee and
    the Public Services Commission. It supervises the performance of all governmental functions. Its
    overall function is to improve the work of governmental bodies.

    The Ombudsman Commission‟s power to refer constitutional questions to the Supreme Court is another
    important supervisory function. If the Parliament passes an Act, which does not comply with
    constitutional procedures or is otherwise in breach of the Constitution, the Ombudsman Commission
    can challenge the constitutionality of the Act.

    TRIBUNALS AND REFERRALS

    On the leadership front the Ombudsman Commission referred a number of leaders to the Public
    Prosecutor for misconduct in office. A number of leadership tribunal inquiries were concluded and
    those leaders found guilty were imposed appropriate penalties under the Leadership Code. These
    matters are reported in detail in Chapter 6 of this Report.

    LITIGATION

    A number of Court matters were concluded while others remain unresolved and were carried over to
    2007. Litigation matters are reported in Chapter 8 of this Report.

    REFERRAL OF CHIEF OMBUDSMAN TO OMBUDSMAN APPOINTMENTS
    COMMITTEE

    On 31 March 2006 the member for Gulf Provincial Hon Chris Haiveta, MP, referred the Chief
    Ombudsman Mr Ila Geno to the Ombudsman Appointments Committee (Committee) for alleged
    misconduct in office. The referral was made to the Hon Prime Minster, Sir Michael Somare MP,
    Chairman of the Committee.

    On the same day Mr Haiveta called a press conference and publicized the allegations through the
    media.

    On the same day the Prime Minister met with the Chief Ombudsman and served the allegations on the
    latter.

    Chapter 9
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 88 of 117

  • 78

    On 3 April 2006 the Chief Ombudsman wrote to the Prime Minister stating that only the Committee
    was the lawful authority to consider the allegations by Haiveta and put the same to him, if there were
    serious issues to be answered. That the Prime Minister did not have the legal authority to ask the Chief
    Ombudsman to answer to the allegations referred to him by Mr Haiveta.

    On 19 April the Prime Minister wrote to the Chief Ombudsman and informed him that the Committee
    had considered the latter‟s letter of 3 April 2006. Mr Geno was informed that the Committee formally
    met and deliberated on the allegations. The Prime Minster further stated that the Committee resolved
    to have the Chief Ombudsman respond to the allegations within 14 days of receipt of their letter of 19
    April.

    The allegations against the Chief Ombudsman inevitably brought the integrity of the Ombudsman
    Commission into question. This is because four out of the five allegations related to the conduct of its
    administrative business. Therefore it was appropriate that both the Commission and Mr Geno
    responded to the allegations.

    Mr Haiveta raised five categories of allegations against Mr Geno. The allegations are:

    1 Improperly conducted himself by directing Justice David Cannings final entitlements to be
    settled; and
    2 Improper receipt of travel allowances of K10,128.62 and failure to refund monies to the
    Ombudsman Commission; and
    3 Allegations of abuse of power in respect of renewing the employment contract of an expatriate;
    and
    4 Improper use of Ombudsman Commission funds; and
    5 Abuse of power in referring Honourable Justice Mark Sevua to the Public Prosecutor for
    alleged misconduct in office.

    On 20 April 2006 both the Commission and Mr Geno asked the Auditor-General as an independent
    auditor to audit the transactions that gave rise to the allegations.

    On 24 April 2006 the Chief Ombudsman requested an extension of time to 15 May 2006 to prepare
    and give his response.

    On 2 May 2006 the Prime Minister responded that the Committee was only prepared to grant 7 days
    only to 10 May 2006. Mr Geno was asked to give his response on that date.

    On 10 May 2006 the Auditor-General provided independent audit report for the alleged transactions
    for all the relevant years and found nothing improper about the transactions that gave rise to the
    allegations.

    On 10 May 2006 the Chief Ombudsman Mr Ila Geno exercised his right to be heard and wrote to the
    Prime Minister responding to the allegations against him. He stated that he would provide the Auditor-
    General‟s audit at a later date.

    On 12 May the Chief Ombudsman forwarded the Auditor-General‟s audit to the Prime Minister.

    On 5 June 2006 both the Ombudsman Commission and the Chief Ombudsman, Mr Geno, responded
    to the allegations.

    Chapter 9
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 89 of 117

  • 79

    On 24 October 2006 Winnie Kiap, Secretary Ombudsman Appointments Committee, verbally
    requested the Chief Ombudsman to provide copies of his response to the allegations.
    On 25 October the Chief Ombudsman supplied copies of his response to Ms Kiap.

    On 27 October 2006 Ms Kiap acknowledged receipt of the copies of the Chief Ombudsman‟s
    response.

    On 24 November 2006 the Prime Minster advised the Chief Ombudsman Mr Ila Geno, that it found no
    merit in the allegations against him. The Committee stated in part:

    “The Ombudsman Appointments Committee sat yesterday to consider the Ombudsman Commission‘s
    submission on the 5 allegations raised by Hon Chris Haiveta against you. The Ombudsman Commission‘s
    submission is dated 5 June 2006.

    In relation to Haiveta allegations, the Committee had earlier on considered your response, and an
    assessment commissioned by the Committee. Having also considered the Commission‘s submissions, the
    Committee concluded that it was not satisfied that the allegations raised against you for the purpose of
    your removal from the office of Ombudsman and Chief Ombudsman, should be further investigated. The
    Committee therefore resolved to put this matter to rest‖.

    The allegations against the Chief Ombudsman Mr Ila Geno were resolved accordingly.

    The Chief Ombudsman Mr Geno later held a press conference. He informed the public in part:

    ―Every person is subject to the Rule of Law and due process. I am a public office-holder and am subject to
    public scrutiny. However, such public scrutiny must be sound and healthy for the common good and
    subject to principles of natural justice. It serves no good purpose to raise allegations that have no merit
    against any person. Our obligation to provide checks and balance must be genuine to serve public purpose
    and not individual gains that serve no purpose to public interest.

    Soon after the publication of the allegations against me and following media queries I held a press
    conference and made a public statement denying the allegations. I stated that I am subject to public
    scrutiny and I welcomed investigations into the allegations.

    I asked the Committee to publish its findings but this has not happened. Since the allegations were
    published, the public is entitled to know the outcome so I have decided to publish the outcome of the
    allegations‖.

    The allegations against the Chief Ombudsman were initiated by Hon Christopher Haiveta MP. Mr
    Haiveta raised the allegations against the Chief Ombudsman soon after he was investigated and
    referred to the Public Prosecutor by the Ombudsman Commission.

    JULIAN MOTI AFFAIR

    In October 2006 the Ombudsman Commission became concerned over the issues of law and
    governance surrounding the entry, arrest, release and departure of Mr Julian Ronald Moti, the
    Attorney-General of the Solomon Islands.

    The event gave rise to significant issues of law, national security, integrity of leadership and
    governance surrounding the facilitation of the alleged clandestine departure of Mr Moti by authorities
    and the instruments of the national government.

    The public raised serious questions about the integrity of our leadership and the integrity in the
    national security infrastructure established to protect our national security.

    Chapter 9
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 90 of 117

  • 80

    On 18 October 2006 the Commission released a press statement informing the public that it will
    investigate the matter. The Commission said in its press release:

    ―The Commission is aware that the national government has caused an investigation into the issue.
    However as an independent constitutional authority established to investigate conduct of leaders and public
    officials, it is obliged by the Constitution and the relevant Organic Laws to conduct its own inquiries on its
    own initiative.

    The Ombudsman Commission is concerned over the alleged facts and issues surrounding the departure of
    Mr Julian Moti.

    Significant issues of law, national security, integrity of leadership and governance arise from the allegations
    and issues surrounding the facilitation of the alleged clandestine departure of Mr Moti by authorities and
    the instruments of the national government.

    The Commission believes that the Julian Moti affair warrants the Commission to act to protect the
    Constitution of Papua New Guinea its laws and the established democratic processes. The country just
    commemorated its 31 years as a sovereign nation. The country took pride and commemorated not just
    coming of age but a celebration of the Constitution and the democratic institutions and democratic
    processes. It is everyone‘s duty to protect and observe our laws. They should not be bent or flouted for
    individual interests and leave open the nation to external threats.

    The Commission is concerned that the public is asking why and how is it that our leadership and the
    important gatekeepers are alleged to have compromised the national sovereignty and national security. The
    public is clearly raising serious doubts about the integrity of our leadership and the integrity in the national
    security infrastructure established to protect our national security.

    The People of PNG are left to wonder who is to guard and protect their interests if the leadership and the
    existing security infrastructure that should play such role can no longer be trusted‖.

    THE PARLIAMENTARY SELECT COMMITTEE ON OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION; WHO
    DIRECTS THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION?

    In 2006 the focus was on the Ombudsman Commission when it was subject of views and opinions
    from the political leaders and the grass roots and further subject to a Select Parliamentary Committee.

    The National Parliament established a Select Committee on the Ombudsman Commission in 2005
    with a mandate to examine the role of the institution and look at ways to strengthen it.

    In 2006 the Select Committee received comments from the members of the public. As a result of the
    public scrutiny, comes the argument, is the Ombudsman Commission doing a good job?

    In June 2006 the Ombudsman Commission was put to task on issues of who directs the Ombudsman
    Commission, or to whom and to what extent is it accountable for its actions and decisions.

    As the constitutional supervisor of public administration the Commission is conscious of its own
    obligation to be accountable as any other public institution.

    The last time the Ombudsman Commission responded publicly to these questions was in June 2004
    when it published in both nationwide newspapers in two parts a summary of the Ombudsman
    Commission‟s powers and the Constitutional and statutory checks and balances under which it
    operates.

    Chapter 9
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 91 of 117

  • 81

    In short, the People have through their Constitution conferred powers on Constitutional authorities,
    such as the Parliament, the Executive, the Judiciary, the Ombudsman Commission, etc. The
    Constitution expressly states that those respective powers are to be exercised “subject to the
    Constitution” itself.

    The deliberate subjecting of the exercise of those respective powers and functions of each
    constitutional authority means that each of them are subject to important accountability mechanisms
    the People have provided through their Constitution.

      

    Chapter 9
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 92 of 117

  • CHAPTER 10

    EXTERNAL RELATIONS PROGRAM

  • Page 93 of 117

  • 83

    10 EXTERNAL RELATIONS PROGRAM

    REACHING THE PEOPLE

    External Relations Program (ERP) is part of the Ombudsman Commission‟s ongoing awareness and
    promotion vehicle which helps to define, inform, promote and improve relationship with stakeholders,
    the government, the media and the People of Papua New Guinea.

    Its primary aim is to assist the Ombudsman Commission (OC) perform its constitutional
    responsibilities more effectively and efficiently, in partnership with the wide range of people and
    agencies with whom it interacts.

    The ERP outlines activities that will improve the OC‟s relationship with Parliament, the public,
    complainants, constitutional and governmental bodies and leaders. These activities are extensive and
    include media releases, speeches, seminars, visits to the provinces, reports, posters, pamphlets and
    booklets. They also involve developing and improving anti-corruption preventative measures and
    complaint-handling systems for governmental bodies, including provincial and local level government.

    Through the ERP, the OC aims to have its role and functions better known and understood by the
    community by educating them on what constitutes good governance, leadership and the Rule of Law.

    Some of these activities undertaken in 2006 included;

     Information seminars and workshops with elected leaders in the national, provincial
    and local-level governments, heads of departments and statutory agencies, institutions
    and schools;
     External Relations visits to,
    – Provinces,
    – Villages,
    – Schools and institutions,
    – Government Bodies/NGOs
     Publication of a monthly newsletter (Wasdok);
     Media Releases/Legal Nius;
     Speeches and papers;
     OC Publications;
     Annual Reports; and
     Major Reports

    Even though the Commission envisaged maximum results in this reporting period, external relations
    visits throughout 2006 declined compared to 2005 due to the Ombudsman Commission taking much
    of that time preparing and improving its reporting process through the out put of its annual reports.

    ACHIEVEMENTS IN 2006

    Some of the major achievements under the External Relations Program were reflected in the
    successful completion and production of the Summary and Detailed Annual Reports for 2005. Both
    reports were delivered to the Governor-General.

    Chapter 10
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 94 of 117

  • 84

    The Commission conducted more than 35 ERP visits throughout 2006 in Madang, Milne Bay, East
    New Britain, National Capital District, Morobe, Western Highlands and Simbu. Informative sessions
    were held with Public Servants, Council Presidents, various Local-level Government Presidents,
    students, Village Court Officials, Correctional Services Officers, National Education officers,
    Business Council Representatives and the general public. The Commission‟s Regional Offices also
    carried out ERP within their localities.

    The Branch coordinated five (5) radio awareness programs in Port Moresby and the Provinces,
    produced 27 Press Releases and Speeches and 12 Wasdok Newsletters. It also produced 13
    publications including the 2005 Summary Annual Report, the Detailed Annual Reports (for 2003,
    2004 and 2005), leadership manuals and booklets and Annual Statements.

    ADMINISTRATIVE PRIORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
    Activities in 2006

    40
    35
    30
    25
    20
    15
    10
    5
    0
    1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr TOTALS
    ERP 6 12 12 6 36
    Publications 1 3 6 3 13
    Press releases/speeches 13 5 6 3 27
    Wasdok 3 3 3 3 12
    Radio ERP/talkback 2 2 1 1 6
    Unit/Divisional meetings 9 8 11 9 37

    MONTHLY NEWSLETTER PRODUCTION

    The Media Unit of the Commission continues to prepare and publish the monthly editions of the
    newsletter, Wasdok. A total of 12 newsletters were published for 2006.

    EXTERNAL RELATIONS VISITS

    The Commission‟s External Relations Programme continues to administer and run awareness
    programs and seminars to inform and educate leaders on their roles and responsibilities and people on
    their rights and responsibilities. The ERP also promotes good governance.

    ISSUE OF PAMPHLETS, BOOKLETS AND BROCHURES ABOUT THE ROLES AND
    FUNCTIONS OF THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION

    The pamphlets „Making a Complaint’ and ‗Duties & Responsibilities of Leadership’ continue to be
    distributed to the public in 2006. More than 4,500 copies of the pamphlets were distributed in the
    course of the Commission‟s public awareness exercise.

    Chapter 10
    External Relations Program

  • Page 95 of 117

  • 85

    OTHER OC PUBLICATIONS AND MAJOR REPORTS

    The Commission‟s 2003, 2004, and 2005 Detailed Annual Reports and 2005 Summary and Annual
    Reports were compiled and presented to the Governor-General His Excellency Grand Chief Sir
    Paulias Matane GCL, GCMG, KSt.J.

    SPEECHES

    Speeches by the Members of the Commission and other officers of the Commission continued to be an
    important external relations tool in 2006.

    Linkages with other Agencies

    The Government Bodies Liaison Programme (GBLP) has enabled the Ombudsman Commission to
    establish links with Government Departments, Agencies and Institutions. Since the launch of the
    program in June 2002, government agencies and statutory organizations have been encouraged to join.

    

    Chapter 10
    Issues of Constitutional Significance

  • Page 96 of 117

  • CHAPTER 11

    INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENTS

  • Page 97 of 117

  • 87

    11 INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENTS

    The powers given by the Constitution of Papua New Guinea to the Ombudsman Commission of Papua
    New Guinea to enforce and supervise the Leadership Code makes it distinctively unique from other
    Ombudsman offices in the Pacific and in the world.

    As this important function gets recognised internationally it gives rise to the need for this information
    to be shared.

    In 2006, the Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno and his colleague Ombudsmen Peter Masi and John Nero,
    carried out extensive Public Relations exercises at the international level upon requests from
    Ombudsman offices, world renowned organisations and educational institutions.

    The Members of the Commission not only travelled to the neighbouring Island countries but also to
    Washington DC in the United States of America, Beijing-China, London-United Kingdom and
    Barcelona-Spain to name a few.

    In attending these international conferences, workshops and meetings, the important roles and
    functions that the Commission plays in maintaining good governance and good leadership in Papua
    New Guinea was imparted. In return the Commission acquired knowledge, new methods and systems
    to help it strengthen its work processes and to keep abreast with changes and issues.

    The following is a brief synopsis of the trips taken by Chief Ombudsman Ila Geno, Ombudsman Peter
    Masi and Ombudsman John Nero in 2006.

    Official international visits by Chief Ombudsman, Mr Ila Geno

     Australasian Pacific Ombudsman Regional Conference (APOR), Perth, Western Australia, 26-
    28 April 2006

    As PNG is a Pacific Island country the OCPNG is a member of the Australasian Pacific
    Ombudsman Regional Conference. The Chief Ombudsman and his colleague Ombudsman
    attended the APOR conference to impart and exchange knowledge, skills and expertise.

     Pacific 2020 Conference & Seminar, Sydney, 10-13 May 2006

     1ST Pacific Youth Festival, Papeete, Tahiti, 17-22 July 2006
    Presented the keynote address on Good Leadership

     Twining Program, Canberra, 3-5 August 2006

     Fiji Parliamentary Workshops on Governance & Leadership, Solomon Islands & Fiji, 14-18
    August 2006

    Transparency International organised the speaking arrangements.

     International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) Board of Directors Meeting, Barcelona, Spain, 3-8
    October 2006
    Chapter 11
    International Engagements

  • Page 98 of 117

  • 88

    Mr Geno is one of the Directors of the IOI representing the Ombudsman Institutions in the
    Australasian and the Pacific Region (APOR) and as such is required to attend the IOI Board of
    Directors Meeting.

     Anti Corruption Advisory Conference, Washington, D.C. 13-14 November 2006
    Mr Geno attended at the invitation of the World Bank.

    Official international visits by Ombudsman Peter Masi

     Speaking Engagement arranged by Transparency International New Zealand, Vanuatu, 22 – 27
    August 2006

     1st Annual Conference & General meeting of the International Association of Anti-Corruption
    Authorities (IAACA), Beijing, China, 22 – 26 October

     2nd Twinning Meeting between OC PNG & Commonwealth Ombudsman Office, Canberra,
    Australia, 5 – 8 November 2006

    Official international visits by Ombudsman John Nero

     23rd Australasian Pacific Region Ombudsman Conference, Perth, Australia, 26 – 28 April 2006

     Case Management System research trip, Australia & New Zealand, 12 – 26 June 2006

     24th Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime, London, United Kingdom, 31
    Aug – 15 September 2006

     Familiarisation Tour – New Zealand Ombudsman Office,

     6th National Investigation Symposium, Manly, Sydney, 2-3 November 2006

     2nd Twinning Meeting between OC PNG & Commonwealth Ombudsman Office, Canberra,
    Australia, 5 – 8 November 2006




    

    Chapter 11
    International Engagements

  • Page 99 of 117

  • CHAPTER 12

    AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT FOR 2006

    AO Purchasing Officer Jones Hawala making arrangements for officers travelling on
    business trips.

  • Page 100 of 117

  • 90

    12 AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT

    +

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 101 of 117

  • 91

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 102 of 117

  • 92

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 103 of 117

  • 93

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 104 of 117

  • 94

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 105 of 117

  • 95

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 106 of 117

  • 96

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 107 of 117

  • 97

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 108 of 117

  • 98

    

    Chapter 12
    Audited Financial Report for 2006

  • Page 109 of 117







  • Appendix 1 – List of Leaders referred to the Public Prosecutor

    Appendix 2 – List of OLOC Reports

    Appendix 3 – List of Governmental Bodies under the Ombudsman
    Commission Governmental Bodies Liaison Program

    Appendix 4 – Former members of Commission

  • Page 110 of 117

  • APPENDIX 1 Table of leaders referred for prosecution by the Ombudsman Commission
    under the Leadership Code as at 31 December 2006

    LEADERS REFERRED FOR PROSECUTION BY THE
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION UNDER THE LEADERSHIP CODE
    AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2006

    No LEADER OFFICE YEAR RESULT
    1 MOSES SASAKILA MP; Minister for Culture 1976 Guilty – dismissed – later set aside by Supreme Court
    2 BRIAN GREY General Manager, National Airline 1978 Guilty – reprimanded
    Commission
    3 AKO TOUA Commissioner, Electricity Commission 1978 Guilty – suspended
    4 LEO MORGAN Acting Secretary, Department of Works 1978 Guilty – dismissed
    and Supply
    5 JAMES MOPIO MP 1981 Guilty – dismissed
    6 OPAI KUNANGEL MP; Minister for Commerce 1982 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    7 PIUS KEREPIA Secretary, Department of Works and 1983 Guilty
    Supply
    8 ILINOME TARUA PNG High Commissioner to London 1983 Guilty
    9 MICHAEL PONDROS MP 1983 Guilty – dismissed
    10 LENNIE APARIMA MP 1985 Not guilty
    11 EZEKIEL BROWN Managing Director, National Provident 1985 Guilty – fined
    Fund
    12 JULIUS CHAN MP; Deputy Prime Minister; Minister 1988 Not guilty
    for Finance
    13 JOHN KAPUTIN MP 1988 Guilty – fined
    14 OBUM MAKARAI Chairman, Papua New Guinea Banking 1988 Guilty – fined
    Corporation
    15 KEDEA URU Chairman, National Broadcasting 1988 Not guilty
    Commission
    16 GERALD SIGULOGO MP 1989 Guilty – dismissed – judicial review by leader unsuccessful
    17 SUSUVE LAUMAEA Chief of Staff, Office of the Prime 1990 Public Prosecutor failed to refer matter to tribunal – no
    Minister further action
    18 GABRIEL RAMOI MP 1990 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    19 ESEROM BUREGE MP 1990 Resigned after tribunal commenced hearing

    20 TED DIRO MP; Deputy Prime Minister; Minister 1991 Guilty – recommended for dismissal – resigned before
    for Forests dismissal effected
    21 TOM AMAIU MP 1992 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    22 TONY ILA MP 1992 Guilty – resigned before decision on penalty
    23 TIMOTHY BONGA MP 1992 Resigned – later guilty – dismissed
    24 PETER GARONG MP 1992 Resigned – later guilty – dismissed
    25 GALEN LANG MP 1992 Resigned – later died in office
    26 MELCHIOR PEP MP 1992 Resigned – later guilty – dismissed
    27 PHILIP LAKI MP 1993 Guilty – recommended for dismissal – resigned before
    dismissal effected
    28 ANDREW POSAI MP; Minister for Forests 1995 Guilty – dismissed – judicial review unsuccessful
    29 JOHN NILKARE MP; Minister for Village Services and 1995 Guilty – dismissed – later reviewed by Supreme Court –
    Provincial Affairs penalty altered to fine
    30 PAUL PORA MP; Minister for Civil Aviation 1995 Guilty – fined – judicial review by Public Prosecutor
    unsuccessful
    31 JEFFREY BALAKAU MP; Governor, Enga Province 1996 Guilty – dismissed – judicial review unsuccessful
    32 GABRIEL DUSAVA Secretary, Department of Foreign 1996 Guilty – dismissed – judicial review unsuccessful
    Affairs
    33 YAIP AVINI MP; Minister for Health 1996 Lost office through criminal conviction

    APPENDIX 1

  • Page 111 of 117

  • 101

    LEADERS REFERRED FOR PROSECUTION BY THE
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION UNDER THE LEADERSHIP CODE
    AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2006

    No LEADER OFFICE YEAR RESULT
    34 JOSEPH ONGUGLO MP; Minister for Education 1996 Resigned after tribunal commenced hearing
    35 ALBERT KARO MP 1997 Lost office in election
    36 PETER YAMA MP; Minister for Transport and Works 1997 Lost office in election – later re-elected Dismissed from
    office on 01.12.04. On 04.02.05 National Court quashed the
    penalty of dismissal, dismissed 2 guilty findings and
    imposed a fine of K1000.
    Leader is reinstated as member of Parliament for Ussino-
    Bundi. Appeal by the Public Prosecutor is pending.
    37 AMOS YAMANDI MP 1997 Lost office in election
    38 JERRY SINGIROK Commander of the Defence Force 1999 Guilty – dismissed – judicial review unsuccessful
    39 MICHAEL GENE Secretary, Department of Attorney- 2000 Appointment revoked prior to appointment of tribunal
    General; Attorney-General
    40 JIM KAS MP; Governor, Madang Province 2000 Guilty – dismissed – judicial review unsuccessful
    41 PETER PEIPUL MP; Deputy Leader of the Opposition 2000 Guilty – dismissed – later reviewed by Supreme Court –
    decision on guilt affirmed but penalty altered to fine – slip
    rule application by Public Prosecutor rejected
    42 ANDERSON AGIRU MP; Governor, Southern Highlands 2000 Guilty – dismissed – judicial reviews unsuccessful
    Province
    43 JOHN WAKON Commissioner of Police 2000 Appointment revoked – judicial review of referral
    unsuccessful
    44 KUK KULI MP 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    45 BERNARD MOLLOK MP 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    46 JACOB WAMA MP 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    47 JOHN KAMB MP; Minister for Communications and 2001 Not guilty
    High Technology
    48 BEVAN TAMBI MP 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    49 PETI LAFANAMA MP; Governor, Eastern Highlands 2001 Guilty – dismissed – later reviewed by National Court –
    Province decision on guilt affirmed but penalty altered to fine
    50 PETER WAIENG MP 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    51 ANDERSON AGIRU MP; Governor, Southern Highlands 2001 Guilty – dismissed – judicial reviews unsuccessful.
    Province
    52 VINCENT AUALI MP; Minister for Corporatization and 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    Privatisation
    53 PETER ARUL MP 2001 Resigned after appointment of tribunal
    54 BERNARD HAGORIA MP 2002 Guilty – dismissed
    55 MAO ZEMING MP 2002 Guilty – dismissed – Applied for judicial review. On
    06/02,06 the Court considered that the breach of s. 21(6)
    OLDRL did not result in any real and substantial injustice to
    Mr Zeming and declined to quash the tribunal‟s findings and
    dismiss the application with costs to the respondent, the
    State, who is the nominal respondent representing the 1 st, 2nd
    and 3rd respondents.
    56 IAIRO LASARO MP 2002 Lost office in election
    57 YAUWE RIYONG MP 2002 Lost office in election
    58 JOHN TEKWIE MP 2002 Lost office in election
    59 THOMAS PELIKA MP; Deputy Leader of the Opposition 2002 Lost office in election
    60 ANDREW KUMBAKOR MP; Minister for Finance, Planning and 2002 Not guilty
    Implementation and Rural Development
    61 MICHAEL NALI MP 2002 Guilty – fined
    62 ALFRED DANIEL Chairman, National Gaming Control 2002 Appointment expired after request for tribunal
    Board
    63 REUBEN KAIULO Electoral Commissioner 2002 Appointment expired after matter referred to tribunal

    APPENDIX 1

  • Page 112 of 117

  • 102

    LEADERS REFERRED FOR PROSECUTION BY THE
    OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION UNDER THE LEADERSHIP CODE
    AS AT 31 DECEMBER 2006

    No LEADER OFFICE YEAR RESULT
    64 CES IEWAGO Managing Director, Public Officers 2003 Appointment revoked prior to request for tribunal
    Superannuation Fund
    65 MICHAEL NALI MP, member for Mendi Open, member 2003 Guilty – dismissed. Judicial Review application granted,
    Southern Highlands Provincial tribunal decision quashed and matter referred for rehearing.
    Assembly Pending
    66 DANIEL KAKARAYA Managing Director, Mineral Resources 2003 Pending – Decision Judicial review in National Court
    Development Corporation Ltd pending
    67 MARK WANI Auditor-General 2003 Guilty –Judicial Review on payment of entitlements
    successful.
    68 RAHO HITOLO Ombudsman 2004 Tribunal disbanded due to lack of jurisdiction. Matter
    pending
    69 MARK SEVUA Judge of the National Court and 2004 Pending
    Supreme Court
    70 PETER IPATAS MP, Governor of Enga Province 2004 Guilty of 16 out of 23 allegations. Fine of K1000 for each
    allegation. Public Prosecutor has filed application seeking
    leave for judicial review: pending
    71 GALLUS YUMBUI MP, member for Wosera-Gawi Open 2004 Tribunal decision pending. Recommended for
    dismissal as at 2 March 2007.
    72 CHARLIE BENJAMIN MP, member for Manus Open 2005 Guilty of 19 allegations. Recommended for
    dismissal as at 15 January 2007.
    73 GABRIEL KAPRIS MP, Minister for Works 2005 Guilty of 2 out of 2 allegations and fined K2,000
    74 ANO PALA ISO Clerk of the National Parliament 2005 Term expired and not reappointed. Pending
    75 PUKA TEMU MP, Minister for Lands & Physical 2005 Guilty of 4 out of 6 allegations. Fine of K1000 each.
    Planning
    76 JAMES YALI MP, Governor of Madang Province 2005 Pending. Mr Yali was dealt with by the National Court
    Criminal Jurisdiction and convicted on 13/12/05 on rape and
    sexual assault. On 19/01/06 was sentenced to serve 12 years
    imprisonment with hard labour.
    77 ANDREW BAING MP, Deputy Leader of the Opposition 2005 Guilty of 3 out of 5 allegations – recommended for
    dismissal as at 20 December 2006.
    78 CHRIS HAIVETA MP, Governor of Gulf Province 2006 Pending.
    79 GUAO ZURENUOC MP, member for Finchhaffen Open 2006 Pending
    80 ARTHUR SOMARE MP, minister for Planning & 2006 Pending
    Monitoring
    81 MELCHIOR PEP MP, Minister for Health 2006 Pending
    82 SIR MOI AVEI MP, Deputy Prime Minister and 2006 Presently before a Leadership Tribunal.
    Minister for Mining
    83 JOHN MUINGNEPE MP, member for Bulolo Open 2006 Pending
    84 FRED MALIUPA MPA, member of Madang Provincial 2006 Pending
    Assembly and President, Usino Local-
    level Government
    85 HAMI YAWARI MP, Governor of Southern Highlands 2006 Pending
    Province
    86 CHARLES PUNAHA Chief Executive Officer, Papua New 2006 Pending
    Guinea Radio communications and
    Telecommunications Technical
    Authority (“PANGTEL”)
    87 JERRY TETAGA Chairman, Public Services Commission 2006 Pending



    

    APPENDIX 1

  • Page 113 of 117

  • APPENDIX 2 Major Reports produced by the Commission under Section 22 of the Organic Law
    on the Ombudsman Commission.

    Date Published Name of Report
    February 1980 Report on the formal enquiry into the dispute between the Harbours Board and the wharf workers
    of Rabaul.
    June 1980 Air Niugini an interim report by the Ombudsman Commission

    August 1981 Ombudsman Commission Final Report on the Kerevat National High School Enquiry

    February 1982 Report on the investigation into allegations against the former acting Vice Chancellor of UPNG
    Mr Nicholas Kuman

    November 1982 Corruption in Government

    February 1983 Formal enquiry into the cause of student unrest at the University of Papua New Guinea.

    May 1985 Report by the Ombudsman Commission on street vending and associated problems arising as a
    result of formal enquiry into the complaint by street vendors against the NCD interim
    Commission.
    February 1986 Report upon an investigation into the treatment of Juvenile Offenders.

    January 1988 Brief to the Government on the Ombudsman Commission

    December 1989 Public Officers Superannuation Board Investigation
    January 1992 Investigation into the results of an investigation into the dismissal of an officer of the Papua New
    Guinea Defence Force – Leo Nuia No. 455 of 1991.
    December 1992 Report of an investigation into the Spring Garden Road Poreporena Freeway Project.

    June 1994 Report of an investigation into the Disciplined Forces Institutional Housing Project.

    November 1994 Investigation into the termination of Dr AG Pillay, a senior lecturer in Anatomy, University of
    Papua New Guinea.

    June 1995 Report of an Investigation into the Appointment of the Director and a member of the Legal
    Training Institute – Final Report

    May 1996 Investigation into Mrs Mary Parker‟s Complaint Against the Public Curator

    October 1996 Investigation into alleged unfair decision in varying contract gratuity amounts due to non citizen
    contract officers by the acting chief Executive and General Manager – Papua New Guinea
    Electricity Commission.
    October 1996 Investigation into Awarding of Contracts for Upgrading of the Port Moresby Water Supply
    Project.

    June 1997 Investigation into Alleged Improper Transfer of Title Relating to State Lease Volume 30 Folio
    7280 Section 238 Allotment 10 Hohola on a complaint made by Papua New Guinea Banking
    Corporation – Final Report
    August 1997 Investigation into Alleged Improper Leasing of Properties by the National Housing Corporation
    from Neisenel No. 77 Pty Ltd

    APPENDIX 2

  • Page 114 of 117

  • 104

    August 1997 Investigation into Issue of A Permit to Turama Forest Industries Pty Ltd by the Forest Authority

    November 1997 Preliminary Report on Complaint made by Ms Grace Ochero against the University of Papua New
    Guinea Relating to ERSA and Gratuity
    March 1998 Report of an investigation into the illegal occupation of state leases in Bereina town Central
    Province CF: 198/94
    November 1998 Preliminary Investigation Report of an Allegation of unfair decision to award multi-million Ramu
    Highway Upgrading and Sealing contract to Downer Construction By NEC
    November 1999 Investigation into the Purchase of the Conservatory Cairns by Public Officers Superannuation
    Fund Board and associates transactions and arrangements.

    November 1999 Investigation into the lease and proposed purchase of Malagan House, 99 Creek Street, Brisbane
    by the Independent State of Papua New Guinea.

    July 2002 Investigation into the decision of the National Forest Board to award the Kamula Doso FMA to
    Wawoi Guavi Timber company (a subsidiary of Rimbunan Hijau) as an extension to Wawoi
    Guavi Timber Resource Permit – Final Report

    July 2006 Investigation into Administrative Practice – Payment of public funds to officers for sick leave by
    a Government Department.


    

    APPENDIX 2

  • Page 115 of 117

  • 105


    APPENDIX 3 TABLE LISTING GOVERNMENTAL BODIES WHO ARE
    CURRENTLY UNDER THE OMBUDSMAN COMMISSION‘S
    GOVERNMENTAL BODIES LIAISON PROGRAM.

    No ORGANISATION DATE JOINED

    1 Dept. of Education June 2002
    2 Teaching Services Commission June 2002
    3 RPNG Constabulary June 2002
    4 PNG Defence Force June 2002
    5 Dept. of Correctional Service June 2002
    6 Bomana Metropolitan Goal June 2002
    7 National Housing Corporation December 2002
    8 Dept. of Lands & Physical Planning January 2003
    9 Dept. of Personnel Management March 2003
    10 Dept. of Foreign Affairs April 2003
    11 Dept. of Works June 2003
    12 Simbu Provincial Administration June 2003
    13 Electoral Commission July 2003
    14 Magisterial Service HQ July 2003
    15 Post PNG Limited July 2003
    16 Central Provincial Administration August 2003
    17 National Capital District Commission November 2003
    18 Enga Provincial Administration December 2003
    19 PNG Forest Authority April 2004
    20 Southern Highlands Provincial Administration June 2004
    21 East Sepik Provincial Administration August 2004
    22 Sandaun Provincial Administration September 2004
    23 Oro Provincial Administration September 2004
    24 Western H/lands Provincial Administration November 2004
    25 Manus Provincial Administration December 2004
    26 Madang Provincial Administration March 2005
    27 Western Provincial Administration March 2005
    28 ENBP Provincial Administration March 2005
    29 Eastern Highlands Provincial Administration August 2005
    30 Bougainville October 2005
    31 National Broadcasting Corporation December 2005
    32 Gulf Provincial Administration February 2006
    33 Milne Bay Administration March 2006
    34 Office of Workers Compensation May 2006
    35 Judicial Services September 2006
    36 Dept of Trade & Industry September 2006
    37 Office of the Clerk – National Parliament September 2006
    38 Dept. of Agriculture & Livestock September 2006
    39 Office of the Prime Minister &National Executive Council September 2006
    40 West New Britain Provincial Administration September 2006
    41 Dept. of Finance September 2006
    42 National Intelligence Office September 2006
    43 Office of Rural Development March 2007
    44 Department of Health Yet to confirm


    
    

    APPENDIX 3

  • Page 116 of 117

  • 106


    APPENDIX 4 Former members of the Commission

    Sir Ignatius Kilage CBE Frank Hedges Andrew Opu Maino OBE
    Chief Ombudsman Ombudsman Ombudsman
    4.12.75 – 4.1.85 8.12.75 – 4.1.78 17.12.75 – 28.2.82

    Sunny Cherian Keith E. Anderson Jean L Kekedo OBE
    Ombudsman Ombudsman Ombudsman
    6.10.78 – 25.1.79 19.11.80 – 10.12.84 1.3.82 – 8.10.86

    Jim Ridges
    Sir Charles Maino KBE Ango Wangatau Ombudsman
    Chief Ombudsman Ombudsman 10.10.86 – 20.12.92
    5.1.85 – 31.12.94 23.6.86 – 31.12.92

    Joe N.Waugla Ninchib Tetang Simon Pentanu Raho Hitolo, MBE
    Ombudsman Ombudsman Chief Ombudsman Ombudsman
    20.12.92 – 19.12.98 5.1.93 – 4.1.99 01.01.95 – 31.12.00 06.01.99 – 05.01.05

    APPENDIX 4

  • Page 117 of 117

  • CONTACT DETAILS

    Ombudsman Commission
    of
    Papua New Guinea

    HEADQUARTERS
    Ground Floor Telephone: (675) 308 2600
    Deloitte Tower Facsimile: (675) 320 3263
    Section 5 Lot 16 Email: ombudspng@ombudsman.gov.pg
    Douglas Street, Port Moresby
    PO Box 1831
    PORT MORESBY 121
    National Capital District

    REGIONAL OFFICES

    Mamose Region Telephone: (675) 472 1695
    Vele Rumana Building Facsimile: (675) 472 2755
    4th Street
    PO Box 2259
    LAE 411
    Morobe Province

    Highlands Region Telephone: (675) 542 1986
    AGC Building Facsimile: (675) 542 2497
    Hagen Drive
    PO Box 745
    MT HAGEN 281
    Western Highlands Province

    New Guinea Islands Region Telephone: (675) 982 8792
    PO Box 359 Facsimile: (675) 982 8953
    KOKOPO 613
    East New Britain Province