Govt to consult on bill – but will it be fair dinkum?

BY KEITH JACKSON

OPPONENTS OF THE NEW Judicial Bill which has caused mass protests in Papua New Guinea seem to have secured a significant win. But have they?

The PNG government has deferred implementing the law, which gives parliament the power to oust judges and thus wield huge influence over the justice system.

Prime Minister Peter O'Neill has now asked the Constitutional and Law Reform Commission to undertake public consultation on the issue.

But Commission chairman, Gabriel Kapris, has already tainted this process by saying he is confident the public will support the bill.

"Once the Commission goes out and gives the public the opportunity to see the importance of this amendment, they will appreciate why the government has seen it proper to pass the bill," he said.

The Commission will report to parliament in nine months, after the national election.

Comments

[Mrs Barbara Short]

Maybe he could be the start of the PNG Correct Attitude Party (CAP).

I was thinking of sending an email to one of the PNG men who has featured strongly on PNG Attitude over the years. He certainly should be standing!

[Michael Dom]

Phil - That's fantastic news! Looking forward to hearing from 'our' candidate.

[Phil Fitzpatrick]

We have at least one of our PNG Attitude writers and Crocodile Prize entrants standing for election Barbara.

Perhaps he will announce himself on the blog and we can get behind him in a practical way.

[Mrs Barbara Short]

Surely the important question now is "Who are the good men and women who are willing to stand for the next election?"

The good men and women who write for PNG Attitude need to start encouraging the right people to stand for the next election. Give them a call on the phone, see if you can have a meeting with them. Get behind them, rally others, and help them to see what needs to be done to save PNG.

The country needs clever people who can do the job, who are not tainted by corruption, who are trustworthy, honest, hard-working, and have a heart for all the people of PNG.

I hope the PNG election can resemble the Queensland election where I hear only 7 of the previous government are still in the parliament.

There may be 7 of the present PNG parliament who fill the bill but hopefully there will be a lot of new blood with clever men and women determined to work at the main problems of PNG which, to me, seem to be entrenched corruption and violence against women.

[Moais Gabuar]

O'Neill has suddenly realised he's come up against the public 'brick wall'.

His referring the matter back to the CLRC (which should have been done in the first instance) is just a tactic to 'save face' and buy time.

By the time this whole matter is done through, the elections will be over and half of the 'cowboys' in his camp (government) and hopefully himself too, won't be back.

Outrageous O'Neill, just plain outrageous!

[Tavurvur]

I can’t understand why Gabriel Kapris honestly believes the PNG public will “accept” the Judicial Conduct Act 2012 after the Constitutional Law & Reform Commission looks over it at Peter O’Neill’s request.

The response from the PNG public has been unanimous in condemning the law. I have yet to read any group, or let alone, any individual outside of Parliament actually state publicly that the Judicial Conduct Act 2012 should remain.

Even the inmates at Bomana Prison have come out against it!

Go figure.

[David Kitchnoge]

These guys got the process all wrong. You consult us first before making laws that will affect us. You don’t run back to us to “consult” (more like tell – there’s a difference between the two, isn’t it?) us to save face.

Get the process right and the process with yield the right results.

It’ll be interesting to hear other pertinent reasons (if any) for the law during the “consultation” process other than the pathetic "oh judges are only human".

[Paul Oates]

The propriety of Mr Kapris publically voicing his personal opinion prior to the CLRC consultation process must reflect on his suitability for this very important role.

PM O'Neill has responded to public opinion and very properly referred this matter to the CLRC. The PM should be supported and not 'mumuted' by injudicious statements such as Mr Kapris is reported to have made. Perhaps MR Kapris was misreported? That sometimes happens with politicians.....

The matter should now rest until it has been reviewed by those eminent and qualified persons who make up the CLRC. Then and only then should it be reported on directly to the PM and then through him to Parliament.