The idea that he is a dictatorial type, a danger to democracy and rule of law and other things some people write about him, is totally baseless and unconvincing in light of his performance as politician.
Belden Namah has never been given an opportunity to lead Papua New Guinea as Prime Minister.
Although he was Deputy Prime Minister in the O’Neill-Namah government ,he never took the opportunity to pursue anything further.
Instead he worked within the domain of democracy to correct flaws after decades of opportunity was lost to political weakness that allowed systemic tribal corruption to creep in to destroy the very opportunity to turn growth in social progress for seven million people of Papua New Guinea.
The events of 2011 and 2012 were very disturbing – but a struggle between Parliament and Judiciary is not new. It’s very common among many third world democracies faced with massive issues of systemic corruption.
Namah may be criticised for directing the arrest of the Chief Justice, but I believe any person occupying public office should not be immune to allegations.
In any democracy, members of Parliament and the Judiciary must provide leadership in clearing themselves of allegations. Using official powers to protect one’s authority is questionable.
As Belden Namah stated openly - what was done was necessary given the situation at the time. What is important now is to move on, but with some understanding as to what must be done to correct wrongs of the past.
Another major issue was the staging of the claimed military ‘mutiny’. Colonel Yaura Sasa said he was appointed Commander by a court reinstated prime minister Sir. Michael Somare.
What could have been a bad situation was contained by Belden Namah, who suspended airline flights to major military bases in the country where Col Sasa had great influence.
If members of the Defence Force had been flown in to support Col Sasa, it could have led to a major confrontation between armed forces leading to loss of lives. Namah’s political leadership stopped that boil over.
What surprises me is that why anyone would fear and question the political leadership of Namah. Why would he be likened to a dictator or danger to democracy when all his political achievements in addressing major issues in PNG were within the domain of democracy.
He was prepared to take the risk. His reputation has being tarnished by false assumptions and social media frenzy mostly by the Australian press.
But one thing’s for sure, Belden Namah provides a style of political leadership that can address corruption and bring the best out of this country.
Any right thinking Papua New Guinean politician should put aside past mistakes and the 2011-2012 political impasse and form a strong form of leadership with the PNG opposition to correct many flaws within our governance and also address growing issues surrounding our economy and society.
The future of seven million people should not be allowed to suffer another decade of lost opportunity because people are scared to do the right thing.
With due respect to prime minister Peter O’Neill, I find him weakening our forms of governance by appointing political allies and tribesmen to boards of directors of state utilities and other key positions in this country.
The danger is that an ethnic form of governance will lead to conflict among people who realize they are missing out from the benefits governance brings.
Another political crisis is slowly rising. Will this be the opportunity that calls Belden Namah to serve the seven million people of this great country?