My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2006

« O’Neill defends his preparations for Bougainville referendum | Main | Schram tells: ‘My wrongful dismissal & malicious prosecution’ »

29 May 2018

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Michael - You're welcome. Thank you for enjoying my Irish satirical sense of humor.

William Dunlop, I love this line "But now we in PNG are doing it our way the new Melanesian way, eating nails and shitting corkscrews."

I want to steal it from you.

Chris Overland has correctly reflected on the rot in the administration of Justice in PNG.

An important aspect of cleaning up the rot is to have judges appointed through a open parliamentary screening process similar to the United States Senate inquiry.

Here a candidate for justice of the supreme court must face public scrutiny and importantly be able to provide leadership in dealing with officers of the court, who include police, if there is clear evidence in the abuse of court processes.

The case against Dr Schram should have been dismissed for abuse of process.

These so called charges are downright vexatious and spiteful and would clearly be seen as such in a normal country enjoying the full force of the law.

It would have seen this basket case dismissed by the judge with the complainants being arrested and charged for malicious prosecution and perverting the course of justice.

But now we in PNG are doing it our way the new Melanesian way, eating nails and shitting corkscrews.

I think that this article reflects pretty accurately the delusional state of those administering much of PNG's judicial system.

The author mistakes the abuse of the judicial process for the proper administration of justice.

Dr Schram has been subjected to a perverted process whereby the onus of proof has effectively been reversed, leaving him forced to prove his innocence.

It is always open to a judge to dismiss an action because he or she forms the view that the claims made have no merit or are merely vexatious.

Given reports of the judge's scathing comments about the plaintiff's inability to offer any evidence to support their claims this option was certainly available, yet it has not been pursued.

References to getting Interpol to drag Dr Schram back to PNG to face its version of justice border on the bizarre.

Just what does the author think Interpol exists to do? Further the ambitions of cynical, process abusing shysters such as those pursuing Dr Schram?

The ugly truth is that this entire fiasco has been a monstrous abuse of process that has, in practice, denied Dr Schram both due process and natural justice.

As has repeatedly been pointed out, it would have been very, very easy for any competent authority to confirm the validity or otherwise of Dr Schram's qualifications, yet this was never done.

The take home message from this case is that PNG's judicial system can be easily abused by those determined to do so.

It is another example of the maladministration, incompetence and corruption that is a rampaging cancer within virtually all PNG's important institutions.

No academic administrator ought to now be in any doubt that any attempt to impose necessary reforms upon the management and direction of PNG's institutions of higher learning will be resisted by those who feel it is against their interests, including by using spurious charges to harass and intimidate.

This case will do enormous damage to PNG's interests in both the short and long term.

Quite how it can hope to attract the services of top class academics in the future is beyond my comprehension.

Questions remain as to what investigative prelude was begun and achieved by police (and other authorised officers) in establishing verification of matters presented in Court.

If it can be shown that removal and withholding of the Schram passport lacked due process, question is as to what extent of malpractice or insufficiency occurred, such that the PNG government is brought to bring corrective measures and actions among its appointees.

As rational as it may seem to explain these facets of jurisprudence in a manner befitting the gravity of legal circumstance, there is little if any reference to that which even Blind Freddy would appreciate forms the matters of injustice afforded Dr Schram over past months and years.

By the way, have formal charges been brought against the former Vice Chancellor and former council members for official corruption as recommended by the Sevua inquiry?
__________

It seems not, Gabriel - KJ

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)