Who is Hudson Ramatlap protecting?

By SAM BASIL
Bulolo MP

I refer to the comments by the first legislative counsel, Mr Hudson
Ramatlap, and note with great concern that a person who is supposed to
protect the independence of Parliament legislative process is now
making outlandish comments in support of the contemptuous behaviour of
the Prime Minister.
His statement is not only misleading, but calculated to undermine the
seriousness of this matter.
This is not just another political scoring issue here it is an issue
of national importance.
The first misleading statement is his reference that Belden Namah and
Dr PukaTemu whose names are also on the Gazettal Notice.
Their names are not there.
I can pass a copy to him if he so pleases.
I know he has a copy of the notice but deliberately wanted to mention
their names.
This is contemptuous in itself as he is trying to water down the
seriousness of this case and the implications it has on the judiciary.
Secondly, Mr.Ramatlap as a lawyer knows that an appointment does not
take effect until it is gazetted.
It is trite law that a purported performance of duty by a minister
without having his appointment gazetted is null and void.
It can also be noted on the gazettal notice that Mr Pruaitch's
gazettal does not mention him as Finance and Treasury Minister to show
that he is a finance minister suspended on full pay, or to confirm
that this is just a republishing of the original Gazettal dated 13th
September 2007 as claimed by Mr Ramatlap.
Instead it is a new portfolio (State Minister assisting PM) and that
portfolio takes effect upon gazettal.
This is also deliberately stated by Mr Ramatlap to further confuse the
public of the serious nature of the matter.
Mr Pruaitch and Mr Ramatlap are alleging that the decision of the
Supreme Court does not stop the Prime Minister from appointing a
Minister.
In other words, they are claiming that the Prime Minister had
unfettered powers to appoint a Minister, even in contempt of the
Supreme Court Order.
How sensible is that?
I have sought opinion on the Supreme Court decision and whilst the
decision does not state the details of being suspended on pay, which
is left to be an administrative matter, the decision in no uncertain
terms declares Mr Pruaitch automatically suspended as a leader.
Mr Pruaitch is not attending Parliament sitting or attending NEC
decisions which is the effect of him being suspended as a "leader".
It follows that Mr Pruaitch's justification of his new portfolio can
be said that he wants to be a minister without the name "leader"
because under the name leader, he is suspended.
Can the Judiciary see how important it is to protect its independence
or continue to subject itself from political interference?
I am concerned because we are setting double standards and weakening
the institutions that we look up to as our beacon of hope.
Where is the rule of law?
The Prime Minister is in clear contempt and should be cited for
contempt of court.
I reiterate that this is not the first time that the Prime Minister did this.
He is known for interfering and scandalising the judiciary.
We cannot allow that to happen.
I do not need to influence the judiciary as they are learned people
who know the legal implications of this issue.
What I am saying here is my concern as a national leader to protect
the independence of the judiciary.

Prime Minister in Contempt of Court again.

By SAM BASIL
Bulolo MP

The Prime Minister caused the publication of the national ministers
constituting the National Executive Council and their respective
responsibilities in the Nation al Gazette on Thursday 3rd March 2011,
National Gazette No. G57 of 2011.
In the publication, particularly Schedule 30 provides that Patrick
Pruaitch as the Minister for State Assisting the Prime Minister.
This is in direct contempt of the orders of the Supreme Court in the
case of Pruaitch v Manek [2010] PGSC 7;SCl052 (31 May 2010) where the
Supreme Court declared that the leader was automatically suspended
when the charges were served on the Tribunal.
The highest Court of the land constituting Kirriwom J, Gavan-Nanu and
Davani JJ declared that the leader was suspended forthwith.
How could the PM then appoint him to be a minister of his cabinet?
The Tribunal is yet to hear the case against Mr. Pruaitch and as far
as I could recall, there was no court order setting aside the Supreme
Court Orders.
Until the Tribunal finally determines the allegations and unless a
five-man bench of the Supreme Court overturns the decision of the
Supreme Court in the above case, the orders are still effective.
Any action in derogation of that decision is clearly contempt.
The appointment and publication in the National Gazette is a clear
case for contempt on the face of court.
This is a clear disrespect of the court orders and so I urge the
registrar of the National and Supreme Court or the Chief Justice to
cite the Prime Minister Sir Michael Thomas Somare for contempt.
If the PM can act in contempt of the decision of the highest court on
the land then what is there for this country?
This is not the first time the PM had interfered and defeated the
course of justice.
In 1979, Nahau Rooney who was then the Minister for Justice was
imprisoned for interfering with the judiciary citing her for contempt.
Sir Michael was the Prime Minister at that time and released her on
license after she had served one day of her sentence which prompted
the mass resignation of five judges including the Chief Justice.
This was the first ever constitutional crisis only four years after
Independence.
I do not know whether the same can be done.
If the judiciary is adamant to protect its independence and most
importantly, its orders, I suggest the judges should resign.
If the PM cannot obey the orders, what good is there for the
judiciary to hold on?
Judiciary is seen as the last beacon of hope.
People do not want to accept the decisions of the National Parliament
and the executive government and are always going to court and when
such a decision is
handed down, they accept it.
However, with such disrespect at the highest, it destroys everything
that the Judiciary holds on.
The damage this veteran MP and PM has done so far is far too great