PNG Ombudsman wants Leadership Code reformed.

Updated September 2, 2010 17:04:49

Papua New Guinea's Ombudsman Commission says the national parliament is hampering its efforts to legislate reforms of the country's Leadership Code. The PNG Ombudsman, John Nero, says there is a loophole in the legislation that means leaders who resign cannot be prosecuted and punished for offences they committed while in office. He says the Ombudsman Commission also wants tougher penalties for leaders under its proposed reforms.

Presenter: Pius Bonjui
Speaker: John Nero, PNG Ombudsman

NERO: Since the inception of Ombudsman Commission and the enforcement of the Leadership Code functions which were given to it, there have been loopholes that have come up from time to time, starting with a crucial one that came up in 1980, in which the Supreme Court said if a leader were to resign from office the Leadership Code and all other enabling laws that apply to him weren't going to apply. So which means the commissioner and anybody for that matter loses jurisdiction, and he becomes a totally free man. That was one. There were also other loopholes that we found, including issues such as penalties being insufficient, and the dismissal period being not enough and so on. Those were the kind of recommendations that the committee was furnished a report by the commission for them to look at and bring before parliament for amendment. Those to date have not come about as we have expected. That is why I have in that paper said the parliament continues to hamper the work of the Ombudsman Commission so far as the enforcement of the Leadership Code goes.

BONJUI: The composition of leadership tribunal you said that the present system is just magistrate or chief justice, whatever selection of members of the tribunal. You would like to have permanent tribunal members. What background would you see these members would be coming from?

NERO: The idea of having a permanent tribunal is from our perspective a very convenient and meritorious one because for many reasons. One being that the longer it took to setup areas in tribunal, the charges keep hanging in the air, so people make up their own mind about whether he is culpable or not. So one other thing that the commission would like to see, which parliament must try to make amendments is that there should be a permanent leadership tribunal setup, meaning as soon as a leader is referred for prosecution as a result of the commission's investigations, there should be people readily available from the judiciary, meaning persons that have retired as judges and magistrates, and professional people such as accountants, lawyers, engineers, and even successful businesspeople or even the members of the clergy could be drawn from the church's council for example. And these persons must have passed what we call a fit and proper persons test, and be at short notice called to form a leadership tribunal so that they can process matters that have been referred to that tribunal, and then people can carry on with life as usual having processed those matters. So yeah, the group of persons that we would like to form members of the tribunal are the ones that I have outlined.

BONJUI: The provision of the Proceeds of Crime Act where a guilty verdict is recorded, how would you like it to see the recovery of stolen assets in country and abroad?

NERO: That's a pretty good one because in recent times there is a growing perception that leaders if you like have been sending much of their country's wealth, ill-gotten ones out to other parts of the world, maybe in Australia, maybe in New Zealand and so on. And so when there is a guilty verdict by a competent court of law, what should fall into place is that public prosecutor for example should liaise with the police in the first instance, and they should invoke certain provisions of the Proceeds of Crime Act, and people such as forensic accountants, Bank of Papua New Guinea, whatever relevant securities commission for example, and Interpol even could all assist in recovering those stolen assets if you like. So yeah, many, many a times stolen assets, stolen funds are actually not been recovered. So one of the things that we would like to see happen is that there should be a concerted effort by everyone, and where there is a guilty verdict by a competent court of law, there should be a mechanism in place to ensure that there is recovery put into motion almost immediately. And the vehicle already we have is the Proceeds of Crime Act, which is already in operation and people need to give it life by ensuring that its provisions are invoked.

BONJUI: Looking at now the penalties imposed upon whoever is found guilty, you wanted the penalty to depend on the gravity and seriousness of the tribunal's finding?

NERO: Yeah well the three year period as it is, is the maximum penalty that you can get under the penalty regime that is available if you have misconducted yourself in office. But many people are of the view that three years is insufficient because the degree of culpability sometimes is quite high, and stolen funds for example, if you still a million kina you go and enjoy that in three years, and you are a free man to come and contest or be appointed a public official. So it is quite important that we give some reconciliation to the seriousness of the crime, as well as a corresponding penalty that is befitting the level of seriousness of the charge, yeah.