The Supreme Court has allowed a landowner group of Napanapa in the Central province to challenge a decision of the National Court that removed them as recognized landowners.
Chief Justice Sir Gibb’s Salika, sitting as a single Supreme Court judge, granted leave to Pastor Hanua Gadiki and his Rokurokuna sub-tribe of Koita to challenge the 2012 decision of the National Court that removed them as the landowners of the customary land described as DA5 – a land where the Napanapa PNG LNG refinery is situated.
Pastor Gadiki and his Rokurokuna tribe of Koita were initially recognized as the legitimate landowners of the DA5 land by the Provincial Land Court in 2010.
However, the opposing party- the Kuriu Incorporated Land Group- led by a Daure Gabe Pundi, applied to the National Court to review the decision of the Provincial Land Court.
The National Court on July 18, 2012, ruled upheld the review Pundi and the Kuriu Incorporated Land Group and declared them as the principal traditional landowners of the DA5 Napanapa Land, replacing Pastor Hanua and his Rokurokuna sub-tribe of Kotia who were the initial principal traditional landowners of the subject land.
The National Court during the ruling, did not refer the matter back to the Provincial Land Court or the Local Land Court to rehear and redetermine the traditional land dispute.
This prompted Pastor Hanua to apply for leave in the Supreme Court to review the decision of the National Court.
He argued that the National Court had erred in law and breached Section 3 and 26 of the Land Dispute Settlement Act in determining or declaring the ownership of the traditional land in dispute when it has no jurisdiction to do so.
Pastor Hanua through his lawyer submitted during the leave application that there were case laws that supports the contention and that leave should be granted for the full Supreme Court to hear and determine the substantive issue.
The questions posed to the court include;
Whether the National Court has jurisdiction to determine ownership of traditional land or determine who the principal landowner is?
And whether it is fair and just to allow the decision of the National Court to stand, contrary to Section 3(1) and 26 of the Land Dispute Act and the Supreme Court decision in Louis Lucian Siu vs Wasime Land Group Incoporated, and Simon Ekanda vs Hon Pila Niningi, Attorney General of Papua New Guinea.
The Chief Justice after assessing the submissions, was satisfied with the grounds raised by the applicant (Pastor Hanua), noting that the application raised arguable grounds and therefore granted the leave sought.
This means the substantive issue will go before a full Supreme Court bench to be heard and determined.
Leave a Reply