Category: courts

  • COURT DISMISS ALL CHARGES AGAINST POLYE.

    The ICAC case against former Kandep MP Don Polye collapsed in the Waigani District Court yesterday after a magistrate found there was insufficient evidence to support any of the allegations brought against him.

    Senior Magistrate Paul Puri Nii dismissed all charges laid by the Independent Commission Against Corruption, ruling that the evidence presented failed to establish a sufficient basis for Polye to be committed to stand trial before a higher court.

    The decision effectively brings to an end criminal proceedings that accused the former parliamentarian of attempting to pervert the course of justice, conspiring to defeat justice, and official corruption.

    With the assistance of top criminal lawyer, Edward Sasingian, Polye walked out of the courtroom smiling.

    The court examined whether the prosecution had presented enough credible and reliable evidence to justify a trial and after reviewing the case files and materials tendered by investigators, Magistrate Nii concluded that the evidence fell short of the legal threshold required for committal.

    The court found that the prosecution had not produced direct and reliable evidence capable of substantiating the charges. It also noted the absence of sufficient corroborative material linking Polye to the alleged offences.

    The ruling means the court was not satisfied that a properly instructed tribunal could reasonably convict based on the evidence presented.

    The charges had attracted public interest due to Polye’s prominence in national politics and his long career in public service. However, the magistrate stressed that allegations alone were not enough and that criminal charges must be supported by credible evidence before a defendant can be ordered to stand trial.

    The decision highlights the importance of thorough investigations and the need for prosecuting agencies to meet evidentiary requirements before bringing serious corruption related matters before the courts.

    Loading

  • Ombudsman Commission escalates Chief Justice referral to NEC

    The Ombudsman Commission has escalated its pursuit of Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika by referring the matter directly to the National Executive Council despite the Acting Public Prosecutor dismissing all allegations against him for lack of evidence.

    Chief Ombudsman Richard Pagen confirmed the move after the Commission invoked constitutional powers allowing it to proceed independently where it believes a matter has not been properly referred for prosecution.

    The latest development follows Acting Public Prosecutor Helen Roalakona’s decision to drop all 50 misconduct allegations against Sir Gibbs after finding insufficient evidence to refer him to a leadership tribunal.

    In a statement outlining its reasons, the Ombudsman Commission said it had “considered the matter and decided in its deliberate judgment” under Section 29(2) of the Constitution and Section 27(3) of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership to refer the case directly to the NEC for the appointment of a tribunal.

    The Commission argued that under the law it has authority to step in if the Public Prosecutor “fails to prosecute the matter within a reasonable period” or if the Commission believes the matter “has not been properly referred to the appropriate tribunal.”

    It said the NEC, chaired by the Prime Minister, has constitutional responsibility to determine whether allegations against the Chief Justice warrant investigation by a tribunal.

    Citing the Supreme Court Reference No. 3 of 2005, the Commission said the Constitution provides distinct grounds for the removal of law officers, including misconduct in office under the Leadership Code.

    The statement further noted that Section 179 of the Constitution empowers the NEC to appoint a tribunal if it is “satisfied that the question of removal from office of the Chief Justice should be investigated.”

    The Commission maintained that questions surrounding the referral process remained unresolved and informed Sir Gibbs of its decision to invoke its constitutional powers.

    The referral to the Chairman of the National Executive Council was formally delivered yesterday morning, setting the stage for the NEC to decide whether a tribunal should be established to investigate the allegations against the country’s top judge.

    Loading

  • PUBLIC PROSECUTOR DROPS ALL MISCONDUCT ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE CHIEF JUSTICE

    Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika has been cleared of 50 misconduct allegations after the Office of the Public Prosecutor declared there was insufficient evidence to refer him to a Leadership Tribunal.

    Acting Public Prosecutor Helen Roalakona announced the decision at a press conference this afternoon, bringing an end to months of scrutiny following a referral by the Ombudsman Commission.

    Ms Roalakona said investigators closely examined the allegations, including claims relating to money received by the Chief Justice, but found the funds were derived from legitimate income sources that had already been declared in his annual statements.

    She said the evidence presented by the Ombudsman Commission did not meet the threshold required for a tribunal referral.

    The decision means Sir Gibbs will not face further leadership proceedings over the allegations.

    The Office of the Public Prosecutor said its assessment was based strictly on the evidence available and the requirements of the law.

    Loading

  • COURT REFUSES BID TO UNFREEZE K224 MILION OK TEDI TRUST FUNDS

    The National Court has refused an application by the Ok Tedi Fly River Development Foundation Limited to revoke restraining orders freezing more than K214 million held in three bank accounts amid allegations of misappropriation and dealings involving suspected criminal property.

    In a recent decision delivered in Waigani, Justice Susan Berrigan ruled there were reasonable grounds to suspect the funds were linked to offences under the Criminal Code, including misappropriation and dealing with property reasonably suspected of being criminal property.

    The case arose from an application by the Acting Public Prosecutor under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2022 seeking to preserve funds held in Credit Bank and Westpac accounts operated by the foundation. The restrained sums included K8.8 million, K15.5 million and nearly K190 million.

    The court heard that the funds originated from the Western Province Community Mine Continuation Agreement dividend trust account established to hold Ok Tedi Mining dividends for the benefit of Western Province communities.

    Justice Berrigan said investigations revealed large sums were transferred between various accounts without evidence of ministerial approval or compliance with trust conditions requiring the money to fund development projects.

    “At the time of the application I was satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to suspect that the monies held in each of the three bank accounts identified above were instruments of the offence of misappropriation,” Justice Berrigan said.

    The foundation argued the money lawfully belonged to it following National Court orders in 2018 appointing its trustee of the funds. It also relied on a 2024 criminal case in which several defendants were acquitted over related allegations.

    However, Justice Berrigan ruled the earlier criminal decision was not binding in the proceeds of crime proceedings.

    “The POCA specifically empowers the Public Prosecutor to bring proceedings seeking confiscation of tainted property both related to and separate from any criminal proceedings,” she said.

    The judge also criticised the way millions of kina were moved through multiple accounts and withdrawn through cash transactions, directors’ fees, consultancy payments and allowances.

    “In a little over a year, between January 2025 and January 2026, more than K10 million of the balance of the ANZ Trust Account was spent from three different accounts,” the judge observed.

    Justice Berrigan further found there was an obvious drafting error in Section 57 of the Proceeds of Crime Act and interpreted the law to ensure the restraining orders remained valid while confiscation proceedings were before the court.

    She said courts should use “good sense to remedy the situation” where legislation produces absurd results.

    The court ultimately dismissed the foundation’s application, ruling the restraining orders had not lapsed and should remain in force pending further proceedings.

    Loading

  • Yafai fights back, appealing his conviction

    Former Deputy Secretary of Finance, Jacob Yafai, has launched an appeal against his conviction and 22-year prison sentence handed down by Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika earlier this month.

    Yafai was found guilty of unlawfully approving K41.8 million in payments to Paul Paraka Lawyers without verifying the legitimacy of the claims between 2011 and 2012. He was convicted on four counts of misappropriation and one count of abuse of office.

    According to the appeal filed by Yafai’s lawyer, Edward Sasingian of Sasingian Lawyers, it argues that the trial judge erred in both law and fact, and that Yafai was not personally responsible for the controversial K41.8 million payment.

    “The main contention is that Mr. Yafai did not authorize or process the payments to Paul Paraka Lawyers. He was not the officer directed to verify those claims,” Mr Sasingian said.

    During trial, the National Court found that Yafai acted dishonestly by failing to verify the Paraka payment when directed by the then Finance Secretary, the late Steven Gibson. However, in his appeal, Yafai will argue that no such direction was ever issued to him and that the verification responsibility fell under a different deputy secretary — Strategic Management, not his own portfolio as Deputy Secretary for Operations.

    According to recent Post-Courier report, the  appeal argues that in all the evidence before the court, Yafai was never directed by the Secretary for Finance to verify the claim by Paraka Lawyers.

    It is also argued that the trial Judge erred in mixed fact and law when he did not make a definitive finding of dishonesty against the appellant in accordance with the subjective and objective test and the established legal principles of dishonesty.

    Further, it is argued that the primary  judge erred in mixed facts and law when he excluded vital evidence in his decision, and there was apprehension of bias in accepting the evidence of the then Financen Minister and current Prime Minister, James Marape.

    These and other crucial grounds would be put before the Higher Court for it’s deliberation.

    Loading

  • Sri Lankan judge join PNG judiciary

    A Sri Lankan judge has officially joined the judiciary of Papua New Guinea, taking his oath as a judge of the Supreme and National Courts during a ceremony held at Government House in Konedobu this afternoon.

    The swearing-in was officiated by the Acting Governor-General and Chief Justice of Papua New Guinea, Sir Gibbs Salika.

    In a solemn ceremony steeped in judicial tradition, the new judge took his oath of office and allegiance before Sir Gibbs Salika, pledging to serve with integrity, impartiality, and dedication to upholding the Constitution and laws of Papua New Guinea.

    The new judge joins a distinguished panel of justices serving both the Supreme and National Courts of Papua New Guinea — the country’s highest institutions for interpreting the law and safeguarding justice.

    He is expected to commence his duties immediately, presiding over cases in both the appellate and trial jurisdictions of the courts.

    This latest appointment underscores the judiciary’s ongoing efforts to maintain efficiency, integrity, and credibility in the administration of justice across the nation.

    Loading

  • Nomane allowed to challenge Opposition Leadership

    Chuave MP and Opposition strongman James Nomane was allowed to challenge the Opposition Leadership.


    A full five-men Supreme Court bench unanimously granted Mr Nomane standing in his Section 18  Application to become the Opposition Leader.


    Nomane challenged the leadership of the Opposition under Douglas Tomuriesa, who was recognised by the Speaker as the Leader of the Opposition.


    Nomane claimed that he had the support of 10 out of the 18 Opposition MPs, which he argued was sufficient under the applicable law (namely, Section 64(2) of the Organic Law on the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates (OLIPPAC)) to be recognised as Leader of the Opposition.


    Separately, he also challenged constitutional and parliamentary decisions regarding the motion of no confidence and amendments to Section 145 of the Constitution (relating to no-confidence motions) via the courts.

    Loading

  • Yafai sentence to 22 years in prison

    The National Court has just sentenced  Jacob Yafai to 22 years imprisonment.
    The sentence was handed down by Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika at the Waigani National Court.
    Jacob Yafai is the former deputy Secretary of the department of Finance and hails from Karapia village in Yangoru-Saussia district, East Sepik Province.
    He was charged with multiple counts relating to misuse of public funds: four counts of misappropriation and one count of abuse of office.
    The misappropriation relates to payments totalling K41.8 million made via the Finance Department to the law firm Paul Paraka Lawyers, during the years 2012-2013.
    The court noted that Yafai had failed to comply with instructions for him to verify the claims before settling.
    The Chief Justice therefore sentenced him 20 years for all the misappropriation changes and 2 years for abuse of office.
    The court made those four sentences concurrent so Yafai will serve a total of 22 years in prison.

    Loading

  • Yafai sentence to 22 years in prison

    The National Court has just sentenced  Jacob Yafai to 22 years imprisonment.
    The sentence was handed down by Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika at the Waigani National Court.
    Jacob Yafai is the former deputy Secretary of the department of Finance and hails from Karapia village in Yangoru-Saussia district, East Sepik Province.
    He was charged with multiple counts relating to misuse of public funds: four counts of misappropriation and one count of abuse of office.
    The misappropriation relates to payments totalling K41.8 million made via the Finance Department to the law firm Paul Paraka Lawyers, during the years 2012-2013.
    The court noted that Yafai had failed to comply with instructions for him to verify the claims before settling.
    The Chief Justice therefore sentenced him 20 years for all the misappropriation changes and 2 years for abuse of office.
    The court made those four sentences concurrent so Yafai will serve a total of 22 years in prison.

    Loading

  • Supreme Court allow review of Napanapa land issue

    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.

    Loading