Academia Nomad

The PNG MPs have refrained from engaging in the debates around Justin Tketchenko calling Papua New Guineans primitive animals, after having the same people pay for him and his entourage’s trip to the UK. The silence had many wondering why their MPs are silent (with a few exceptions). Alan Bird, the Governor of East Sepik Province explained why he has been reluctant to publicly engage in this debate. Alan Bird’s rational may explain why the MPs of PNG are silent on this issue.

By Alan Bird (via Facebook)

My priority is funding of services and development for the Sepik people

I see some PNGans criticise my stand on the saga involving the Foreign Affairs Minister. I was one of several MPs who privately asked the Minister to do the honorable thing.

All MPs are equal. None of us are greater than the other. So if certain districts elect MPs of different values and educational qualifications, it means nothing. A bus driver and an MP with a PhD are both equal in the house.

I don’t agree with big delegations going overseas. In fact I have withdrawn from many large delegations going overseas because of their size. I will not go overseas on a joy ride. Thats my personal choice out of respect for my own Sepik people. I have zero right to speak of that to other MPs. They were elected by their own people which makes them equal to me.

As a back bencher in a government, I don’t make policy. I have been part of a small group in government that has been going against what we consider bad policy. It is not easy when 5 or 6 MPs vote against the whole house on issues, but some of us do so consistently.

Our people elect all kinds of leaders, then they expect people like me to hold your leaders accountable. You had the chance to vote them out, you didn’t.

Many PNGans stopped voting leaders with principles a long time ago. Today, people vote for roads, bridges and cargo delivery. The best MP in PNG is judged on how many projects they bring to their electorates. Now you complain about principles and there is an expectation that some of us will do the work for you? Where were you during the elections?

If we forgo principles for roads, bridges and cargo then why do we expect something else?

My priority is to make sure my people get our budget on time and not cut constantly because of my different principles.

I walk a fine line, either I impose my high minded values and risk having funding to East Sepik cut or to stay out of issues that do not concern me so that my own, very marginalised people can get the services they deserve.

I don’t have the luxury most people have. Our politics is cut throat. My principles if pushed too hard, will have a negative impact on a million Sepiks. That’s too high a price for me to pay.

When I went against Government for two years, I saw the impact on my Sepik people. Its not fair on them.

So my advise to PNGans, please take responsibility and hold your own MPs accountable. It is not the job of the Governor of ESP to hold your MP accountable. I was not elected to make all PNGans happy, I was elected to make sure the connection between Waigani and Wewak is working well.

I make no apology for trying to do right by my own electors. Don’t ask my opinion of an MP that someone else elected based on their values.

Comments from Academia Nomad

This is both sensible and sad. Parliament in a democracy has three roles: make laws and policies, provide representation and “hold the executive accountable”. The fact that leaders like Alan Bird are hesitant to speak their minds, that is, hold the executive accountable is a sad reality of PNG politics. Because if he does, his constituents will suffer from withdrawal of funds. Our executive and the PM in particular, have developed a strong control on the allocation of state resources that the executive and the PM dictate who gets what.

To the point where leaders like Alan Bird is hesitant to perform his constitutional duty of holding the executive accountable. We can blame the people of not electing good leaders, but the blame lies on the government patronisingly controlling MP behave by controlling the funds.

There are two ways around this: restrict MPs functions to law making, and leave service deliver to the bureaucracy. Second, pass Constituency Development Fund Act, which specifically states the amount and timing of the allocation to MPs. This removes the control of the funds from PM, because what happens is the PM, through the relevant departments, either delays or underpays the funds allocated to the MPs critical of the government. The rest is paid towards the end when the accounts are about to be closed, so the MPs cannot access it. By early following year the funds revert back to the national coffers.

The few MPs who spoke on the issue, including Alan Bird are summarised below:

1. James Marape

Accepts JT’s apology and asks for forgiveness

2. Alan Bird

Privately communicated his people’s views to the PM and government caucus but says it’s the allocation of ministries is PM’s prerogative and therefore accepts PM’s decision (calls JT one of the hardest working individuals).

3. Kessy Sawong

Offended by JT’s statements but calls forgives JT after his apology and asks the same from PNGeans.

4. Belden Namah

Calls it unacceptable and demands JT to resign as foreign affairs minister

5. Deputy opposition leader Douglas Tomuriesa

Calls for Ombudsman Commission to investigate claims.

6. The Opposition leader Joseph Lelang calls the categorisation insulting, and further calls for prime minister to fire JT as foreign minister.
7. Luther Wenge

Calls for JT’s citizenship to be revoked, and for him to leave PNG. Promised to raise it in Parliament

8. The rest of the MPs are silent.

The least our MPs can do is call for the PM to sack JT as foreign affairs minister. He cannot represent the people who considers primitives on the international stage.

We have a parliament that is trapped. And a reckless executive. The people continue to suffer whilst MPs and their families take overseas trips to places like UK. Good MPs blame the people for voting wrong MPs whilst refusing to hold the executive accountable.

Where will the break for good and responsible government come from?

Many have called for Justin Tketchenko (JT) to resign a Port Moresby South Electorate, or resign as the foreign affairs minister, whilst other have called for have his passport revoked and have him deported. J

T is a naturalised PNG citizen, originally from Australia, who moved to PNG as a gardener in the early 2000s. One cannot become a member of parliament if he holds a dual citizenship. It is therefore safe to assume JT has only one passport – the PNG one, after he became a naturalised citizen.

However, calling someone “primitive animal” doesn’t qualify as a grounds to have his passport revoked. He is a PNG citizen, and has equal rights before the law to seek judicial review and retain his citizenship if revoked. In hindsight, some are probably wishing JT wasn’t given the citizenship status.

Now back to why it’s a good thing JT hasn’t resigned yet as member of parliament.

If JT resigns, the Ombudsman Commission (OC) cannot investigate him for potential abuse of funds, as well as unprofessional conduct when he referred to Papua New Guineans as “primitive animals.” By law, the OC can only investigate people occupying public office, not those who cease to hold the office. If JT resigns, he automatically becomes a “private” citizen, evading the ambit of the OC.

One can lay a complaint to the office of the fraud squad, a division within the police department, to investigate claims of abuse of funds, if JT resigns.

However, the fraud squad cannot investigate unprofessional conduct such as calling someone primitive animals. This is because the fraud squad is set up to investigate criminals offences, and generic categorisation of another person as primitive animal is not a criminal offence.

The OC on the other hand, is charged with ensuring that leaders and public servants strive to maintain professional and ethical standards. So the fact that JT called Papua New Guineans primitives or animals, the use of these words makes it an ethical issue worth investigating.

Many Papua New Guineans have submitted their complaints to the Ombudsman Commission to investigation JT and his entourage.

JT is trapped. He is too prideful and egotistic (all PNG MPs are) so he is not planning to resign. He stepped aside to let things cool down, and the US president’s visit to proceed. He is hopping to return in either the foreign affairs minister or in other ministerial capacity. But the more he remains a MP, he risks been investigated by the OC.

The best outcome for those wanting to be held accountable, is to hope he doesn’t resign. And also hoping the OC do conduct the investigation, that this doesn’t become one of those issues the OC neglects. The sheer numbers of complaints should make the OC take notice.

Justin Tketchenko has stepped aside as foreign affairs minister after sustained calls for him to resign. This comes after he branded Papua New Guineans “primitive animals” for criticising his daughter’s TikTok videos showing lavish trip to the UK funded by tax payers money.

Context is important here because it is rare for a government minister to step aside.

First, it is possible to argue that Justin Tketchenko (JT) wouldn’t have stepped aside if it wasn’t for the visit of US President Joe Biden. In an earlier interview with ABC, JT said he was not resigning. The PNG Prime Minister James Marape asked the the nation to “forgive” JT after he apologised. A day after stating he that he stepped aside. It is possible prime minister asked JT to step aside to avoid further protests during the Biden visit, who meets with the Pacific Island Forum leaders in Port Moresby on 22 May 2023.

Don’t think for one second that JT was doing the honorable thing by stepping aside after calling the people he represents in the international arena as foreign affairs minister “primitive animals”.

Second, the rise of social media and its impact on shaping politics in PNG cannot be understated. A friend of mine who does research on how social media shapes politics, or digital politics, told me that because of the sheer numbers of PNG Facebook users, if they focus on one thing, it dominates social media sites in the Pacific. On every social media site, the JT saga dominated the conversation. The story about JT’s trip was first shared on social media before print media and ABC picked it up. Social media provides wider coverage and access to get information out to the public. It is decentralised in that no one institution controls the narrative. Going forward, social media will continue to shape PNG politics significantly.

Third, the student-led protest has once again showed that it plays an important role in PNG politics. On 11 May 2023, the students from the University of Papua New Guinea protested on the streets, calling for JT to step down, with the “We Are Not Primitives” banners. In my view, this protest broke the camel’s back, and forced JT to step aside. In PNG, the student-led protests usually gets the political elite’s attention. Protests organised by the different unions and NGOs never gets nationwide support like the student-led protests do. There is a pride among the rural majority when the students lead the protests. About 85% of Papua New Guineans reside in rural areas, many of them illiterate. The students see themselves as the voice of these rural majority. The University of Papua New Guinea students have always been at the forefront of these protests. However, since 2016, the student representative council (SRC) was suspended following a boycott of classes against the O’Neill government. The government reacted with suspending the SRC. The SRC remained suspended for five years. The suspension was only uplifted in 2022. During this period, there was no nation wide protest against the government despite unions and NGOs still open in PNG. This is the first protest since 2016, and it was led by the students.

Fourth is the controversy itself: JT, a white man, calling Papua New Guineans “primitive animals”. Less than 50 years ago, Australia was ruling PNG as a paternalistic colonial master. As the controversy raged on, I was reading Ben Reilly’s article in 1999 on the historical explanations of weak political party systems in PNG, and wondered if deep down, PNG still holds a deep resentment against Australians. JT is originally from Australia.

When the first Papua New Guineans were elected into the House of Assembly in 1972, they were deprived of any real power. Real political power remained in the hands of the colonial administration, and ultimately with the Australian government, which retained a power of veto over House of Assembly legislation. This led to an imbalance between the executive and legislative roles of the House of Assembly: a parliament that facilitated representation, but had little or no real power.

Paul Hasluck called the House of Assembly a glorified debating chamber, “a place for the expression of opinion,” than a functioning legislature (Reilly, 1999).

Elected members predominantly saw themselves as “apprentice politicians rather than as parliamentarians elected to govern the country” (Reilly, 1999).

By branding Papua New Guineans primitives, Justin Tkatchenko consciously or unconsciously reverted to the racial superiority mindset of the colonial administration. If an indigenous Papua New Guinean MP called his own people “primitive animals”, I wonder if he would have attracted the same level of criticism.

Finally, JT is a controversial politician, with a ton of baggage. He was the APEC minister in 2018 when PNG hosted the APEC meeting. He bought 40 Masaratis for world leaders to use, each cost about PGK1 million. Due to allegations of corruption around the purchase of Masaratis, no world leader used the Masaratis. About K40 million worth of Masaratis are not kept in a shed in Port Moresby rusting away. This issue has never been investigated. Many wanted to see JT face the law for a long time.

A confluence of factors explain why JT steeped aside. PNG politicians rarely step aside, so you will see PNG social media celebrating this little gain.

The next two articles will look at why happens next now that JT has stepped aside, and why the silence from PNG leaders on the JT saga.

About 150 of you shared the post on Academia Nomad Facebook page about the wastage of resources on King Charles’ coronation. That’s the awareness bit. The second part is to lodge an actual complaint to the Ombudsman Commission by just making a call, writing a letter to the OC, visiting their office or filing a form on their website and emailing it.

Below are steps on how to do it. We need at least 50-100 of you to inundate the OC with the same complaint so the OC can take notice.

But first, why should the OC be required to act?

Short answer is: Because it’s their job!

OC’s function involves investigating complaints about the administrative actions and decisions of government departments and agencies; to investigate the conduct of PNG leaders and; to investigate complaints about discriminatory practice.

What issues can the OC investigate?

Any COMPLAINTS against leaders (politicians, SOE heads, departmental heads, provincial and district leaders, bureaucrats, universities, statutory authority etc).

The only entities OC cannot investigate are:

➢ Discriminatory practices by private bodies;
➢ Complaints about private individuals or companies;
➢ Complaints about decisions of the Court.

For these three areas, you can go to the Public Solicitor.

How to make a complaint to the OC?

Complaint can be lodged either by telephone or letter, or calling in personally at the Ombudsman Commission head office in Deloitte Tower, Port Moresby or at the regional office in Mt Hagen, Western Highlands Province, Kokopo, East New Britain Province and Lae Morobe Province. You can also email it. There’s a form on OC website. Download, fill and email it to OC. OC email address can be found on their website.

What happens when you make a complaint?

1. When you contact the Ombudsman Commission, an officer will record all the relevant information about your complaint.
2. This officer will check whether the Commission has the power to investigate your complaint. If it cannot investigate, it usually refers your case to an agency that can investigate.
3. If the commission approve your case for investigation, it may ask you for more supporting information such as letters or other documents.
4. The ombudsman commission will contact the relevant agency or department to hear what they have to say about your complaint. Many complaints are resolved at this stage.
5. If the course of the problem is not clear and no solution is offered, it will investigate further. It has the power to call on the Heads of Department to produce all files, documents and relevant papers relating to your complaint. It can summon any person to give evidence in connection with the investigation.
6. It provides opportunity for anyone against whom adverse findings are likely to be made to be heard and defend themselves. This can take time.
7. Once the OC is satisfied that it has found out as much as it can about the case, the Commission writes a final report containing findings, opinions and recommendations about the matter.
8. When the investigation is complete, the investigating officer will write to you to tell you the outcome.

How long will the Ombudsman Commission take to attend to your complaint?

It is hard to say how quickly the commission will be able to resolve to your complaint. It will depend on how many complaints the OC need to attend to, how complex your case is and how much cooperation OC receives from government and agencies.

Will the information you give to the Commission become public knowledge?

All information obtained by the Ombudsman Commission through its investigation is confidential, even detail of the complainant are confidential. This to ensure that its investigation are not jeopardised. The Commission however, will only reveal information that it believes is necessary to its investigations.

All officers of the Commission have taken an oath to promise that they will keep secret all information relating to cases it is investigating.

Can the Ombudsman Commission enforce its recommendations?

The Ombudsman Commission requires the department or agency to report back with the actions they will take to address the Commission’s recommendations. If the department or agencies fail to report back, the Commission will follow up to find out why it has failed to address the Commission’s recommendation.

Through the Governmental Body Liaison Program, the commission has established links with government agencies like Police, correctional Services and Education Department. Liaison officers are appointed for each agency to work with Commission in resolving complaints. This process enables the commission to effectively resolve complaints.

Action needed: our target is 50-100 Papua New Guineans to make a complaint this week. If you can read and write, have access to internet and have one hour free time in the next 24 hours, you are one of these 50-100. 85% of the population is silent. You’re their voice. Make it count.

As King Charles was crowned, a child in PNG died from lack of proper medical services. But this didn’t stop PNG government from spending K6 million on King Charles’ coronation. In fact, all it needed was a team of five to witness the event at the Buckingham Palace. PNG needs a reaction to this wastage:

1. We need a volunteer to lay a complaint with the Ombudsman Commission to investigate everyone involved.
2. There’s a consultation being currently conducted by the Constitutional Law Reform Commission on whether the Governor General’s position in PNG is necessary: write to the CLRC and say you want this institution abolished.
3. If you’re serious enough, remember this moment, and vote Rainbo Paita and Justin Thanceko out of office in 2027.
4. We need Marape’s death curse on the corrupt to work.

A total of 31 delegation consisting of state ministers, the Governor General and his wife, and the Governor General’s “guests” travelled to the UK for King Charles’ coronation as the King of England and the Commonwealth countries – those that still have the royal family’s representative as the head of state. The delegation included a former MP who was invited as the Governor General’s guest, and the PNG foreign affairs minister’s daughter (she shared her lavish trip on TikTok).

According to reports, only 4 out of the 31 delegates were given tickets to attend the King’s actual coronation, together with a protocol officer who was also the flag bearer. This means, as far as the Buckingnam Palace is concerned, only five representatives from PNG were recognised as attendees. It has been reported that the foreign affairs minister’s daughter was one of those who attended the King’s coronation eventhough she holds no official position in PNG’s bureaucracy.

This trip cost the state of PNG K3 million. Another K3 million was spent on an event hosted in Port Moresby for the King’s coronation – a symbolic event for those who didn’t travel to the UK. This event was attended by the prime minister and the High Commissioner of UK to PNG among others.

We can complain about the symbolic, unnecessary, and extravagant event in Port Moresby. We can curse the 31 delegates who had a great holiday at the expense of tax payers in UK. And we can argue about the relevance of the Governor General in PNG. But all these means nothing if the Governor General and his delegation are not held accountable.

We need practical action. We need someone to lay a formal complaint to the Ombudsman Commission to investigate the Governor General and the delegation to the UK as well as the other K3 million spent on the ceremonial event in Port Moresby. If the Ombudsman Commission doesn’t take the initiative to do this on its own, a Papua New Guinean has to take the responsibility and lay a formal complaint with the Ombudsman Commission.

Second, there is a review currently being conducted by the Constitutional Law Reform Commission, which include questions about whether having a Governor General as the head of state in PNG is necessary. If you think PNG doesn’t need a Governor General make your voice known. You can do this by participating in the nation wide consultation, or through a written submission to the Constitutional Law Reform Commission.

Third, please don’t forget your role in returning Justin Tkatchenko and Rainbo Paita as MPs in the 2022 elections. Yes, they are in office because you voted them back. It’s four years away, but if you’re really serious about abuse of state funds, remember this moment in 2027 when the election come around. The quality of the leaders you get is reflective of the quality of the decisions you make during elections.

Finally, James Marape has already declared a curse on those who engage in corruption in PNG, and wished death upon them. Corruption is often defined as a criminal act, but it also means abuse of funds using legal means, which is what the coronation expenses amounts to. So let’s hope the curse works and if these events and trips amount to abuse of funds, may Marape’s prayers be answered.

These 31 aristocrats who travelled to the land of their royal master, and their siblings who participated in the symbolic celebrations in Port Moresby must know that they are soaked in the blood of Papua New Guineans who died this week because of lack of medical supplies. We must make them realise that.

Share this post. Tag a lawyer. Tag a journalist. Tag your MP. Let them know it’s not okay.