Academia Nomad

How to lodge a complaint with the PNG Ombudsman Commission

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?

When you contact the Ombudsman Commission, an officer will record all the relevant information about your complaint.
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.
If the commission approve your case for investigation, it may ask you for more supporting information such as letters or other documents.
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.
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.
It provides opportunity for anyone against whom adverse findings are likely to be made to be heard and defend themselves. This can take time.
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.
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.

A response to PNG K6 million splash on King Charles’ Coronation

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:

We need a volunteer to lay a complaint with the Ombudsman Commission to investigate everyone involved.
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.
If you’re serious enough, remember this moment, and vote Rainbo Paita and Justin Thanceko out of office in 2027.
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.

At its core, PNG is corrupt

An Australian PhD student was conducting research on corruption in PNG and met a group of youths in Port Moresby. After a few exchanges asked them:

“What is the root of corruption?”

One of them pointed to National Parliament building, and said:

“There lies the roots, the stem, the branches, and the leaves of corruption in PNG…”

(the thesis was published as a book titled “Public perceptions of corruption in PNG” by Grant Walton).

Whilst this view is popular among Papua New Guineans, it’s misplaced. The politicians are corrupt, but they are voted by equally corrupt Papua New Guineans.

Democracy is designed in a way “the people” get to decide who gets into parliament. The graph in this article shows that Papua New Guineans, on average, have been replacing 50% of their MPs since independence.

But the problem is this: they remove 50%, and replace them with another cohort of corrupt politicians. The fact that the next 50% voted as replacement continue to abuse and misuse power and money shows that the problem lies not only with the politicans, but the voters.

See “PNG election database” on ANU’s development policy centre for more information

Good voters = good politicians. Corrupt voters = corrupt politicans.

Recent events shows just another example of the decaying state of PNG. A technical glitch resulted in Bank South Pacific crediting accounts on its customers. BSP immediately put out a notice advising customers of the glitch. Despite this notice
30, 000 customers continued to withdraw the excess funds.

The saddest thing of all, is that this happened on Easter weekend. As per the 2011 census, 96% of Papua New Guineans profess to be Christians. Easter is a scared calendar in the Christian world. It’s believer to be the dates Jesus Christ died, and resurrected. His death paved the way for forgiveness of sins. His resurrection demonstrated He defeated sin, hell and grave. Easter is a symbol of hope and redemption. Easter holiday starts on a Friday and ends on Monday. 30, 000 Papua New Guineans used the most holy of days to conduct a nationwide theft.

A more troubling issue is that portions of the educated population and Christians continue to blame BSP for crediting customers accounts, and defend the theft. The educated represents the elites in PNG. The Christians represent the moral values in PNG. The fact that a significant portion of PNG’s elites and moral avatars support theft goes to show why PNG is corrupt at its very core.

Corruption in PNG is not a matter of poor and uneducated struggling to make ends meet. It is not a matter of the sinner expressing his lack of internal convictions. Corruption is prompted by the elites, rationalised by moral avatars, and followed by a committed congregation spread across the breath and length of the nation.

Until PNG stops rationalising corruption, nothing will change.

Why you cannot run away from BSP

On Easter weekend, BSP unintentionally credited its customers an undisclosed amount of money due to a technological glitch as the bank attempted to update it’s systems. The customers received notifications on their phones. About 30, 000 people rushed to the BSP ATMs and withdrew an average K1, 000 each. Some then subsequently switched banks the following week. BSP has indicated that it will take back its money. If you withdrew the access money in your bank account and intend to ditch BSP, it’s not that easy.

Here’s why:

Credit and Data Bureau

The withdrawals means you owe BSP money, and this information is now registered into the Credit and Data Bureau. All financial institutions have access to this information. If you are in a serious need and want to take out a loan from your new bank, lets say Kina Bank, your new bank will refuse your application because you still owe BSP money. This even applies for your savings institutions such as NCSL which allows for members to borrow. The success of your loan application is determine by, among other things, your credit history. Right now you don’t have an impressive one.

BSP still has your details

You will continue to receive emails and calls and letters from BSP to repay. If you intentionally avoid communication, and do not repay, BSP can report it as an offence. Remember when you opened your bank account you provided the bank your contact details and used a formal ID. For those working, the last thing you want is to be taken in for questioning by uniformed policemen in front of your colleagues. When the court ruling goes in favour of BSP, and it certainly will, you will have to repay it.

BSP is the only bank in most provinces

Apart from Port Moresby and Lae (perhaps Hagen and Rabaul as well), BSP is the only bank with a presence in most provinces and districts. You cannot escape immediate deductions from BSP.

It’s even difficult for students, and the unemployed. The law will find you. Days of reckoning will come.

BSP vs 30, 000

BSP made K1. 136 billion in profits in 2022. It will arm itself with lawyers, and it will get it’s money back.

What to do about it?

Go to the nearest BSP branch or the branch where you opned your bank account, or call them, and arrange with them on how you can repay. Preferably you should repay the amount immediately. If you cannot, arrange for fixed amount to be deducted from your account.

BSP has it’s limitations (and there are many), but the fact is this: you withdrew money that didn’t belong to you. You did this intentionally which means you stole. You must return that which is not yours.

James Marape vs Joseph Lelang Debate: Winners and Losers

PNG prime minister and opposition leader at UPNG

Was it a debate? Panel discussion? Or church gathering even?

Whatever it was, the interaction between the PNG PM James Marape and Opposition Leader Joseph Lelang, the first of its kind, was conducted at the back of massive fanfare. The student representative council (SRC) of the six universities of PNG put out statements stating they would not join the proposed protest against the government in late March 2023. In its place, the SRC of the six universities organised a debate between the prime minister and opposition leader at the University of Papua New Guinea (UPNG) in the first week of April 2023.

The central theme of the organisers was that the “debate” between the two political leaders outside of parliament, is the dawn of a new and mature way of intellectuals interacting with national leaders. Gone were the days, the organisers boasted, of university-led nationwide strikes against the government which resulted in the loss and destruction of properties and violence.

The venue of the “debate” was the New Lecture Theatre (NLT) of UPNG, which has about 300 sitting capacity. On the evening of the event, NLT was filled and a little more, so it’s safe to assume that about 400 were present auditorium. There were about 600 who joined the online streaming of the event. They even attracted the media, other current and former MPs, the UPNG administration and staff as well.

The event began with the UPNG administration and student leaders giving introductory remarks, where they praised the “mature” approach the students adopted to engage with national leaders. The student leaders of the six universities then presented their recommendations to the two leaders and the moderator asked the leaders to expound on them.

Given the issues affecting the country, many expected to see a good debate, especially from one hosted by an academic institution. However, following the event, many Papua New Guineans have left disappointed. Criticisms ranged from poor format of the debate, poor performance from the opposition leader, questions being too soft and even sympathetic towards the prime minister. Here we rank the performance of the opposition leader, the prime minister, the student organisers, and even as a whole.

1. Opposition Leader Joseph Lelang – 5/10

Opposition leaders are usually alternative prime ministers in the waiting, to replace the PM when the incumbent loses the confidence of the parliament. You’d expect the opposition leader to “distinguish” himself from the PM. Instead, the opposition leader agreed with half of the things the PM said, and the PM is doing. If you agree with the PM, why are you even in the opposition? Why not join him on the government side?

Even the PM later had to defend the opposition leader from black lash after the debate. We don’t expect the opposition leader to shout and pound his fist against the PM. But we do expect him to show some PM calibre. Is this our alternative PM?

Prime Minister James Marape – 8/10

This was supposed to be the toughest audience for Marape. As an incumbent overseeing high inflation, lawlessness, caught in between disruptive superpower rivalry, and poor development indicators, Marape was supposed to dig deep to defend his policies or lack thereof, in front of a non-apologetic and critical audience. Instead, Marape used his usual charm, and rhetoric and even advised the students, occasionally receiving applause from them.

Part of this had to do with the questions put to the PM. It didn’t even make the PM blink.

3. The students – 4/10

Perhaps the only group that was impressed with the occasion when it ended were the organisers. You must remember the magnitude of what this initiative was replacing. This debate, or panel, or whatever you want to call itC was replacing “student led protests”, which in the past led to change in governments, resulted in politicians losing elections, and pressuring MPs from passing legislations or amending constitutions.

No one walked walked out of NLT, or logged out after watching the stream, thought the PM will change some of his policies.

You cannot blame the students for trying out something new. The problem is this even was advertised as a debate, and ended up as a gentlemen’s chat without distinction.

4. The event as a whole – 5/10

This even was safer than protests, and students should be applauded. But it failed to apply any real pressure for the government to reconsider its approach. It overpromised and under delivered.

There is room for improvement. The first thing to do is improve the format. There was no need for each student leader to present separate positions. They should have had the moderator ask the same questions to prevent push-start style of discussions.

Second, the questions put forward to the PM must be well researched. Ask questions that PNG reporters and fellow MPs fail to ask the PM. Possible questions the students/moderators should have asked the PM include:

“PM you recently announced the increase of DSIP funds to MPs to K20 million per MP. Given that only 40% of MPs acquit their funds, how do you justify such and increase?”

“Do you think the presidential system of voting will fix the problems in this country? Isn’t it a problem where the politicians are failing to follow parliamentary conventions? How about dealing with individuals accused of high-profile corruption are within your coalition first? – and then list issues like the Masaratis wasting away, the Manumanu land deal etc.”

“PM you are the longest-serving finance minister of PNG during your years under Somare and O’Neill. You voted for every budget, legislation and amendment put forward by the O’Neill government, and even defended them in parliament during debates. Don’t you think it’s convenient to blame O’Neill for the mess in this country now?”

To the opposition, the moderate should then put it straight to him: as the alternative PM, what would you do differently?

Third, the star-like treatment of politicians must be replaced by respectful but hard questioning. Half of the opening remarks were full of praise of the PM for making time to attend the event. The level of awe PNG audiences give to politicians is astounding.

Going forward, there is still room for a conversation like the one organised by UPNG. Though it needs improvement. But just remember that it cannot replace protests (peaceful and within the limits of the law). The two are not the same.