Paul Pora v The Commissioner of Police

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Injia J
• Judgment Date: 09 May 1997
• Citation: (1997) N1569
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1997
• Judgement Number: N1569

National Court: Injia J

Judgment Delivered: 9 May 1997

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

OS NO. 218 OF 1996

BETWEEN

PAUL PORA — Applicant

And

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE — Respondent

Mount Hagen

Injia J

12 February 1997

9 May 1997

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — Judicial Review of Disciplinary authority's decision to dismiss policeman — Grounds of review — Excessiveness of punishment — Nature of Court's discretion — Nature of Relief sought — Re-instatement and payment of lost salary entitlements — Nature of Court's discretion to grant the additional relief in the form of lost salary entitlements consequent upon an order for re-instatement — National Court Rules, Order 16 r. 4 (1).

Cases Cited:

Dicky Nanan v Police Commissioner & Anor Unreported National Court Judgment N 1507 (1996)

Kekedo v Burns Philp (PNG) Ltd [1988-89] PNGLR 122

Counsel:

DL O'Connor for the Applicant

J Kumura for the Respondent

9 May 1997

INJIA J: The Applicant is seeking judicial review of his dismissal from the Police Force by the Respondent on disciplinary grounds pursuant to the provisions of the Police Force Act (Ch. No. 65). Leave to seek judicial review was sought pursuant to Order 16 of the National Court Rules and granted by the Court.

There are two grounds of review as set out in the statement filed in support of the application for leave. They are:

(i) The penalty applied by the Commissioner was excessive.

(ii) The decision of the Commissioner was contrary to natural justice in that the Commissioner:

(a) Failed to provide the Plaintiff with copies of any evidence substantiating the charge.

(b) Failed to provide the Applicant with an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses providing evidence in support of the charge.

(c) Failed to provide the Applicant with an opportunity to address the Commissioner on penalty.

(d) Failed to provide any reasons for his decision.

(e) Failed to provide the Applicant with an independent authority to deal with the matter.

The following facts appear not to be in dispute. The Applicant comes from Langa village just outside Mount Hagen town. He is married with several children. He joined the Police Force in 1986 and served in various locations throughout the country as a member of the Police Mobile Force. In 1990, he was transferred to Mount Hagen from Porgera, Enga Province. Apparently, the Police Department could not provide him accommodation in Mount Hagen so he had to stay in his village and come to work in Mount Hagen everyday by PMV transport. In October 1994, he was posted for duty on Bougainville. Upon his return from duty on Bougainville in April 1995, he never returned for duty until 28 August 1995. Consequently, his absence from duty was treated by the Police Department as AWOL (absent without leave). The Applicant gave his reasons for AWOL as being lack of married accommodation and inability of the Police Department to pick him up from his village in the police vehicle. The...