Ombudsman Commission of Papua New Guinea v The Honourable Justice Sakora, Messrs Manuhu and Karapo (Constituting the Leadership Tribunal) and Paul Pora

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Citation: (1996) N1720
• Date: 06 December 1996
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1996

National Court: Amet CJ

Judgment Delivered: 6 December 1996

1 Application for Judicial Review—Leadership Tribunal—Non–disclosure of documents by the Commission—Refusal of application by Counsel for Commission to intervene—Natural justice—bias—principles of review—locus standi—Whether Commission has separate locus standi from Public Prosecutor

___________________________

Amet CJ: This is an application by the Ombudsman Commission (the Commission) for leave to apply for Judicial Review of the Proceedings of the Leadership Tribunal (the Tribunal) inquiring into allegations of misconduct in office by the Hon Paul Pora, MP.

The Tribunal has not yet completed its inquiry. The issues giving rise to this application occurred in the following circumstances. The stage had been reached in the Tribunal's inquiry where the Prosecution had closed its case, and the leader, Mr Pora was himself completing his evidence in chief, when the issue arose over the non–disclosure of certain documents by the Commission.

Prosecuting Counsel before the Tribunal, Mr Manek requested a search of the Ombudsman Commission's files and records with a view to locating any documents associated with the subject letter of 14 August 1992, Exhibit N11, the copy of a letter from Ombudsman Ridges to the then Secretary for Finance and Planning, Mr Gerea Aopi. Mr Ravi Perera, the senior legal officer with the Commission swore and filed an affidavit annexing certain documents which were located, relating to that letter.

As a result of the disclosure of these related correspondences, the following day Counsel for Mr Pora made application that, the Tribunal discharge Mr Pora, terminate the proceedings and award costs against the Commission in favour of the leader. In the course of the submissions in support of this application, Counsel for Mr Pora had made observations, comments and remarks which were critical of and adversely reflected on the role of the Commission in its investigative functions and in particular in relation to the documents that were revealed before the Tribunal.

Counsel prosecuting the leader Mr Manek replied to the submissions for the leader, and the Tribunal reserved its ruling to be...