Peter Beswick v Mark Pupaka in his Capacity as Chief Magistrate and Others

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Court: National Court
• Judge: Crowley J
• Judgment Date: 27 July 2026
• Neutral Citation: N11721
• Docket Number: OS(JR) NO. 12 OF 2025 IECMS
• Date: 27 July 2026
• Counsel: Mr. E Asigau for the plaintiff,Counsel,Ms Z Rekeken for the first & second defendants

N11721

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

OS(JR) NO. 12 OF 2025 IECMS

Between:

Peter Beswick

Plaintiff

v.

Mark Pupaka in his Capacity as Chief Magistrate

First Defendant

The Independent State of Papua New Guinea

Second Defendant

WAIGANI: Crowley J

11 July 2025; 27 July 2026

JUDICIAL REVIEW — issuing arrest warrant — where decision-maker has to be satisfied both that the person has committed an offence and that the issuing of arrest warrant is necessary — jurisdictional error — precedent fact — where information the decision-maker relied on was wrong — where decision-maker applied test of probable cause — where Arrest Act provides the test of reasonable grounds for believing — obiter dicta — there is no obligation on a person to prevent crime — an arrest deprives a person of their liberty — an arrestee should have an opportunity to challenge their arrest before the issue of the warrant.

Held

1. The affidavit material did not provide evidence capable of satisfying the decision maker that the Plaintiff would not appear at court, would continue committing offences or was a danger to himself or the public.

2. The First Defendant relied on facts now understood to be wrong in material respects.

3. The First Defendant applied the wrong test and

4. The First Defendant took into account irrelevant considerations.

Cases cited

Ignote v Hualupmomi and The State [1996] PNGLR 308

Pala v Bidar [2016] PGSC 33; SC1515

R v Coney [1882] UKLawRpKQB 30; (1881–1882) 8 QBD 534

Counsel

Mr. E Asigau for the plaintiff

Ms Z Rekeken for the first & second defendants

Lawyers for the plaintiff: Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Lawyer for the first & second defendant: Solicitor-General

RULING

1. Crowley J: This is an application for the judicial review of a decision to issue a warrant of arrest for Peter Beswick (the Plaintiff) by the Chief Magistrate Mark Pupaka (the First Defendant) in relation to a charge under s415 of the Criminal Code. The information that was provided to the First Defendant, asserted that a letter the Plaintiff authored dated 15 September 2018 was fraudulent and calculated to cover up the behaviour of Bank of South Pacific (‘BSP’) employees.

Background

2. The background facts contained in the information before the First Defendant, and in subsequent material filed by the parties, has almost nothing to do with the Plaintiff. They relate to criminal activity of another, who has been tried and convicted. The accusations and investigation against the Plaintiff follow in the slipstream of this criminal activity. However, one cannot understand the nature of the charge against the Plaintiff without a recitation of the facts of the investigation and conviction of Robert Ralewa (‘Mr Ralewa’).

3. Mr Ralewa was the CEO of Asian Pacific Insurance Brokers (‘APIB’). That organised, sold and managed insurance policies. As part of that activity, APIB operated a trust account. That trust account was with BSP and included an internet banking facility. The major shareholder and a director of APIB was Watt Kil Kiddie (‘Mr Kiddie’). Between 27 January 2017 and 3 March 2018, Mr Ralewa used the internet banking facility to withdraw K931, 800.00 from APIB's trust account and deposit it into his own. This scheme was eventually uncovered, and Mr Ralewa was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment.

4. Mr Kiddie commenced litigation against BSP on the basis they had been negligent in allowing Mr Ralewa to operate the internet banking facility on his own. Mr Kiddie asserted BSP had breached its own policies in doing so. The Plaintiff, who was Group General Manager of BSP Corporate Banking and had never had any dealings with APIB, Mr Ralewa or Mr Kiddie, wrote a letter to Mr Kiddie. The letter said that an internal investigation at BSP had found no problems with the establishment of APIB's internet banking facilities and denied liability.

5. Mr Kiddie used this letter in a criminal complaint he had made. Mr Kiddie claimed the Plaintiff's letter was a fraud, and its purpose was to cover for BSP employees whose actions had allowed Mr Ralewa to commit his offence.

6. DSS Francis was much taken with this idea and commenced investigating the Plaintiff. That investigation ran for several years (and is presumably ongoing). It involved attempts to question some BSP staff including the Plaintiff. When the Plaintiff declined an invitation to attend the police station for questioning DSS Francis sought an arrest warrant against him.

7. When issuing the arrest warrant the First Defendant checked the following boxes to indicate why he decided it was necessary to issue it against the Plaintiff:

a. “To ensure his appearance in court to answer to the offence charged.

b. To prevent the continuation or repetition of the offence or the commission of further offences.

c. To preserve the safety or welfare of a member of the public or of him”.

8. In his affidavit filed in these proceedings, the First Defendant said that his reasons were: “The warrant for Arrest was issued on the basis that the Plaintiff's arrest was necessary to ensure his appearance and continued involvement in the ongoing criminal investigation by the Criminal Investigation Division.” (see para [7])

Law

9. Section 8 of the Arrest Act provides that:

“ISSUE OF WARRANT BY A COURT OTHER THAN A LOCAL COURT

Where an information is laid before a court, other than a Local Court, that there are reasonable grounds for believing –

(a) that a person has committed an offence within the country; and

(b) that it would not be practicable or desirable to proceed against the person by summons in that his arrest is necessary –

(i) to ensure his appearance in court to answer a charge for the offence; or

(ii) to prevent –

(A) the continuation or repetition of the offence; or

(B) the commission of a further offence; or

(iii) to preserve the safety or welfare of a member of the public or of the person,

the court may issue a warrant for the arrest of the person.”

10. The process of obtaining an arrest warrant commences with an information being laid before a Court (other than the Local Court, s8 Arrest Act). The definition of “information” includes a complaint for an offence (see s1(1) of the Arrest Act).

11. The information must first convince the Magistrate that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a person has committed an offence within the country (s8(a) Arrest Act).

12. Second, the information must also convince the Magistrate of one or more of four things. Either that:

a. there are reasonable grounds for believing that the persons' arrest is necessary to ensure his appearance in court to answer a charge for the offence (s8(b)(i) Arrest Act); OR

b. there are reasonable grounds for believing that his arrest is necessary to prevent the continuation or repetition of the offence (s8(b)(ii)(A) Arrest Act); OR

c. there are reasonable grounds for believing that his arrest is necessary to prevent the commission of a further offence; (s8(b)(ii)(B) Arrest Act); OR

d. there are reasonable grounds for believing that his arrest is necessary to preserve the safety or welfare of a member of the public or of the person, (s8(b)(iii) Arrest Act).

What evidence was before the First Defendant?

13. On 6 December 2024 the First Defendant was presented with a Notice of Motion filed by DSS Francis. This Notice of Motion was accompanied by an Affidavit in Support and a Police Information.

14. The Notice of Motion was in COM NO: 1334 of 2024 between Derrick Francis Detective Senior Sergeant as the Informant/ Applicant and Peter Beswick the Respondent. It sought:

“That pursuant to Section 8 of the Arrest Act 1977 a Warrant of Arrest be issued to the applicant, Detective Senior Sergent Derrick Francis to Arrest the Respondent, Peter BESWICK. And An order authorising the applicant and members of the Police Force (CID NCD, Boroko Police Station) to physically and formally arrest the suspect, Peter BESWICK” [emphasis in the original].

15. The Affidavit in Support was deposed too by DSS Francis. That affidavit said:

a. DSS Francis was the investigating officer;

b. On 26 July 2018 he received a complaint of misappropriation of trust monies of K931,800.00 by Robert Ralewa the CEO of Asian Pacific Broker Limited (APIB Ltd) between 27 January 2017 and 3 March 2018;

c. The complainant was Watt Kil Kiddie a director and major shareholder of APIB Ltd;

d. Mr Ralewa bought Mr Kiddie “…a BSP Online Business Banking form for the purpose of BANK VIEWING BALANCE and RECONCILIATION PURPOSE ONLY…”

e. Mr Ralewa “… had his own intention and made himself as the sole master user for daily withdrawals of K500,00.00 in the company's Operations Account and Trust Account…”. Ralewa transferred this money to his private company's bank account.

f. Mr Ralewa was arrest, charged and convicted of “misappropriation of trust monies in the sum of K931,800.00”

g. His appeal was heard and dismissed on 1 December 2023.

h. Police Investigation “…revealed that BSP Online Business Banking Form for Asian Pacific Insurance Brokers Limited … did not exercise due diligences (“The care that a reasonable person exercises to avoid harm to other persons or their property”) in performing their duty statement and indirectly assisted/facilitate …[Mr Ralewa]… to misappropriate the trust monies in the sum of K931,800.0…”;

i. Mr Kiddie “… wrote several complaint letters in 2018 to the BSP Corporate Banking high lighting the alleged misappropriation by … [Mr Ralewa]… who was CEO of APIBL at that time and also his complaint against BSP Bank staffs for alleged conspiring with the accused, negligence and not exercising due diligence in approving the BSP Online Business Banking internet form…”

j. “Peter Beswick who was the Group General Manager of BSP Corporate Banking at that time, then wrote one page letter on 15th September 2018 to …[Mr Kiddie]… stating that …[his]… allegations were investigated, the account was correctly established, transactions were duly...