Papua New Guinea’s Supreme Court has stayed a court order nullifying the appointment of David Manning as Commissioner of Police.

Manning, who was ordered to vacate his office by noon today, is also the country’s Pandemic Response Controller.

The order was handed down by Justice David Cannings in the National Court last Friday in response to an application for a judicial review of Manning’s appointment filed by former senior police officers Sylvester Kalaut and Fred Yakasa.

Both men had failed in an application for the position of police commissioner in competition with Manning in 2019.

Justice Cannings ruled that Manning’s appointment was wrong because he did not have a tertiary qualification as required for the parallel post of Secretary to the Police Department.

Yesterday, Justice Derek Hartshorn granted the stay order sought by lawyer Troy Mileng of the Solicitor-General’s office representing the state and lawyer Derek Wood representing Manning pending the determination of an appeal against Justice Cannings’ decision.

Justice Hartshorn said there was an arguable case on the separation of the two positions of commissioner and secretary of police which Manning was holding.

Ruling accepted
Manning will remain police commissioner in the meantime because of the stay order.

Outside court, Kalaut and Yakasa yesterday accepted the decision by Supreme Court judge Justice Hartshorn.

Police Minister Bryan Kramer wrote a strong defence of Manning’s appointment on his Facebook blog this week, saying that due process had been followed and none of the six police commissioners since a law change in 2003 had had a tertiary degree.

RNZ Pacific reports that in May 2020 Sylvester Kalaut was arrested by anti-fraud detectives within the PNG police force and charged with one count of abuse of office, and one count of attempting to pervert the course of justice.

Karo Jesse is a reporter for The National. Asia Pacific Report republishes The National reports with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

New Zealand’s Attorney-General David Parker says there has been no decision yet on a possible appeal to the High Court ruling that some of the country’s alert level 4 covid-19 pandemic lockdown in late March and early April was unlawful.

Lawyer Andrew Borrowdale had argued that the Director-General of Health, Dr Ashley Bloomfield, went beyond his powers and put the country into lockdown unlawfully.

Three judges heard the judicial review at the High Court in Wellington late last month and their written decision has been released this afternoon.

Borrowdale had sought the court rule that three actions by the government in the early stages of the lockdown were unlawful.

The first was public statements made by the prime minister and other officials during the first nine days of lockdown, the second was regarding three orders made under the Health Act, while the third was about the definition of essential services.

The judges have concluded that from March 26 to April 3, the requirement for people to stay at home and in their bubbles was justified, but unlawful.

“Those announcements had the effect of limiting certain rights and freedoms affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 including, in particular, the rights to freedom of movement, peaceful assembly and association,” the judges said.

“While there is no question that the requirement was a necessary, reasonable and proportionate response to the Covid-19 crisis at the time, the requirement was not prescribed by law and was therefore contrary to s 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.”

A new order was introduced by the government on April 3 which corrected that.

The judges said Borrowdale’s other challenges to the lockdown and the early covid-19 response had failed.

Attorney-General responds to ruling
In a conference this afternoon, Attorney-General David Parker said there had been no decision yet on a possible appeal to the High Court ruling.

The current lockdown orders made under the Covid-19 Public Health Response Act 2020 are not affected by this judgment.

Parker says the government does not think there are any consequences and was happy the Crown had in its view won the major points.

“What we were trying to do during those early days was take people with us from … very few restrictions to … very broad restrictions,” he says.

“You can see that the court has gone to a lot of effort to record that this was an emergency… they just think things should have been written down a little bit more.

“In some way, the health act has been vindicated.”

But where it was out of date was in the way decisions were taken.

“I would expect that when all of this has passed … that we will have a look again as to whether the Health Act will use the format that is in the covid response.”

An important issue
He was not critical of those who had brought the case against the Crown, saying it was an important issue and acknowledged the ability to hold the Crown to account was also important.

“We always thought we were acting legally all of the way through.

“The main point in this case has been that is was beyond the power of the government … that kept everyone in their bubbles and close businesses.”

That had been upheld by the court, Parker says.

He cautioned against over-reading the judgment.

He says the issue with the first nine days being an oral request – rather than a former order – was cured by April 3.

“We can be confident in the Orders made and enforced,” Parker says.

“However the court did find that there was a breach of the Bill of Rights Act in the first nine days of the alert level 4 lockdown, because the original oral request for people to stay home and in their bubbles was not put in a formal order until April 3.

“Importantly, though, the court found that the requirement to stay home and in their bubbles was a necessary, reasonable and proportionate response to the Covid-19 crisis at that time.”

Six new covid-19 cases
Director-General of Health Dr Ashley Bloomfield announced today six new covid-19 cases of infection – five are in the community and related to the Auckland cluster and one an imported case, reports RNZ News.

He said the imported case was a woman in her 50s who had arrived from Qatar via Sydney on August 14 and had been in the Sudima Hotel.

Police say there had been a large increase in the number of vehicles being turned around at the checkpoints on Auckland’s boundary, reports RNZ News.

As of yesterday afternoon, more than 86,000 vehicles had been stopped at the 13 different checkpoints.

Almost 4800 had been turned around.

This article is republished by the Pacific Media Centre under a partnership agreement with RNZ.

• All RNZ coverage of covid-19
• If you have symptoms of the coronavirus, call the NZ Covid-19 Healthline on 0800 358 5453 (+64 9 358 5453 for international SIMs) or call your GP – don’t show up at a medical centre.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz