Papua New Guinea being declared a Christian nation may offer the impression that the country will improve, but it is only “an illusion”, according to a Catholic priest in the country.

Last week, the PNG Parliament amended the nation’s constitution, introducing a declaration in its preamble: “(We) acknowledge and declare God, the Father; Jesus Christ, the Son; and Holy Spirit, as our Creator and Sustainer of the entire universe and the source of our powers and authorities, delegated to the people and all persons within the geographical jurisdiction of Papua New Guinea.”

In addition, Christianity will now be reflected in the Fifth Goal of the Constitution, and the Bible will be recognised as a national symbol.

Father Giorgio Licini of Caritas PNG said that the Catholic Church would have preferred no constitutional change.

“To create, nowadays, in the 21st century a Christian confessional state seems a little bit anachronistic,” Father Licini said.

He believes it is a “cosmetic” change that “will not have a real impact” on the lives of the people.

“PNG society will remain basically what it is,” he said.

An ‘illusion that things will improve’
“This manoeuvre may offer the impression or the illusion that things will improve for the country, that the way of behaving, the economic situation, the culture may become more solid. But that is an illusion.”

He said the preamble of the 1975 Constitution already acknowledged the Christian heritage.

Father Licini said secular cultures and values were scaring many in PNG, including the recognition and increasing acceptance of the rainbow community.

“They see themselves as next to Indonesia, which is Muslim, they see themselves next to Australia and New Zealand, which are increasingly secular countries, the Pacific heritage is fading, so the question is, who are we?” he said.

“It looks like a Christian heritage and tradition and values and the churches, they offer an opportunity to ground on them a cultural identity.”

Prime Minister James Marape, a vocal advocate for the amendment, is happy about the outcome.

He said it “reflects, in the highest form” the role Christian churches had played in the development of the country.

Not an operational law
RNZ Pacific’s PNG correspondent Scott Waide said that Marape had maintained it was not an operational law.

“It is something that is rather symbolic and something that will hopefully unite Papua New Guinea under a common goal of sorts. That’s been the narrative that’s come out from the Prime Minister’s Office,” Waide said.

He said the vast majority of people in the country had identified as Christian, but it was not written into the constitution.

Waide said the founding fathers were aware of the negative implications of declaring the nation a Christian state during the decolonisation period.

“I think in their wisdom they chose to very carefully state that Papua New Guineans are spiritual people but stopped short of actually declaring Papua New Guinea a Christian country.”

He said that, unlike Fiji, which has had a 200-year experience with different religions, the first mosque in PNG opened in the 1980s.

“It is not as diverse as you would see in other countries. Personally, I have seen instances of religious violence largely based on ignorance.

“Not because they are politically driven, but because people are not educated enough to understand the differences in religions and the need to coexist.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Last year, the Papua New Guinea government moved in a subtle way into the Fourth Estate.

It tried to — and is still trying to — find a way to curtail and restrict your access to mainstream and social media by trying to gag media organisations.

Obviously, this was an attack on media freedom. We were not going to take it sitting down.

We met the government head-on to protect our country’s media freedoms, and to ensure the public — that’s you — are well informed on what is happening in our country.

Today, we report on a government endeavor, which we consider extremely dangerous and an affront to the intelligence of Papua New Guineans, which we also believe is impinging our constitutional freedoms.

The government, in introducing a State of Emergency, has gone to a dangerous level of invoking section 70 of the NICTA Act.

Section 70, according to our Prime Minister, gives absolute rights to government agents including police, soldiers and undercover agents, to enter any home and check private house and property.

Section 70 also gives these agents all the power to search your phone. This is in our view draconian and extreme.

What will become of democracy? Is this a test run for what is yet to come?

We will support any move to impose restrictions that will save lives and protect properties and ensure peace and good order.

But we do not promote laws that will instill fear, limit freedom and impinge on the rights of the common people.

No to draconian governance, no to dictatorial leadership.

While we support the State of Emergency as a deterrent to further violence, looting and acts of terror against businesses and citizens, we consider the power to search without a warrant as a direct attack on the freedoms guaranteed by the constitution to our people.

This Section 70 of the National Information and Communication Technology (NICTA) Act 2009 seems to be the same section used by government in its recent attempt to curtail the media.

While this action seems to have been sparked by the Black Wednesday looting in Port Moresby on December 10, one cannot rule out the perplexity of the first sitting of Parliament on February 13 where a Vote of No Confidence in the government is looming.

The NICTA Act allows the government to require operator licensees, such as telecommunication companies, to provide ICT services, restrict or delay certain communications, disclose the content of specified communications to the Minister, and coordinate with other government organisations if necessary.

The activation of Section 70 is likely to agitate citizens regarding privacy rights and the protection of personal information.

However, the government contends that these measures are necessary to address public emergencies and ensure public safety.

The government has yet to come clear on how this section 70 will be enforced and carried out.

Will the police and army use section 70 to conduct raids on suspected homes, communities, and people?

Will there be search warrants for these phone searches, home searches, bag searches?

What is the recourse for the public if they are caught in the crossfire of section 70?

The Prime Minister and his Minister for Internal Security must explain this clearly.

This editorial was published by the PNG Post-Courier on 16 January 2024.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papua New Guinea’s Minister of Bougainville Affairs, Manasseh Makiba, believes an absolute majority is needed for the vote on the Bougainville referendum because it involves changing the constitution.

Makiba told Parliament last month that two thirds of MPs would need to support the independence push, drawing the ire of Bougainville’s Minister of Independence Mission Implementation Ezekiel Massatt.

Massatt said officials from both governments had already agreed that a simple majority would suffice.

Last month Massatt told RNZ Pacific that what transpired in the last session of Parliament gave the Bougainville leadership no confidence that they could achieve independence under a government led by Prime Minister James Marape.

But Makiba said the Bougainville Peace Agreement and the Constitution allowed for Parliament to make a decision on the 2019 Bougainville referendum which resulted in a 97.7 percent vote in favour of independence.

The National newspaper reports Makiba saying that, as an issue of sovereignty, the vote on Bougainville’s future has to be done with the same majority as that required for constitutional amendments.

He said officials had overstepped their authority in making a commitment to a simple majority.

Prerogative of Parliament
Makiba said it remained the prerogative of the Parliament to make its decision as to the appropriate voting majority.

He also rejected claims from Massatt that the national government was putting up roadblocks.

Makiba said the national government had been very supportive and committed to implementing the provisions of the Bougainville Peace Agreement and the PNG Constitution.

He said leaders needed to refrain from misleading people with the wrong information.

“The people must hear the correct information and the process and rule of law must be respected, followed, and upheld at all times,” he said.

“If certain leaders are not happy with the ratification process proposed to the Parliament to debate and adopt by way of Sessional Order they have the option to go to the Supreme Court to get interpretation on the ratification process,” he said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz