AUSTRALIAN THINK TANK WARNING CONFIRMS OPPOSITION’S PREDICTION, FEARS AND WARNING ON PNG’S ECONOMY

The PNG Government’s revenue is going to be billions of kina lower, given the drop in global energy and oil prices.

This is from a think tank, a research fellow with the Australian Policy Centre at the Australian National University.

Mathew Dornan says this would create major budgetary crisis for the PNG government.

This means certain key priority areas in the 2015 budget will be cut meaning no funds will be going to those areas.

Mr Dornan said a “certain decision” by the PNG government had inflamed the crisis.

Mr Dornan did not specify “certain commercial decision” but it’s obvious a number of commercial decisions by the O’Neill government happening despite expert warnings and caution from credible institutions.

Among them is the controversial UBS K3 Billion Loan deal which pushed the country’s debt level high to an unsustainable level.

The prediction by the think tank proves what the Opposition has been saying.

The Opposition has been calling for an immediate step to be taken by the government to address the crisis.

The government failed to foresee the looming crisis in the world oil and gas prices, thus bringing down the 2015 budget basing on wild assumption that world oil and gas prices will be steady.

Opposition from time and time has been urging the government to spend within the budget and in general not to mismanage the economy.
Well, the government being ignorant, made several commercial decisions which inflamed the budgetary crisis.

PNG-based business houses are feeling the pinch yet they are keeping a tight-lipped over the issue.

Business Review reported of low forex inflow especially in foreign currencies.

One second hand car dealer has been advised by its bank to limit the purchase of vehicles.

“The company was going to import 30 second hand vehicles from Japan but was advised by the named bank there is a temporary hold on overseas purchase”.

There are other companies feeling the pinch as well.

These are signs and symptoms of economy not doing well. The O’Neill government’s irresponsible decisions, spending on unbudgeted areas had landed the country in this financial situation.

Our economy needs major overhaul.

In the last session of Parliament, government was supposed to introduce a supplementary budget to revise the budget figures amidst the falling oil prices thus affecting our revenue inflow.

The government being irresponsible failed to do so.

The government does not have a clear picture how it will save PNG’s economy.

So the question is, is your government responsible in managing the affairs of the country?

The signs are clear on the wall.

The Opposition is doing its duty under the West Minister system of governance in acting as checks and balances for the government.

The Opposition as an alternate government sees what’s happening in the economy and says, yes we can provide the alternative policies to rescue our economy from taking a nose dive amidst the falling global oil and gas prices.

by SAM KOIM, DevPolicy Blog
The allegations reported in the Australian media of an Australian mining company bribing high ranking Nauru politicians is a real test for Australia. The stakes are high. Nauru hosts one of the asylum detention centres under Australia’s “Pacific Solution” policy. Nauru, together with Manus in Papua New Guinea, has relieved Australia of the influx of boat people to Australia and the Australian Government needs the ongoing political support of the host nations to continue the operation of the detention centres.
Australia is a member of the OECD Working Group on Bribery and a party to the key international conventions concerned with combating foreign bribery, such as the Anti-Bribery Convention and the United Nations Convention against Corruption.
Australia is also the immediate past president of the G20. According to the fifth principle of the G20 Guiding Principles on Enforcement of the Foreign Bribery Offence:

“Investigation and prosecution of foreign bribery should not be subject to improper influence based on concerns of the national economic interest, the potential effect upon relations with another State, or the identity of the natural or legal person involved.”

To remain a corruption-free trading partner in the region, Australia needs to show the way in dealing with bribery allegations such as this, even if it comes at a cost.
There is some scepticism that Australia is held over a barrel with the asylum seekers deal and is willingly turning a blind eye to the corruption and rule of law problems that are plaguing the host nations –PNG and Nauru. This case will test those claims.
Australia also has to contend with the recent adverse findings of the Financial Action Task-Force (FATF) [pdf] that:

“Australia remains at significant risk of an inflow of illicit funds from persons in foreign countries who find Australia a suitable place to hold and invest funds, including in real estate.”

When it comes to bribery of foreign government officials, it takes two to tango: the bribe-giver and the bribe-taker. Getax, the Australian mining company alleged to have been involved in supplying the bribe, may have its directors and the company itself prosecuted by the AFP under the Australian law. But we should not forget the Nauru officials who may have demanded the alleged bribe.
Under the Australian Criminal Code Act 1995, only Australian companies and individuals engaged in bribing an official in a foreign country can be prosecuted. This is not dissimilar to the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (FCPA). There is, however, a way around it. If the proceeds of the predicate or underlying offence, in this case bribery, are found to have been laundered to Australia, then Australia can mount money-laundering actions against the persons implicated under the Proceeds of Crimes Act 2002 (POCA).
Prosecuting any Nauru officials will require the cooperation of the Nauru authorities. The Nauru Anti-Money Laundering Act 2008 makes provisions for cooperation with a foreign state in the investigation and prosecution of money-laundering offences (see section 80 of the Act). Nauru itself can prosecute citizens who launder the proceeds of a bribe overseas (see section 6 of the Act). Nauru also has the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 2004, which directly corresponds with the Australian Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987 to facilitate cooperation in the prosecution of persons for criminal matters.
The precedent that Australia sets in this case could assure the rest of the Pacific Island countries that Australia does not tolerate corruption and is prepared to pay the price to combat cross-border corruption. Or it could send a message that in cases of corruption Australia will only go after the bribe-giver, and not government officials. It seems that the cat has now been let out of the bag and there is only one way – investigate all the offenders.
* Sam Koim is Chairman of the multi-agency, anti-corruption body Taskforce Sweep and Principal Legal Officer at the Department of Justice and Attorney General, Papua New Guinea.

by LUCAS KELLY KOM
My dear fellow Papua New Guineans, the so called Dr Susan Merrell has in effect said that the Judiciary of the Sovereign State of Papua New Guinea in not infallible, That amounts to sedition and she must be arrested and charged immediately when she is in the country.

The Judiciary in PNG today is the last bastion of democracy and can never be questioned by aliens. The JUDGES RULING IS FINAL therefore the discipline forces will act accordingly to administer justice in so far as the Independent Sovereign State of Papua New Guinea is concerned. PNG has adopted English Common Law from its colonial past. Laws are made to be amended as and when the evolution of the society in question sees fit under its sovereignty therefore Susan Merrell can’t tell Papua New Guineans that their ruling judge has erred.

The Sovereign State of Papua New Guinea is not strictly obligated to follow the provisions of English Common Law,  We have parliamentarians and legislators to amend the Constitutional provisions by the virtue of our political independence accorded to us in 1975 Susan Merrell cannot tell us how to live in our free country.. I think our PM has some idea or may be in some sort of a relationship with Susan Merrel who is allegedly in the country at the moment supposedly staying in Crowne Plaza Hotel. I want to ask this question to my audience:- Has Susan Merrell ever gone against the incumbent PNG Prime Minister since she has seen fit to go against the deputy chief justice? Susan Merrell has an obsession with PNG’s political leaders – first with Belden Namah and now PM. My observations are deduced from her obsessions, persistent and largely unpopular opinions and statements on social media about our people and our government.

Many Papua New Guineans have suggested strongly that PNG blocks Susan Merrell from commenting about PNG politics and social issues but I personally (of course I have the democratic right to) want to be objective as a learned man. So I have decided not to attack Susan Merrel personally but look at the person objectively and try to understand why she published what we believe is highly contemptuous, defamatory and seditious writings against PNG's Deputy Chief Justice.

By the way, I won’t be surprised if Susan Merrel is given a job by GoPNG since she hasn’t said something bad against our PM to my knowledge and we the learned people can see that the Judiciary (headed by CJ Sir Salamo Injia & DCJ Sir Gibbs Salika) is on the opposing ends with PM (separated by a myriad of legal procedures & correctness in administration of justice - ie. warrant of arrest) now since the PM refused to come to the courts to clear his name from the allegations. If PM had his way, he would obviously just terminate CJ Sir Salamo Injia and DCJ Sir Gibbs Salika in the name of ‘political stability’ to put all matters to rest.

Susan Merrell, if you are reading out there, let me tell you this:- PNG is a very small place yet further subdivided into 700 hundred nations. All people living here belong to an identified group therefore it is relatively easy to identify aliens with vested interests in this country. Beware that PNG is no safe haven for you. You are PNG’s public enemy number one for attacking our Judiciary. You have been aftering Belden Namah for some time and now you are after the PM. Your posts suggests that you have conspired with Tiffany Twivey-Nonggorr who had represented PM Peter O’Neill in resisting arrest and questioning by the courts for allegations of fraud by the Fraud Squad.

Now you are here just when the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Independent Sovereign State of Papua New Guinea in its ruling has convicted Geoffrey Vaki the ex-CoP for Not Arresting the Prime Minister Peter O’Neill as ordered by the Papua New Guinea Sovereign Court of Law. This Prime Minster IS UNDER ARREST as per the PNG Sovereign Constitution - Full Stop... Just that Vaki couldn’t effect it doesn’t make the PM free of the blame and allegations.

The PM of PNG is still a suspect (Not Guilty but a SUSPECT) in the alleged K71.8 million payment to Paul Paraka Lawyers – nothing changes that. Susan Merrell, what is your opinion of that since you have seen fit to look around for all potential reasons to say that DCJ Gibbs Salika is not infallible in his rulings?http://www.pngecho.com/2015/05/22/mr-popular-deputy-chief-justice-sir-gibbs-salika/#comment-8312

by BRYAN KRAMER

On Wednesday 17th June 2015 the Chief Justice Salamo Injia convicted the former Commissioner of Police Geoffrey Vaki on two charges of contempt of court for failing to execute the Warrant of Arrest issued by District Court against Prime Minister Peter O’Neill.

The decision comes almost one year after Director of National Fraud & Anti-Corruption Directorate Mathew Damuru and his Deputy Timothy Gitua filed contempt proceedings against Vaki back in June 2014.

Before discussing the judgement and its significance in detail lets first visit some of the background facts to help put most of the issues raised in this case in context.

Damuru and Gitua were attached to Task Force Sweep Team who per the directive of Prime Minister on 13th May 2013 were investigating alleged fraudulent payments for legal bills of K71.8 million by the Finance Department to Paul Paraka Lawyers.

Prime Minister O'Neill issued the directive instructing amongst other things that "...a High Level Investigation must be conducted into the legality of the payments and settlements. The investigation team should be made up of Taskforce Sweep and Police Fraud Squad, with the support of the Australian Federal Police and Interpol."

Prime Minister issued the directive in response to the Opposition Leader Belden Namah (as he was then) making public a letter purportedly signed by the Prime Minister dated 24th January 2012 instructing the Minister of Treasury Don Polye (as he was then) to pay the outstanding legal bills owed to Paraka Lawyer. Prime Minister claimed he never signed the letter and his signature was forged.

In October 2013 Task Force Sweep after assessing the Paraka legal bills finding them to be fraudulent charged Paul Paraka principle of Paraka Lawyers on five counts of defrauding the State, nine counts of stealing by false pretence, two counts of money laundering and two counts of misappropriation.

In November 2013 following the charges against Paraka, Namah filed an official complaint against the Prime Minister over the Prime Minister’s alleged involvement in procuring fraudulent payments of K71.8m to Paraka Lawyers.

Commissioner of Police Tomai Kulunga as he was then referred Namah’s complaint to Sam Koim Chairman of Task Force Sweep (TFS). Investigations were carried out and its findings that Sydney-based private investigators believe the document purportedly signed by the Prime Minister was genuine. “We have now received the forensic examination report from the Sydney-based Forensic Document Services Pty Ltd confirming that the signature on the letter ... directing payments to Paraka Lawyers is PM O’Neill’s,” Mr Koim said. The evidence was sufficient to establish probable cause to believe that the Prime Minister was involved and guilty of committing Official Corruption by directing the payments to Paraka Lawyers.

Official Corruption is a criminal offence prescribed under the Section 87 of the Criminal Code. It relates to a person employed in the public service or holding any public office, who corruptly asks, receives, or procures (arranges) any property (including funds) or benefit for himself or any other person, is guilty of a crime. Penalty is imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years and a fine at the discretion of the Court. The provision (section) also states that a person cannot be arrested for Official Corruption without a Warrant.

A Warrant of Arrest is an official order of the Court compelling those it is directed to, in this case Police to arrest a person(s) accused of committing a crime and that they be brought before the Court to answer the charges against them.

Police have constitutional powers (Section 197(1)(2)) to arrest, charge and prosecute any person believed to have committed any offence(s) For most criminal offences Police do not require a Warrant to arrest and charge a person unless the particular offence defined under the Criminal Code says so, which is the case for Official Corruption.

The process for obtaining a Warrant of Arrest involves Police (investigating officer) moving a formal application before the District Court pursuant to Section 49 of the District Court Act. The provision prescribes that where information (police sworn statement of charges) is laid (submitted) before a Magistrate, that a person is suspected of having committed a criminal offence in PNG. Magistrate may then issue a warrant for the arrest of that person and cause him to be brought before the Court to answer to the information and to be further dealt with according to law.

The process of obtaining a warrant (court order) allows the Court to firstly independently consider whether the information is genuine and sufficient to warrant issuing an order for the person’s arrest.

So the Prime Minister is believed to have committed official corruption (criminal offence) for his part in allegedly procuring the fraudulent payments of K71.8m to the benefit of Paraka Lawyers. Evidence of this being his written instructions (letter dated 24th January 2012) to both the Minister of Treasury Don Polye and Minister of Finance James Marape to process the payments.

To effect Prime Minister’s arrest the investigating officer namely Gitua made a formal application (laid information) before the Chief Magistrate of the District Court for a Warrant as required by law (Section 87 of Criminal Code). Chief Magistrate after considering the information laid before her granted the Warrant on 12th June 2014.

The terms of the Warrant of Arrest directed or commanded Damaru and Gitua of National Fraud Squad including the Officer in Charge of Police (Commissioner of Police) and all members of the Police Force to arrest Prime Minister and to bring him before a Court of law to be dealt with according to law.

On 16th June 2014 Timothy Gitua in the company of Assistant Commissioner of Police for Crimes Thomas Eluh and Chief Superintendent Peter Guinness served the warrant of arrest together with letter from Commissioner of Police Tomai Kulunga on the Prime Minister at around 9:30am at his private business office at Konedobu in National Capital District (Remington).

Commissioner invited the Prime Minister for a formal interview. This letter reads:

"My dear Prime Minister”

“REQUEST FOR FORMAL RECORD OF INTERVIEW”

“With the greatest respect to yourself and your esteemed office, I refer to the above and request your attendance at the National Fraud and Anti-Corruption Directorate at Konedobu, National Capital District for a formal record of interview at 11.00am or 1.00pm on 16th June, 2014.”

“The interview relates to the allegations of fraudulent payments made to Paul Paraka Lawyers between February, 2012 (sic) and May 2013. The investigations were carried out at your request through a Prime Ministerial Directive issued under your hand dated 13th May, 2013.”

“Pursuant to the requirements of law, a warrant of arrest has been issued today, ordering police to arrest you. A copy of the warrant of arrest dated 12th June 2014 is enclosed herein for your reference. You would note that a warrant is a court order demanding police to effect your arrest.”

“It would help if you could make your way to the nominated time and place for a formal record of interview and answer questions that would be put to you formally.”

Yours sincerely,
(Signed)
Toami Kulunga, Kt, OBE, DPS, QPM
Commissioner of Police"
Out of respect for the high office the officers did not arrest the Prime Minister on the spot as required by the warrant but asked him to accompany them to Police Headquarters to be interviewed. However the Prime Minister refused, explaining he would first obtain advice from his lawyer and voluntarily turn up at the Police Station later that afternoon around 2pm.

Prime Minister fearing arrest instead rushed to Parliament House hiding behind Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act that prohibits a Member of Parliament being arrested or the execution of any warrants within the precincts (grounds) of Parliament during Parliament Sittings. From Parliament the Prime Minister then issued instructions to his lawyer(s) to rush to Court to file an urgent application before the National Court staying (stopping) his arrest.

At around the same time Minister of Finance James Marape who was also facing charges over the same issue had initiated proceedings in the National Court against Paraka Lawyers seeking orders for the taxation (court assessment) of Paraka legal bills and a declaration that any bills paid in excess the amount be refunded by Paraka Lawyers and that any excess amount shall be deemed lawful and legal.

In other words Marape was trying to avoid criminal charges for his part in facilitating the fraudulent payments to Paraka Lawyers by trying to get the Court to legalise them through the process of taxation, seeking to have bills assessed by the Court and any excess (fraudulent payments) repaid.
Marape had filed the proceedings three months earlier in March 2014 after receiving a formal request for interview from the Commissioner of Police notifying him that “Police through the work of the Task Force Sweep have analysed the information that was gathered and are of the opinion that there is evidence of criminality implicating yourself in the complaint, hence the need to speak to you."

Through his lawyer, Marape requested for the interview to be deferred until the determination of certain National Court proceedings. While the proceedings were on foot (underway) Marape filed an application seeking an interim stay against his arrest pending the final determination of the proceedings however at the time the Prime Minister was facing his arrest Marape had yet to move his application.

Prime Ministers lawyers filed an urgent application joining Marape’s proceedings and sought a stay (stop) against his arrest until the Court had first determined whether or not the Paraka bills were lawful through the process of taxation. Marape also used the opportunity to move his application at the same hearing.

To be continued ....Part 2

by LUCAS KIAP

MPs are supposed to be lawmakers and not cheque book carriers promising to deliver basic government services.

Implementing government policies and delivering basic services is the function and the responsibility of the public service mechanism in the country and not MPs.

How did this happened?

Basic services is not rocket science.

A drug addict or a street seller can be voted into parliament to deliver basic services becuse money (budget) for basic services should be there regardless of whoever is voted into parliament.

People have the right to basic government services by law under the constitution. That's the reason why there is an elected government in a democracy, serving the people and not themselves.

No MP or government should promise people to deliver basic services or take credit for providing basic services when people already own everything including the MPs and the government.

MPs are supposed to be legislators, lawmakers and not basic service delivers or cheque book carriers. MPs supposed to make laws, pass legislations, write policies, and development plans. MPs supposed to be the defult check and balances making sure that public servants are implementing government policies and delivering basic services to the people. MPs supposed to live among the people and make sure their interests are properly served. MPs supposed to debate issues, laws and bills in the parliament before being passed. Being in the government does not necessarily mean you have to be silent on critical issues of national concern and vote for every bill to be passed.

What kind of democracy have we become over the 40 years? Are we confused in running the country? Are we deceiving the illiterate rural people? Are we simply ignorant or are we lost?

We have more serious issues for the MPs to debate in the parliament and address them. The following are some serious issues affecting this country for the last 40 years and which every MP should be engaging in addressing them:

1. Job creation - more than 85 % of the population still unemployed and live in rural villages untouchable by basic services;

2. Energy security - the growth of the country needs cheap and reliable energy;

3. High cost of living - PNG is one of the most expansive countries in the world;

4. Food security - a healthy population will increase productivity and reduce medical costs. Reduce high cost of living;

5. External and internal security - buildup of Indonesia military in the border is a concern. Tribal fights and ethnic violence is a grave concern;

6. High cost of housing - the country needs cheap and affordable housing for every income level;

7. Law and order problem - high unemployment and poverty is the cause of most law and order problems. The defense force and police force in the country becoming a problem too;

8. Economic growth - diversification of the economy to grow every economic potential;

9. Infrastructures - connecting up all provinces to boost traded and trousim;

10. Corruption - trapping millions in poverty and contributing to the law and order problems; and

11. You can add onto this list

MPs supposed to be discussing these issues and not becoming obsessed with cheque books.

We have lowered the standard of politics so low to a point where MPs are now becoming mare cheque book carriers taking away the function and responsibility of the public service servants.

Why MPs are becoming too obsessed with cheque books and basic service delivers is a concern now.

Should they be interested in the K15million DSIP funds in the pretext of providing basic services?

Because of the MP's obsessed with cheque books and the K15million DSIP, the ruling party in the government is now using the DSIP funds as a bite to attract more MPs into the government in the pretext of stability.This is becoming a major concern for MPs to address in the parliament.

If there is any better use of the DSIP funds then definitely it is MP's pocket money to use on anything they wish as there are no strict monitoring and compliance mechanisms in place to trace and monitor the usage of funds and show physical evidence of projects built.

What the country needs is a standardized and nationalized development concept for every provinces and districts to distribute the country's wealth fairly and equally without blaming MPs for not delivering basic services. Whether MPS perform or not must not be an issue or excuse. The development model should automatically trigger development in every districts without necessarily the input of the local MP. This is another serious issue we have in the country blaming MPs for not delivering basic services when those MPs supposed to be investigated and prosecuted.

Delivering basic services is not rocket science and this must be understood by the people. We are not going to preach forever about delivering basic services. We must talking about progressing and advancing the country to a developed country.

We are not going to go on like this forever blaming ghosts and wrong leaders for the missing of billions and lack of basic services.

This must end and we must end this in 2017.

EXCLUSIVE - SYDNEY MORNING HERALD
'The days of banging a million bucks into an account are gone'


Lawyer Greg Sheppard is seen in this secret recording explaining how to avoid detection when making illegal payments to foreign politicians.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIZfjbE8Abc&feature=youtu.be Australia has been exposed as a safe haven for corrupt funds from overseas after a pair of top lawyers were caught on video explaining how regional leaders steal money from their own people and park it in bank accounts here.

Fairfax Media has obtained recordings of an undercover sting that show one Papua New Guinea lawyer, Harvey Maladina, explaining how a "prestigious" law firm and a well-known Queen's counsel issue inflated invoices to conceal the movements of corrupt money.


Papua New Guinea lawyer Harvey Maladina.

And his law firm partner, former Queensland crown prosecutor Greg Sheppard, is shown on camera saying that the "only way" to bribe foreign politicians and avoid getting caught is to pay "small dribs and drabs" disguised as commercial transactions.


Both Mr Sheppard and Mr Maladina are considered to be close to PNG Prime Minister Peter O'Neill and senior ministers and advisers, upon whom Canberra relies heavily for providing the Manus Island immigration detention centre. Mr Sheppard was appointed in 2014 as a "resident" director of the company that provides security to the centre, but resigned in January.

But covertly-filmed footage using operatives posing as Australian businessmen opens an unprecedented window into how Australian lawyers, accountants and migration agents enable corrupt politicians to undermine their impoverished home countries and shift billions of dollars into the relative safety of Australian bank accounts and real estate.

The footage filmed by anti-corruption NGO Global Witness exposes deep complacency among Australian politicians and enforcement agencies, as well as large holes in Australia's regulatory regime.


On Tuesday, Fairfax Media revealed how corrupt high-ranking Malaysian officials had teamed with Australian developers to launder kickbacks through a multi-million dollar student apartment complex in Caulfield, Melbourne. Those officials relied on a local financial services firm and auditing firm to create offshore companies used to facilitate the transactions.

The PNG sting operation goes much further, showing Australian lawyers coaching prospective clients on how to move suspect funds without attracting police attention.

"It would have to be something that didn't raise suspicion, something that was ostensibly commercial," says Mr Sheppard, to the under-cover operative.

"The days of banging a million bucks into this secret numbered account in Singapore is over," he says.

Mr Sheppard acts for "prominent clients in Papua New Guinea, including Prime Ministers, Ministers of State and businessmen", according to his website. His clients include senior figures in the government of Mr O'Neill, who is considered an ally of Canberra, and has been implicated in several huge financial scandals.


He also manages and finances his childrens' smash-hit pop group, Sheppard.

Three of Mr Sheppard's children are in the Brisbane indie-pop group, Sheppard, which had a number-one Australian hit single, Geronimo, and has been nominated for several major recording industry awards. He resigned his directorship of Manus Island detention centre to protect the family band from the stigma associated with it.

The second lawyer, Mr Maladina, claims on camera that his brother, convicted fraudster Jimmy Maladina, is "very close" and "chief adviser" to Mr O'Neill.

"He advises Peter, he talks to the Prime Minister every five minutes," says Harvey Maladina, about his brother Jimmy. "You want a license … he gets it."

The footage shows Mr Maladina boasting about how his brother Jimmy acted as a middleman to hide corrupt payments relating to the National Provident Fund, a workers' pension fund, that went "back to the prime minister". He says the brother covered up Mr O'Neill's involvement by fleeing to Australia for several years.


"The problem was there was a missing link in this chain and that was my brother," he says.

"They didn't extradite him [during the fraud inquiry] so that saved the prime minister."

In late May, after a 17-year legal odyssey, Jimmy Maladina was convicted of corruptly stealing funds in 1998 from the National Provident Fund, which he chaired. Mr O'Neill was cleared in a PNG court in 2006 over his role in the deal.


Both Mr Maladina and Mr Sheppard may face investigations by Australian legal bodies over their comments. It is understood that the covert vision has been provided to federal police.

"Australians should harbor no illusions that corruption is someone else's problem", said Rick Jacobsen, a campaigner at Global Witness. "The exposes published by Fairfax Media this week put Australia at the epicentre of regional corruption and money laundering that is harming ordinary Australians and the citizens of impoverished neighbours like Papua New Guinea alike."

"Lax laws allow unscrupulous lawyers, property developers and accountants to turn financial centres like Australia and Singapore into havens for stashing dirty money," said Jacobsen. "Governments have a responsibility to act, starting with full investigations and appropriate sanctions, and leading to regulatory reforms that increase oversight of high risk professions."

The undercover footage also shows Harvey Maladina naming a leading Australian Queen's counsel that he uses to issue inflated legal invoices to launder corrupt funds.

"He's billed us more previously," Mr Maladina says.


Asked to clarify that the QC is willing to adjust the bill to a higher amount, in order to disguise money transfers to Australia, Mr Maladina responds: "Sure."

"Normally if it's through the law firms, they don't usually question that because it's – especially if it's a firm that I'm based with, it's a prestigious firm …" Mr Maladina says.

Fairfax Media cannot name the QC for legal reasons.

Mr Maladina explains that this money laundering system is far preferable to wiring large lump sums into Australia, which can attract official attention.

Mr Sheppard, who operates out of PNG and Australia, is also shown on video cautioning against using local Australian banks directly to make "mobilisation payments".

"Those sorts of mobilisation fees really ought to originate from offshore," he states.

"There is no possible way of transferring funds here because … the banks are required to divest information [about politicians] so there's no confidential banking."

Mr Sheppard states that any suspicious transactions need to be structured in ways that avoid scrutiny from foreign investigators.


He warns that American regulators are becoming more aggressive in tracking possible payments to financial hubs, like Hong Kong and Singapore.

Regulators in Singapore, in turn, are behaving "like Nazis," he says.

Nevertheless, Mr Maladina is recorded describing how an associate, who he describes as a senior official in the PNG gaming commission, "flew over to Singapore recently … to collect some payments".

"He came back quite a happy man."

Approached for comment by Fairfax Media, Mr Maladina and Mr Sheppard, who are now partners in the same law firm, said in separate statements that they had never engaged in any wrongdoing.

Mr Sheppard said: "I am often approached informally by a variety of people who are not clients to share aspects of my knowledge and practical experience in PNG, and in these areas of the law. My comments on these occasions are by the very nature of the exchange, general, hypothetical and merely descriptive. I always assume that those who ask me for this kind of information are doing so to broaden their understanding of the issues and practices here under the relevant laws."

Mr Maladina said: " These allegations are not true. I met an American businessman at the Airways Hotel in Port Moresby last year but at no time did I make or insinuate that illegal payments can be made through my firm or through my partner Mr Greg Sheppard."


Sydney Morning Herald

PNG SELLING CITIZENSHIP IS NOTHING NEW, ASK JOE CHAN

 by JAMES PERAKIN

Isn't it ironic that since Somare's last reign, long serving missionaries in PNG have found it so hard to get visas to stay in PNG permanently while any foreign con artist biz man waving money gets any visa they want or even a PNG passport. Which category is JT in?


PNG'S LAW ON CITIZENSHIP

Section 67.-CITIZENSHIP BY NATURALIZATION.

(1) A person who has resided continuously in the country for at least eight years may apply to the Minister responsible for citizenship matters to be naturalized as a citizen, and the Minister may, if he is satisfied as to the matters referred to in Subsection (2), in his deliberate judgement (but subject to Division 4 (Citizenship Advisory Committee)), grant or refuse the application.
Division 4. – Citizenship Advisory Committee.

75. THE COMMITTEE.

(1) An Act of the Parliament shall make provision for a Citizenship Advisory Committee, all of the members of which must be citizens (other than naturalized citizens).
(2) The Committee shall consist of–
(a) four permanent members, at least two of whom are members of the Parliament other than Ministers; and
(b) one ad hoc member to represent the community in which the person to whom a matter before the Committee relates resides.

76. FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE.
(1) Before taking any action under this Part in relation to a person, the Minister responsible for citizenship matters shall refer the matter to the Citizenship Advisory Committee and receive its advice.
(2) If the Minister refuses to accept the advice of the Committee on any matter referred to it under Subsection (1), he shall, if so requested by a person affected or by the Committee, give to the Parliament, as soon as practicable, a statement on the matter setting out the reasons for his refusal, and the Parliament may reverse his decision on such conditions as it thinks proper.
(3) The reversal by the Parliament of a decision to grant or to allow the regaining of citizenship, or to grant a certificate under Section 81 (certificate as to citizenship), takes effect, subject to any conditions to which it is made subject, as a deprivation of citizenship on the date of the reversal.
(4) The reversal by the Parliament of a decision to refuse to grant citizenship to a person, to deprive a person of citizenship or to refuse to grant a certificate under Section 81 (certificate as to citizenship) takes effect retrospectively to the date of the decision.
(5) The Committee has such powers and such other functions and duties as are conferred or imposed by or under an Act of the Parliament.

The constitution clearly states that the minister responsible shall refer citizenship applications to the Citizenship Advisory committee.
Considering the well publicized fact that the Citizenship Advisory committee did not sit or even exist between 1999 and 2009 and as such there was a ten year backlog of citizenship Applications that were not processed until 2009 when the Committee was re-established.

How was this particular foreigner granted citizenship by the minister in 2006 without vetting by the Citizenship Advisory committee? On what authority did the then minister grant citizenship to the applicant if there was no Citizenship Advisory committee? Is the foreigners Papua New Guinean citizenship actually valid?

This particular foreigner was granted citizenship in 2006 (unlawfully ?) and subsequently stood for election as a candidate with the party that was headed by the very minister that granted his citizenship. His election at that time was unsuccessful. However he stood for election again in 2012 with another party and is now a government minister.

Is this foreigner a legitimate PNG Citizen and if not is he not illegally occupying elected office? I am not making an allegation, Just asking a question

by WILLIAM KEP

Greg Sheppard on trying to guess who is the person demanding a bribe of the anti-corruption fighter: 
Anti-corruption fighter in disguise says "May I sort of take a risk and trust you with a name?  Obviously I'd ask that....




It is time for you to start standing up more against corruption and the injustice that is drowning our country.  Don't read this as another article, shake your head, and continue as before, doing nothing about it.  As long as you do nothing, and everyone else does nothing, that will leave only the corrupt people in PNG working hard and doing something.   They will remain in control like a mafia and the fault will rest with you and me. 

by BRYAN KRAMER

Greg Sheppard PNG’s highest profile lawyer, recently for all the wrong reasons has warned the media not to publish any material from the secretly-filmed footage aired by SBS. He was referring to video footage that depicted himself and his firm's partner Harvey Maladina discussing how funds can be laundered out of PNG.

In his defence Sheppard argues he has done nothing wrong, the secret recording was done without his consent and a criminal act. He is seeking advice on that and considering his options.

Many Papua New Guineas from all walks of life, grass roots to professionals took to social media to vent their disgust after viewing the special report aired on SBS Date-line on Wednesday evening. The report explained how high-level Government Ministers launder funds overseas facilitated by reputable legal firms in PNG and Australia by inflating the legal fees billed to clients.

Mr. Marku Bake a member PNG’s largest social media group boasting 106,000 members said “Wake up PNGians from your ignorant slumber.......Am speechless and cannot sleep at all!”

Mr Nips Gerason responded “its such a deep cut to us PNGIANS, the majority of the populace live in poverty, a reflection of this is evident in almost everywhere you go in PNG. the cut to the chase here is this is just the tip of the iceberg the rot has been in this country since independence, cronies cashing in hefty jackpots, using every means to extort billions. I’ve seen the telecast its just stinking corrupt shit.”

Hans Columbus said: “How can the PNG Government bring in the AFP to help train the PNG Constabulary when they can't stop money laundering in their country??”

Ted Sine Auro who is a Civil Engineer and lives in Tari said “Where is the future for our beloved country Papua New Guinea when the very people (Politicians, top bureaucrats, the legal fraternity) that should protect the well fare and sovereignty of this country are laundering our nation's wealth through corrupt deals and investing it overseas while our country is falling apart???”

“Do these corrupt top shots when they live and drive around in the luxuries realise the struggle that almost 90% of our countrymen, countrywomen & innocent children are facing everyday because of these corrupt people's greed??? “

“Please my countrymen we have to do something here before it's too late.
Please God save my beautiful, wonderful, vibrant and Unique motherland of Papua New Guinea that I'll forever embrace and love.”

Thousands of comments followed after the report went viral. Most took issue with the fact a foreigner who has benefited from business interests earning millions of kina and recipient of distinguished medals bestowed on him by PNG to have made such despicable remarks about our country that has given him so much. Confirmed by his infamous remark acknowledging "it’s not wonderful [in PNG] but it’s not like I’m here for, my health.

Sheppard’s claim he has done nothing wrong is misconceived the Lawyers Act states unequivocally that lawyers admitted to practice are prohibited from illegal, dishonourable improper and unprofessional” practices.

For now the criminal allegations of money laundering facilitated by his firm is a separate issue reported to be subject of investigation by Australian Federal Police.

However it is beyond question both lawyers conduct depicted in the video is deplorable, dishonourable and unprofessional and the footage is evidence to that fact.

The Law Society must now move swiftly to invoke its powers under Section 53 of the lawyers Act to enquire into the improper conduct of both lawyers to have their practising certificates revoked forthwith. The Society may also invoke its powers under Section 8(c) to institute prosecutions.

Conduct by Sheppard may have also breached the conditions of his visa permit imposed on expatriates working in PNG, a matter for the PNG immigration to make inquiries into.

Sheppard’s defence is to blame the people who took the secret video without his permission and published as being a criminal act. He has made reference to the Protection of the Private Communications Act 1973.

It doesn't surprise me he has canvassed PNG legislation in a desperate effort to haemorrhage the fallout from the recent scandal, fortunately there is nothing there to afford him the comfort he seeks.

Private Communications Act is pre-independence law that protects the rights of people’s conversations being intercepted or recorded and used against them. It typically applies to restricting Police from setting up wires taps without first obtaining a warrant or by individuals for malicious purposes.

Section 3 of Act states where a person who uses a secret listening device to intercept or to attempt to intercept a private communication is guilty of an offence. Penalty a fine not exceeding K2,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both.

Section 4 relates to the use of illegally intercepted communications. The provision stipulates that a person who divulges (discloses) to another or publishes in any way any information obtained, to the knowledge of that person, by the prohibited interception of a private communication is guilty of an offence. Again the penalty a fine not exceeding K2,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both.

Sheppard accentuates it’s a criminal act in an effort suppress the media reporting details of the disgraceful report. It is important to note that there are no provisions in the criminal code that prescribe secretly recording a conversation without the other parties knowledge is a criminal offence.

However it is an offence prescribed under the Private Conversation Act. (section 3) The overseas journalist who secretly recorded the offence is liable to face summons or charges under Section 3 of Private Conversation Act. Regardless he has since left the country and PNG laws no longer apply him unless he returns any time in the future. It's important to note a person summoned or charged under Section 3 it is not an indictable offence (not serious criminal offence) and would only be summarily dealt with by the District Court. Journalist need only plead guilty and more than likely be fined (K1,000.00). It is rare that a competent court of law would apply a prison term taking into the account the circumstances of the case where a person committed the offence in the public interest and concern by exposing allegations of high level corruption.

It's reported Sheppard would be seeking recompense (compensation) for the fact he feels he is damaged. It’s my view Sheppard has no case for compensation because the law on Defamation Section 8 protects discussion on matters of public interest and concern and if the manner of the publication is such as is ordinarily and fairly used in the publication of news.

Further Section 9 provides protection for fair comment, the provision states it is lawful to publish a fair comment with respect to which the publication of a fair report in good faith for the information of the public is declared to be lawful by Section 8.

Further still Section 10 under Defamation Act provides protection of truth. It is lawful to publish defamatory matter if it is true, and if it is for the public benefit that the publication complained of should be made.

Lastly Section 11 provides for qualified protection, in that it is a lawful excuse for the publication of defamatory matter if the publication is made in good faith for the purposes of discussion of public interest and benefit, and if, so far as the defamatory matter consists of comment, the comment is fair.

The days of ignorant Papua New Guiean's are over!! Welcome to PNG Social Media...

Bire Kimisopa current Member of Goroka Open, former Minister of Internal Security (Police) and Minister of Justice 2006-2007

by BRYAN KRAMER

This is Part 2 of a 5 part series of articles providing an insight into recent National Court’s conviction of the former Commissioner of Police Geoffrey Vaki on two counts of contempt charges for failing to enforce the Warrant of Arrest issued against the Prime Minister Peter O’Neill. Before reading over this article I would first suggest reading Part 1 if you haven’t already done so.

Part 1 discussed the background issues that lead to the District Court issuing the warrant and the efforts by Police to effect the Prime Minister’s arrest on charges of Official Corruption in relation to alleged fraudulent payments of K71.8 million to Paraka Lawyers.

The article concluded at the point where the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance James Marape issued instructions to their lawyers to secure a stay (stop) order against Police from effecting their arrest.

Before continuing from that point I thought it appropriate to first cover a number of other key background issues and events that were overlooked in Part 1. The central issue behind the issuance of warrant of arrest against the Prime Minister relates to fraudulent payments to Paraka Lawyers. Thus I thought it appropriate to first explain the genesis (beginning) of this whole issue to put everything into context.

Paul Paraka is a lawyer and principle owner of Paraka Lawyers. On 19th December 2002, the then Attorney General (AG) or Minister of Justice, the late Francis Damem, briefed-out (engaged) Paraka Lawyers to act for the State (Government) on 56 matters (cases). These were followed by a further 210 matters in 2004, bringing the total briefs to Paraka Lawyers to 267.

The term brief-out is used when a legal firm or lawyer engages another legal firm or lawyer to take up a case on their behalf. This practice is common when the principle lawyer or legal firm lacks any knowledge in particular area of law or they are overwhelmed with existing cases.

Attorney General (AG) is the chief or principle legal advisor (lawyer) of Government providing advice to National Executive Council (NEC) or Cabinet. If a Member of Parliament who is a lawyer by profession and appointed to be Minister of Justice they automatically assume rthe position of Attorney General. As opposed to a Member of Parliament who isn’t a lawyer by profession they are referred to as Minister of Justice.

Example Sir Arnold Amet, Kerenga Kua and Ano Pala are all lawyers by profession when they were appointed the Minister of Justice they were all referred to as Attorney General. Member for Goroka Open Bire Kimisopa was appointed as the Minister in 2006 he was referred to as Minister of Justice. In such instances the Secretary of the Department of Justice assumes the position of Attorney General, principle chief legal advisor to NEC not the Minister of Justice.

Department of Justice or Attorney General’s (AG) Office is the legal department in charge of all legal matters on behalf of the State (Government). Headed by Secretary of Justice who is a lawyer by profession and is in-charge of the two other legal branches of the Department, Offices of Solicitor General and State Solicitor. Solicitor General is a lawyer whose office's primary function is to represent the State on matters before the Courts. While the State Solicitor provides legal advice or opinion on legal or legislative matters including drafting contracts and other legal documents. All contracts involving the Government must be first cleared or vetted by the Office of State Solicitor.

Government has its own qualified legal officers that include Attorney General, State Solicitor, Solicitor General, Public Prosecutor and Public Solicitor. All are paid positions under the Public Service and their officers are fully staffed. An organisation having its own lawyers reduces the cost of engaging private law firms who’s services can be expensive and unnecessary, especially when you already have paid legal officers who can perform the same services.

However there will be instances where the Government will need to seek legal advice outside the Attorney General’s Office. In such cases the Attorney General will brief-out to outside lawyers or legal firms on matters where it has little or no legal knowledge, e.g specialist areas of law such as Environmental Law or Oil & Gas legislation. Or where the AG Office is understaffed and overwhelmed with a backlog of cases against the Government. Any briefs to a private law firm or lawyer must be by formal approval of the Attorney General pursuant to (in accordance with) Attorney General's Act. Their engagement as a service provider to Government must also comply with Finance Management Act.

So in 2002 the then Attorney General late Francis Damem, briefed-out Paraka Lawyers to act for the State. It is unclear what the nature of the cases were or reasons behind it.

On 18th September 2002 the State paid K41.9 million to Paraka lawyers which included K3.9 million that covered a period prior to Paraka Lawyers even being engaged. Between 2003-2006 Paraka Lawyers continued to act for the State on all matters including cases on behalf of the Public Solicitor.

During that period Paraka Lawyers was billing the Government for 100’s of millions of kina for purported legal services carried out on behalf of the State all while the Government had its own lawyers who should have been acting in those matters.

In April 2006 Member for Goroka Open Bire Kimisopa was appointed Minister of Justice, soon after taking office he issued directive to the then Chief Secretary of Somare Government Joshua Kalinoe directing the then Acting Secretary of Finance Department Gabriel Yer to cease all further payments to Paraka Lawyers.

In October 2006 Minister Kimisopa with the endorsement of NEC chaired by Grand Chief Somare terminated all brief-outs to Paraka Lawyers and ordered a Commission of Inquiry in the Department of Finance relating to the substantial payments to the law firm.

On 10th November 2006 Paraka Lawyers filed National Court proceedings, OS 829 of 2006 by way of Judicial Review challenging the decision of Chief Secretary Kalinoe, Acting Secretary of Finance and Treasury ceasing all payments to his firm. The matter came before Justice Hinchliffe, on 17th November 2006, at the initial hearing Paraka Lawyers moved an application for leave for Judicial Review and was also granted the following interim orders.

(1) Leave is granted to Paraka Lawyers for Judicial Review.

(2) The stop-payment directive by Chief Secretary to the Acting Secretary for Finance is stayed (stopped) pending the determination of the substantive Judicial Review.

(3) Secretary of Treasury Simon Tosali identify funds and issue a special warrant for the sum of K6, 499,436.44 to Acting Secretary of Finance Gabriel Yer forthwith, who in turn shall arrange the payments to be made to Paraka Lawyers by or before 1:30pm today, Friday 17th November, 2006.

(4) Further or in the alternative, the Secretary of Finance identify savings/funds and pay Paraka Lawyers all of its outstanding legal fees of K6, 499,436.44 by or before 1:30pm today, Friday 17th November, 2006.

(5) Once the cheque is paid to Paraka Lawyers the other parties namely Chief Secretary, Secretaries of Treasury and Finance and the State are restrained from cancelling or putting a stop-payment to the cheque.

(6) Further still they are restrained from issuing any further stop-payment directives, or from taking any steps whatsoever to frustrate, or delay or cease payment in legal fees owing to Paraka Lawyers upon the necessary clearance by the Attorney General, pending the determination of the substantive judicial review.

(7) Secretaries of Treasury & Finance shall pay the Parka Lawyers out of monies lawfully available any subsequent legal fees of the Paraka Lawyers that have been or may be sent to them by the Attorney General pending determination of the substantive judicial review.

(8) Minister for Justice and Attorney General be restrained from issuing any directives, or any form of advise whatsoever to the Secretaries of Treasury & Finance for the purposes of stopping, frustrating or delaying or ceasing payments of legal fees owing to Paraka Lawyers legal firm pending determination of the substantive judicial review.

(9) Lastly that the parties appear before the Court at 1:30pm today, Friday 17th November, 2006 to advise the Court of the compliance to Orders in paragraph 3 and 4 herein and for further directions.

On the same day of the above orders were granted, Attorney General's office quickly filed an appeal kin Supreme Court and obtained a stay against Justice Hinchliffe’s orders.

The decision by National Court Judge was not only unprecedented and bizarre it was fundamentally flawed. In all the case laws (past case court judgements) I have read I have never come across such a peculiar ruling.

If you take a person to Court who owes you a substantial amount of money the substantive matter is for the Court to hear the evidence and arguments to determine whether or not you are owed the monies as you claim. The substantive relief is an order of the Court that you be paid. The Court will only grant such orders when it is has established the facts (truth) and satisfied the relief (orders) you seek is just in the circumstances of your case.

The Court will never grant you a substantive relief until it’s determined the facts by first conducting a trial to hear the evidence and establish the facts by both parties. Or where other party fails to defend the case, the Court may order a default judgement in your favour.

During the course of the proceedings the Court may typically grant interim orders to assist the Court in dealing with a case. Examples are stay or injunctive order prohibiting one party from taking any further action until the Court has made a determination or made a substantive ruling.

To grant a substantive relief before first conducting a proper trial to establish the facts would be an abuse of natural justice because the other party has yet to be heard or present their case.

Where a Court makes a ruling against you whether interlocutory (interim) or substantive you may appeal (challenge) the decision in Supreme Court (higher court). While the matter is still before the Supreme Court you may move or make an application to stay the National Court interim orders until the Supreme Court makes a ruling on your appeal to confirm whether it was proper and just.

To the ordinary person it may sound all too exhausting and a time consuming process, that’s because it is. It’s where lawyers make their money dragging out cases thus providing opportunity to keep billing their clients. Hence why large corporations can drag out a case for years filing application after application, appeal after appeal until the other party goes broke in the process and forced to abandon their case.

Back on point, so in this case Paraka Lawyers filed court proceedings OS 829 of 2006 by way Judicial Review against the decision to cease payments to its firm for legal services performed on behalf of the State. The substantive relief sought being that they be paid all of its outstanding legal fees totalling K6, 499,436.44.

At the initial hearing before Justice Hinchliffe, Paraka Lawyers somehow obtained substantive orders that the Government pay them K6.49 million even before the Court had yet to determine whether or not Paraka Lawyers were even entitled to be paid. Further still the orders directed both Secretaries of Treasury and Finance to pay Paraka by 1:30pm the same day the orders were given.

Imagine attending preliminary hearing in Court in the morning and then ordered to pay the other party K6.9m by 1:30pm that same day without even being afforded the opportunity to present your defence against the claim. After reading the orders by Hinchliffe it is clear Paraka Lawyers prepared those orders with the intent to ensure he was paid forthwith.

Fortunately Minister of Justice and Chief Secretary acted quickly to file an appeal and stayed the orders. With the matter locked up in the Supreme Court Paraka Lawyers then filed a second proceedings OS 876 of 2006 on 29th November 2006 using it to challenge the decision of Minister of Justice Bire Kimisopa and NEC to terminate all briefs to Paraka Lawyers.

The matter came before the same Judge Hinchliffe on 14th December 2006. Judge again granted Paraka Lawyers leave for Judicial Review and issued the following substantive orders on 2nd March 2007 that:

(1) Secretary of for Treasury forthwith upon receipt of this Order identify funds and release a special warrant for the sum of K6.4 million to the Secretary for Finance (Mr. Gabriel Yer) who shall arrange for a cheque for the same amount to be made payable to Paul Paraka Lawyers by or before 3:00pm today, 2nd March 2007.

(2) Bank of Papua New Guinea, through Mr. Ezekiel Bangin, Manager (Governor Accounts) clear the Department of Finance cheque once issued and have the appropriate Bank warrant issued immediately to the Bank of South Pacific, Port Moresby by 3:00pm today, 2nd March, 2007, to be credited to the Paraka Lawyers Bank Account.

(3) Bank of Papua New Guinea disregard any stop-payment directive either verbally or in writing from any officers of the Department of Finance including the Secretary for Finance and comply with the Orders set out in paragraph 2 herein forthwith.

(4) Secretaries for Finance (Mr. Gabriel Yer) or any Officer acting in his place and Treasury (Mr. Simon Tosali) and Mr. Ezekiel Bangin of the Bank of Papua New Guinea appear before the Court at 3:45pm today, 2nd March, 2007 to advise the Court of the compliance of the Court Orders."

The following day on 3rd March 2007, the State again filed an appeal, SCM No. 3 of 2007 and stayed the orders of Hincliffe J.

The second effort by the Paraka Lawyers to extort funds from the State using Court orders was prevented by the quick actions of Minister of Justice Bire Kimisopa. With both proceedings now locked up in the Supreme Court the then Prime Minister Grand Chief Somare appointed Commission of Inquiry into the Department of Finance on concerns as of rampant corruption and misuse of billions of kina in public funds.

To think this is only the beginning…… To be Continued Part 3.

PART 1

by  BRIAN FOLOCK


It was foretold through a Gigita Latebo correlated legend called ‘Kwai Topo’ that if the proceeds of PNG LNG are not coped effectively or managed well, the economic upshots would be far more injurious than the benefits. Thus this article divulges Gigita Latebo’s prophetical resource-curse thus the much chatted PNG LNG Project or Hela’s Gigita Latebo has hidden economic furies as well as benefits.

Background

Gigita Latebo legend is the Hela region’s legendary myth held for long generations of an everlasting fire or light that one day would be engaged to light up the whole world. That boundless light, as we have now realized happened to be the undeveloped natural gas deposits which Exxon Mobil and partners including the government extracted and shipped to light up the world thereby gratifying the prophesy.
The legend has been foretold in many parts of the surrounding regions of Hela or Hela progenies which can be viewed as related myths with the same import but retold slightly and in different style. In these, the economic wraths are seized and revealed.

This article meets a related legend, known as the “Kwai Topo” and is relatively analogous to the Gigita Latebo prophesy. It divulges not only the economic benefits but furies as well. And it also delivers acumens into what these furies are in order to enlighten Papua New Guineans to organize to enjoy the benefits of the PNG LNG Project. If we are not primed to reap its benefits, the legend holds that the diagonal effects would inflict great economic discharge and dejection on the lives of the average Papua New Guineans.

Introduction

On February 10th 2014 I wrote in the letters column ‘Agiru- Olkoben combination best for Hela’ followed by ‘Unity for Hela’ or another, ‘Hela’s issues as important as national issues’ and others. A Weekender Feature magazine of the Post Courier newspaper quoted several reinforcement sockets from these articles. These articles reconsidered Hela Governor Anderson Agiru’s undeterred decisions and premonitions to assemble men, machine and money to flag mode Hela’s development as well as the chucks of all to be integrated to see Hela sets off on its voyage to progress.
If you have seen them, there were some severities of issues to be measured amidst the unresolved Gigita Latebo’s development issues and the beneficial structures and systems including proper land demarcations and clan vetting, benefit delivery structures and others that are urgently needed to be positioned.

Today, on the face of it, it is rigid to scope the Gigita Latebo era of Hela. The future of Hela, in other words, is inflexible to calculate thus the inaccuracies in establishing the doles of Gigita Latebo. Gigita Latebo, the infinite light is the legendary gas. Where was it found? If someone comes and takes your generationally sacred treasure without your permission or commissioning you, would you let it go? How will it benefit the keepers of where it was found? When will its benefits start to flow and impact their lives including the Hela progenies and Papua New Guinea in general? How will the proceeds be managed?
This article could sound just a little too late but Gigita Latebo’s sister legend, Kwai Topo has some stunning as well as bloodcurdling leaks of the depraved side of the profoundly ballyhooed Gigita Latebo or PNG LNG.

The Kwai Topo legend

The forefathers of the Huli’s had five sons and their progenies populated the central, eastern, western and southern ends of the vast Hela region. The descendants at the utmost south have a relatively similar fairytale or prophesy called the “Kwai Topo” foretold for many generations. There is significant bearing and leaks that not only Hela and its descendants but Papua New Guinea as a whole ought to know that there are secret economic savageries or curses of Gigita Latebo which if we are not focused, arranged and geared up to embrace the benefits of the everlasting light, we are predestined for calamitous economic adversities with uncontainable corollaries.
Kwai Topo legend currently sounds like the original Gigita Latepo of an everlasting fire called “kwaitopo” burning in infinity in the north (interestingly now Hela) which an albino (literally a European man) from a dreamy place would one day come and take away to light up houses beyond the mountains and faraway foreign and unheard places.

The albino, with the kwaitopo alit and raised up in the air, will appear on a high speed, riding on a red pig’s back from the north heading to the south. The legend hold that one must see a glimpse of it, touch it or even catch it whilst on its way and do not let it by-pass. For if let it go by, it will be the end of the world! Letting it by-pass without seeing it, touching it, catching it or chopping off a piece of the rosy pig’s meat has the buried economic savageries.
Or usually, an old man would be sitting up late in the early hours of a night in a half-lit houseman whilst occupants lie down and recap the legend in his astute tendency that there is a red pig in the land of Huls (Huli or Hela). It will be slaughtered and put on the fire to get rid of its hair but the blood of the pig will put off the fire where the host jets off in search of an everlasting fire called Gigita Latepo to reignite the fire. The dead pig will then regain conscious, become desolate and start attacking to run away. The host will arrive with the eternal flame but about the same time, an enflamed man (albino) will arrive from nowhere, grab the flame, jump on the back of the wild pig and head south.
It will pass through this land thus the sons of this land ensure to catch it together with the albino and kill it before it escapes again. The pig will be slaughtered, its heart detached and the meat cooked with another everlasting fire called Kwai Topo which is in this village (Kware). Some fatigued Huli men will come after their pig. The person who catches the pig, who will automatically be someone from this village (Kware) will then make peace with the Huli men and share between many people from here, in Huli and elsewhere. The heart will be shared among the Hulis and its progenies.

 Kwai Topo - Agiru

When Southern Highlands (by then) and current Hela favorite son Governor Anderson Agiru came into power in the 1990’s, and continued his undeterred leadership, many people translated the Kwai Topo legend with Anderson Agiru. That the red pig is Anderson Agiru and the eternal flame is the power he continues to hold. He knows all the hamlets, creeks, hills and mountains in every corners of the province (Hela inclusive) and even knows people by name. He is supernatural, everlasting thus the Kwaitopo legend has rephrased with Agiru.
The Kwaitopo prophesy and the article, “Agiru-Olkoben” recipe has some noteworthy correlation between them too. Literally, Kwai Topo means a dry and piping hot wood from a tree called Kwai. The wood produces ferment heat and sparks (Topo) for a long time in a fire-place. Interestingly, it narrates to and has the identical literal import to the unusual Gigita Latebo.
Lawrence Olkoben comes from a village called Kwai-te (or some called it Kware). In the local dialect, it means a place at the stump of the Kwai tree. The kwaitopo lore is very popular around that village’s locality in Nipa district on the one hand. On the other hand, Gigita Latebo also relates to a very similar undertone. Gigita is the place where the Latebo or the infinite light has been alit (now gone!). Again, literally it means an everlasting and glowing fire at a place called Gigita.
Thus the Hela Provincial Executive Council’s optimal of Lawrence Olkoben as Hela province’s enduring administrator (somehow, the appointment has been delayed for almost a year for unknown reasons), his village’s name and the kwaitopo legend with the Gigita Latebo prophesy have some striking parallels and or bearing – a part of the two legends’ myths fulfilled.

Kwai Topo revelation

Pig is a vastly valued and edible animal. It is exceedingly priced, can be used as mediocre to solve problems, symptom of prestige or mammon, bridal and many are inherent pigs. The pig thus is the purported benefit from LNG. The everlasting fire is the natural gas. Mineral gas burns and glows reddish and for as long as the supply is constant, can light on for ages.
The albino is Exxon Mobil and its partners. An enflamed man (albino) atop a red pig, roar in hurry with an eternal flame, on his way from the north to the south is another exquisite gratification relative to the LNG gas pipeline running from PNG’s northern provinces of Hela and Southern Highlands to the Gulf and Central provinces in the south.
So the rendition of Kwaitopo and the red pig being Anderson Agiru or his leadership were not the precise relationships. Oddly however, Governor Agiru, through his wisdom chattered the PNG LNG Project. His leadership, direction and mission absorbed by his vision cast in the biggest ever natural resources development project - PNG LNG. What a coincidence!
His choice of Hela provincial administrator in Lawrence Olkoben, unmistakably a descendant of one of the Hela sons, whose origination has a fabulous connection with Gigita Latebo, whose cartel is predicted to deliver the Hela Dream, is another amazing gratification of the legends.

Fulfillment of the Legends

It was always firmly felt that when the time of slaughtering the pig arrives in the future as foretold, it will not be cooked in Hela but either in the Kwai Topo legend area or elsewhere as the dead pig would resuscitate and runaway. Interestingly, the groundwork to slaughter the legendary pig or the extraction of the gas was done in Hela but it will not be cooked and served in Hela as it has been piped out (likened to running away) by the albino (Exxon Mobil) to a place called Lealea where the actual distribution of the gas will be done and shared.
The pig has also passed by but a man named Lawrence Olkoben (Opene son), originally from the Kwai Topo legend christened to be the provincial administrator for Hela with Anderson Agiru (Hela/Huli son) as the governor who will take back and distribute the pig (benefits of LNG) to the people (via Hela provincial government). Does not that fulfill the part of the legend that holds for a Kwai Topo man to catch the pig and giving it back to the owners to have the pig meat?
However, though Mr. Olkoben is part and parcel of the legendary gratification as presented, his appointment has been delayed for some unknown reasons. That implies that he has not been able to catch, touch, feel or see the pig with the albino and the eternal flame. What ramifications would this present? Many parts of the legends have come into fruition but this is at large. Kwai Topo has that if one let it passes-by, that’s the end of the world!

Hidden Economic Savageries

Does Gigita Latebo hold the clout to end this world? Is Gigita Latebo a Biblical prophecy that Heavenly God has given his salient muscle to end this world? Haha…..hell no! Rather, the wraths of letting the pig by-pass without any attempt to catch or see it originate within the literal worth of the catch phrases, ‘catching the red pig, killing it and roast its heart, or seeing it by-pass without touching it and or end of the world.
The construction phase of PNG LNG expenditure reached $US19 billion, by far the biggest investment rolling a mammoth cash flow beating the projections of Papua New Guinea’s annual national budget in any one year since independence. Seeing, catching or touching a red beast with an enflamed man atop its back with the eternal flame related to the construction phase of the Gigita Latebo.

The legends connote that the red pig would run away after resuscitation half-burnt but will still be caught, cooked and shared. And this event will be marked by very long periods of preparations. Have the people been given enough time to prepare for this feast? Likewise, were there enough time given to the people prior to the initial stages of the development of LNG project or start-up time to prepare to catch the pig? How far have the people benefited from the construction phase of PNG LNG?
One of the economic curses surfaces here. The trace conveyers of the legends maintained for generations that a red beast will come thus must be prepared to catch it for if not, it will be the end of the world. The initial stages of LNG project development and the start-up time was a very short notice that the developers including the government failed to give enough time to the people thus instead of a physical end of the world, those who have not participated in the construction phase are starting to feel the pain of the economic hardships caused by the massive cash flow and inflation it brought. Worse is yet to come during the actual sharing of the pig meat!
Now, though not necessarily by Kwai Topo’s sons (as foretold), the pig has already been caught. The Huli men have also arrived in pursuit of their pig and the meat went underground (mumu pit) and soon to be served. The heart of the pig has been removed as foretold but however it was cooked and shared, nobody can be assured by the glimpse of hopes.

The heart, in real terms related to the LBSA Agreements on who the main beneficiaries are and how the benefits would be structured to benefit. The terms of references or the contents of LBSA still remains inexact or concealed as to identify the benefits and beneficiaries specifications. This gratifies that the very people who supposed to share the pig’s heart have missed out completely. Accordingly, an economic adverse of the LNG will be so disastrous given the legendary heart has been eaten up by others. The Huli’s will suffer; the Opene’s will suffer economic marginalization. This is no joke!

PNG LNG versus PNG

The red beast has been caught, slaughtered and cooked. It will be served soon. How soon? Since it will be served in an area not specified by the legends, how will it be distributed and by whom? Will the Hela men who have come in pursuit of their pig be able to give a piece to all its descendants? During the actual pig killing ceremonies, the hosts distribute according to the level of hard work done, extended families, invited friends and guests and are ensured that no one misses out. But when a different person distributes the pieces of meat, it does not eventuate the way the host plans. The feast ends up in commotions between families, brothers or the host leadership gets catcalled on the one hand.

On the other hand, the country is said to experience an unprecedented economic growth of 25 per cent which means that the benefit of PNG LNG project would be immeasurable. Cash flow would be extremely high. Then, is Papua New Guinea ready to benefit from such an unparalleled economic rebirth? Is the Sovereign Wealth Fund, the benefits delivery mechanisms and legislation ready? Are all the administrative issues, landownership and benefit sharing or delivery mechanisms, clan vetting and others for the Hela province ready?

People, who lazy around, do not make gardens, do not set up small to big businesses or virtually become spectators will be economically marginalized. The high level of cash flow will lead to inflation on prices of goods and services making it hard for such lazy people to purchase and use them. Cash or money flows like the vanity of water. We fetch water in cups, containers, tanks, buckets and or store in southern crosses and others to use and drink. Anyone who expects water to flow into his or her mouth naturally can go without drinking.
Over to the people of Hela, you have a better version of your Gigita Latebo, how someone will come get it and light up the world. Thus Hela must unite in politics, governance, socially and allow peace to prevail at all angles between landowners, warring factions and tribes, politicians and others. Stay back in Hela and tell the government to bring all your Gigita Latebo monies to be administered and delivered in Tari by your provincial government.

The Anderson Agiru phenomenon will now close the Gigita Latebo prophesy with him becoming a synonymous legend. He is the living legacy, like some kind of a messiah from the Old Testament of the Holy book. His vision is beyond outset thus let him unleash through the development of Hela province to complete the delivery of the Hela dream equation.
To the corridors of the pipeline and Papua New Guinea, a legend foretold generations ago has come into fruition. Other related legends of a red pig, an enflamed man with an everlasting fire on a high speed travelling from the north to south has also come to reality. No wonder the LNG Project was completed earlier than expected!

Moreover, the economically relevant catch phrases will come into fruition too. Are you ready to catch it? Are we ready to enjoy a good meal? Will living in Port Moresby, Lae or Mt Hagen make you a lucky charm where the benefits of Gigita Latebo will easily flow into your mouth? Do you drink water that way? The red man on the back of a red pig riding high with a glowing flame has just passed us. Have you let it by-passed? Those who have seen it, chopped it, touched it or felt it will be lucky. They will survive the economic hardships. So as those who will have a piece of the main meat.
The government today could be on the right track by setting up schemes like the K700 million managed by National Development Bank and Commerce and Industry for people to access, start up and live on. The government has also set other viable economic structures and schemes to help people prepare and engage meaningfully so Papua New Guineans must start to do something worthwhile to have a taste of the red pig.
 [This article divulges Gigita Latepo’s prophetical resource-curse if the proceeds of PNG LNG are not managed well where economic upshots would be far more injurious than the benefits ]

Published by PNGBlogs with Permission from author.

PNG NEWS

Greg Sheppard, Managing Partner of Young & Williams, is confirmed to be the Prime Minister's new lawyer. Court records reaffirm that Sheppard's law firm now represents the PM's current case against the Public Prosecutor.

Prime Minister has four cases on foot before the courts - three before the National Court & one in the Supreme Court;

1) National Court OS 444 of 2014 is the Judicial Review challenging the validity of the arrest warrant issued by the District Court;.

2) National Court OS 383 of 2014 Judicial Review challenging the powers of the Ombudsman Commission;

3) National Court OS 810 of 2014 Judicial Review challenging the powers of the Public Prosecutor;

4) Supreme Court Appeal SCA 87 of 2014 challenging the decision of the National Court, Justice Kariko's ruling in July which dismissed the PM's application to stay his arrest warrant;

Greg Sheppard is one of the most successful and prominent lawyers in the Country. He became the Managing Partner of Maladina's law firm in 1994, and continued in that role after the merger of Maladina's with Young & Williams Lawyers in 2004.

Sheppard was admitted as a Barrister and Solicitor in the Supreme Court of Western Australia in 1990. He was a Principal in private practice in Kalgoorlie, Western Australia for a number of years.
Thereafter, he practised as a Crown Prosecutor in Queensland, Australia and was admitted to the High Court of Australia and the Supreme Court of Queensland. He was admitted to practice law in Papua New Guinea in 1990.

Sheppard is also a very successful advocate and has appeared as Counsel before Courts and Tribunals at all levels in a variety of jurisdictions including Judicial Review Appellate Courts. He has previously appeared for influential clients in Leadership Tribunal hearings on many occasions.
It is understood that Sheppard's law firm has briefed out the PM's case to Brisbane based Queens Council (QC) Barrister Mal Varitimos.

It is common practice for law firms to brief out high profile cases to more experienced overseas lawyers or barristers retaining them for specialist legal advice.

Varitimos has considerable experience and expertise in a diverse range of matters throughout the Asia-Pacific Region. He has been retained to advise in relation to matters in eight countries in the Asia-Pacific Region and has appeared in several of these countries, including for Prime Ministers, Deputy Prime Ministers and multinational corporations.

QC Varitimos also has extensive experience appearing in major Royal Commissions and Commissions of Inquiries which include:

- Engagement of Sandline International;

- Transparency in Government Dealings and Accountability of Public Office Holders

- National Provident Fund in Papua New Guinea

- Sinking of the Rabaul Queen;

Bryan Kramer first broke the story on Sheppard, now acting for the Prime Minister, on social media on the 11th of December 2014, but later retracted his story after Tiffany Twivey disputed it to be false.

Tiffany Twivey stated at the time "Greg Shepherd is NOT representing PM in any matter Young and Williams have been representing the Police Commissioner in all the matters this year !!!!!!!!"
Bryan Kramer explained in a separate post after he retracted the initial article that he had to first reconfirm the facts which is now proved beyond doubt as per official court records.
"It's important to always report the facts and at the time I wasn't able to reconfirm from my sources after Tiffany Twivey categorically denied it. I had no reason not to believe her so I retracted my article. However the Court records have since confirmed that Greg Sheppard does in fact represent the PM”, Bryan Kramer said.

by CYRIL GAREA Leaseholder in Papua New Guinea can sell its lease at will “as it saw fit”, according to the Supreme Court.

• Mr. Nixon Koi and Mamun Investment Ltd own land Section 13 Allotments 1 & 2, Mt. Hagen, Western Highlands province;
• The SC has decided on all issues relating to this land after 20 years of court battles;
• There does not lie further court process therefore there cannot be and there are no further issues on it.

“Onda Koim and others (as settlers on this land) must respect the Supreme Court decision. Nixon Koim and Mamun Investment Ltd will defend these allegations and sue those responsible for damages,” Koi’s Lawyers concluded. 

PNGBLOGS EXCLUSIVE

The complete transcript is below all this text. Two lawyers in partnership, Greg Sheppard (GS) and
Harvey Maladina (HM) divulge all to visitor GW, not knowing they were being secretly videotaped.
Programme aired on SBS Dateline television programme 24th June 2015

THIS SHOCKING VIDEOTAPE WILL NOT STOP CORRUPTION IN PNG NOR EVEN SLOW IT DOWN UNLESS THE PEOPLE OF PNG COME OUT IN FORCE AND PROTEST NONVIOLENTLY BUT PERSISTENTLY. ALL STUDENTS IN ALL SCHOOLS MUST GO ON NONVIOLENT BOYCOTT AND PROTEST. THE CORRUPT PEOPLE WILL DO THEIR BEST TO SET UP VIOLENT ACTS WITHIN THE PROTESTS TO DISCREDIT THE PEACEFUL PROTESTORS. BE AWARE OF THAT TO START!
 
During the late 1990s when the corrupt Bill Skate was PM, an Australian immigrant businessman, Muja Sefa, made a secret videotape of Bill Skate bragging about giving the orders to have a security guard of then Moresby mayor David Unagi murdered. Skate also talked about bribery. The videotape in the end was successfully covered up by the PNG Corruption Mafia, of which Peter O'Neill was a
part even back then.

IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN UNLESS ALL OF US IN PNG GET OUT AND START PROTESTING NOW. THE PEOPLE UNITED CAN NOT BE DEFEATED. HOWEVER IF WE CONTINUE TO ALLOW OURSELVES TO BE DIVIDED AND CONQUERED BY PETER O'NEILL AND HIS CRONIES THE PNG CORRUPTION MAFIA WILL WIN AND THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTRY WILL LOSE.

Following are Greg Sheppard's and Harvey Maladina's written lawyerly disclaimers and refutals after they realised they had been trapped. Obviously they did not realise the full extent of the damaging words they said that were caught on tape as Harvey Maladina's denials don't even fit the content of what they said on the secret videotape. Bingo! Point scored. Have they perhaps given the hidden truth away by their own lawyerly deceptions?

Greg Sheppard's Response to SBS/Dateline
I do not recall meeting with anybody identifying themselves as a representative of “New Botany Fund” on the date you mentioned, or at all. I have since receiving your email checked all of my firm’s records and can confirm that New Botany Fund was never at any time a client of this firm and therefore, no legal advice was given to it through its representative. I am often approached informally by a variety of people who are not clients to share aspects of my knowledge and practical experience in PNG, and in these areas of the law. My comments on these occasions are by the very nature of the exchange, general, hypothetical and merely descriptive. I always assume that those who ask me for this kind of information are doing so to broaden their understanding of the issues and practices here under the relevant laws. It is illogical to think someone would be looking for this type of information to ensure their conduct is illegal. Any information I share, is in the context of the overarching requirement to comply with the laws of PNG. If your anonymous source was one of these people, I regret that he did not clearly understand this. I consider the allegations contained in your letter to be false and highly defamatory, and you ought not to publish them. I reserve all of my rights pertaining to this matter, and have forwarded a copy of your email and this reply to my solicitors.

Harvey Maladina's Response to SBS/Dateline
These allegations are not true. I met an American businessman at the Airways Hotel in Port Moresby last year but at no time did I make or insinuate that illegal payments can be made through my firm or through my Partner Mr Greg Sheppard. I told him that yes through the media I have read that this was common in PNG but that was it. We (Greg & I) have been in practice now for over 30 years and we have never assisted anyone bribe or facilitated an illegal payment from the firm or through my partner Greg Sheppard. I recall this expatriate asking me how he could bribe the Minister for Forest. I declined to comment for the reason because I have never made or assisted in this illegal practice before and never will in future. I have never introduced this person to Greg; any suggestion that I introduced this person to Greg through me is an outrageous lie. I met him once for a short meeting and have never met him again since. It is quite extraordinary that you have been able to make a story line from this meeting that implicates my partner and me of these ludicrous bribery and money laundering insinuations.

FULL TRANSCRIPT

GW- Interviewer
HM - HARVEY MALADINA
GS - GREG SHEPPARD
 
PART ONE - HARVEY MALADINA
 
[00:00] Um… my brother, he’s a close friend of the Prime Minister’s, very close links
[00:08] Oh, how close?
[00:10] Um, well they were … couple of years ago we had the inquiry here Papua New Guinea
[00:18] You had the inquiry here every week?
[00:19] Yeah
[00:20] What was this …?
[00:21] This was quite a big one.. it was called the NPF inquiry, National Provident Fund. Some
people were implicated in pilfering the fund.
[00:34] OK and what was the fund for? A provident fund is normally a ...
[00:37] Yeah it’s a … all the workers in Papua New Guinea they contribute to it a certain percentage
of their income to the fund
[00:45] Oh ok. Is this for sort of pensions at the end of it? Yeah ok.
[00:52] You know there was an inquiry at the … there was two guys that were implicated, that’s the
prime minister and my brother.
[01:02] Seriously?
[01:03] Yeah.
[01:04]Oh.
[01:05] And now they’re in power.
[01:07] So it won’t make any difference. Is your brother ok?
[01:11] Well he’s the chief government advisor.
[01:14] On?
[01:15] On anything.
[01:16] Oh anything, ok. So he survived the inquiry?
[01:20] Yes both survived the inquiry. One is the prime minister and one is the government advisor.
[01:27] So they got through it and wealthier for it. So what was the.. what was the.. was this an
offshore thing as well?
[01:37] No local. It was funded by World Bank. The inquiry.
[01:42] The inquiry was funded by the World Bank?
[01:44] Yeah, yeah.
[01:48] Anyway, there was in the center of the, in town… there’s a, they say city, there’s this
massive building, it’s called the Deloittes tower. And anyway, there’s this Japanese company that
constructed … and they wanted two extra stories on the tower. So they borrowed some money from
the bank.
[02:19] From the National Provident Fund?
[02:21] No they borrowed some money from a local bank, it’s called Papua New Guinea Banking
Corporation. And now it’s BSP Bank South Pacific And at that time the chairman of the bank was the
current prime minister.
[02:39] Oh ok. Right.
[02:41] So the inquiry chased the funds that was the loan that was given to this Japanese company
and it went right around the circle. And went back again to the guy lending the money.
[02:53] Back to the prime minister?
[02:54] Back to the prime minister yeah. The problem was there was a missing link in this chain and
that was my brother. He had a law firm here.
[03:06] Oh he is a lawyer as well?
[03:09] So he took off to Australia and they didn’t extradite him so that saved the prime minister.
[03:19] GW: So how did he manage to avoid extradition?
[03:22] HM: He went to court in Australia.
[03:25] GW: Oh he went to court in Australia? Under what jurisdiction?
[03:29] HM: Um, well they sued him in Australia, too.
[03:32] GW: Was it a civil suit?
[03:35] HM: Yeah yeah civil suit. And um, he managed to stay in Australia until the inquiry was over.
He’s back in the country now.
[03:42] GW: So is Peter very … presumably very… I can’t think of the world?
[03:50] HM: Very loyal to him.
GW: Very loyal yes. [Laughter] How much money do they make?
[03:57] HM: Oh it’s estimated around 2 million.
GW: Kina?
HM: Yeah
[4:04] GW: Ok, which is uh... So what did Peter do before? Before he was a politician?
[04:12] HM: He’s a business man, yeah.
GW: Oh he is?
HM: Yeah.
GW: I didn’t know that, I didn’t know what his background is.
[04:18] HM: And he goes in a lot of politics and stuff like that, and he is good friends with former
prime ministers and that’s how he built himself proper…
[04:28] GW: So he’s a kind of financial political figure?
HM: Yeah. So he got himself appointed to the bank as the chairman and that’s when they reached
proof of (?) the money and that is why (?) this Japanese company….
GW: Who paid it back to them.
HM: Who paid it back to them.
GW: Where? Here?
HM: Here, here.
GW: In their own bank accounts? Isn’t that a bit foolish?
[04:51] HM: Yeah well exactly so they chased the money right back to the prime minister.
GW: Have they got a bit smarter?
HM: Of course.
[laughter]
[05:02] HM: Anyway the missing link was my brother, he took off to Brisbane in Australia.
GW: There are a lot of people in PNG from Australia, aren’t there?
[05:12] HM: Yeah. And they didn’t extradite him and the inquiry wound down and there was a report
presented but…
[05:12] GW: Why was there not an extradition if he was being potentially charged with, was it ..
presumably.. he and Peter were charged with a criminal, a potential criminal offence. That would be
fraud, was it fraud, or?
[05:31] HM: Yeah fraud. And um well they didn’t extradite him. And um, he um he came back again.
Um, there’s a case against him in the National Court, but that’s been going for donkey’s years now.
Because he’s able to buy some smart lawyers from Australia to come up and …
GW: He has?
HM: Yeah.
GW: Right. We were thinking of going to Australia for some smart lawyers. This wouldn’t be Mr
Molloy, would it?
[06:00] HM: Oh we’ve got some smarter ones than Mr Molloy. Mr Molloy is good but we normally
engage a guy called Varitimos, Mal Varitimos.

GW: Mal Varitimos?
HM: Varitimos.
GW: How do you spell that?
HM: V-A-R-I-T-I-M-O-S
GW: Varitimos?
HM: Yes.
GW: Ok, and is he in Brisbane?
HM: He’s based in Brisbane.
GW: And he is a good lawyer?
HM: He’s a good lawyer, yes. He does a lot of local cases up here.
[06:33] GW: Right. Does commute over? Cause it’s good to have … we were thinking of some
representation from Australia. If we are going to move a significant kind of fund here, initially we
thought we might get Australian representation… but we also thought we ought to really get a local
[06:54] HM: We work with Varitimos and he is a QC and he is very good.
[07:03] GW: You might… you might .. one of the things that was advised to us is that some of the
payments might go to Australia for people here, um but then I had a…I was talking to someone
informally and he said to me “you have to make sure that payment didn’t come directly via PNG”
because Australians are quite hot on tracing money at the moment, if you want to you know reward
somebody who has helped you, if you do it from a PNG account straight to Australia, it’s getting a bit
tricky.
[07:34] HM: When we engage him, if you wanted him to represent you, you engage us, we engage
him, and we do our bills, we do one bill to you, you pay us and we send him money to Australia, to
his Australian account.
[07:54] GW: How much scrutiny does that come under?
[07:58] HM: Umm like the financial institutions here, they give us a ceiling; I think it’s around
250,000.
GW: Is that per

HM: No, that we’re allowed to deal with in a month.
GW: Ok monthly.
HM: Yeah monthly. And after that they tell us [?] for the following month.
[08:21] GW: Can that be used to get money out effectively via Australia maybe but only up to a
ceiling of 250?
HM: Yeah, like um…
GW: So what’s that annually, that’s six million dollars. Is that…no, six million kina.
HM: Yeah
GW: Which is not [inaudible]
HM: I’ll just check on that um…
[08:42] GW: I don’t want to put you know suggest something that you haven’t already used that isn’t
going to work. I mean if you’re saying this is a mechanism that you’ve tried and worked, that is fine,
but I don’t want to test it out.
[08:56] HM: Like um yeah he’s billed us more previously we are able to pay him.
[09:05] GW: Right. So is he happy to adjust the bill so that it is higher so you can get the money out
to Australia?
HM: Sure.
GW: OK well that’s the key thing, as long as both parties are comfortable with it, and there isn’t a…it
doesn’t go above that monthly ceiling. I mean how are revenue here?
HW: Sorry?
[09:24] GW: How are revenue? Because I mean obviously the degree of scrutiny that revenue exert
on different jurisdictions …
HM: …see most of the guys, a lot of the guys here that come under scrutiny, they ship a large
amount of money on a one-off basis to an account in Australia, that comes under scrutiny. And most
of these guys normally like…
GW: Well that’s what we’ve been cautioned against.
[09:59] HM: They are under investigation by the police here and [in audible] red flag [inaudible]
already with the Australian Federal Police to keep an eye out on these particular transactions.
[10:11] GW: So this way of getting a larger bill from Australia and paying it and then there’s a
balance which we can we can be released, do you think that gets through that kind of scrutiny?
[10:23] HM: Yes normally if it’s through the law firms it’s um, they don’t usually question it, because
it’s…especially if it’s the firm that I’m working with (?), it’s a prestigious firm.
[10:37] Yeah. How do the accountants work here by the way? Because that was another ..Um, I
thought of going see EY who we work with in Africa, but I want some accountants who are good who
are pukka but who are creative.
HM: The local accountants, the Australian based firms here they …
GW: And do they, would they help with this if we needed to get money from here to Australia to
reward somebody.. would they, are they creative enough to provide mechanisms? I mean have you
worked with any?
[11:19] HM: We umm I’ve got a partner here and my partner is a Western Australian guy, we’ve
been in business together for twenty years or something.
GW: From Perth?
HM: From Perth yes. I know that he has a Singaporean accountant and funds are transfer there and
from there to Australia
[11:39] GW: Uh huh well that’s kind of what we are looking for. Is your partner available for a chat?
HM: Yes he is.
GW: Do you think I could talk to him because I think the mechanism that we are looking for umm
because we have some big mouths to feed.
HM: Oh yeah, you wanna do that payment offshore.
GW: Yeah.
[12:05] HM: There’s a lot of my…guys I know in politics … and they go to offshore to collect. Like one
of my good mates he’s now in charge of the gaming board?
GW: The gaming board?
HM: Yeah.
GW: Ok.
[12:22] HM: And he went offshore and I…he flew over to Singapore recently and I asked him “what
do you do over there?” and he said “Oh I want to collect some payments”. There were some funds
remitted to his account over there, to an account. And he went to collect it so he came back quite a
happy man so umm…


PART 2 GREG SHEPPARD

[12:55] GW: To be honest it’s quite an eye opener doing business here. I mean I’ve worked in West
Africa which is quite rough and tumble but this is…
GS: Yeah
GW: This is.. I’m trying to think of a word that adequately describes…
GS: Which is probably why you’re talking to me.
GW: Maybe yeah.
[13:18] GW: One of the things that has been made quite clear to us is that we have quite a lot of
mouths to feed. The cost of doing business here is… it’s not just the total cost, it’s the number of
mouths to feed and the way it’s done. Now I’ve had some kind of initial steer in terms of for example
I mean I’m assuming OK the initial payments…
GS: Everything here is confidential between you and me.
GW: OK. Um, I’ve looked at, well I haven’t looked at yet, I mean I’ve not been out of Port Moresby
but I’ve spoken with three or four people who have got land to sell and they said well it’s gonna
need some big mouths to feed.
[14:01] GS: Some ministerial approvals
GW: Some ministerial approvals. Which will be contingent probably on the payment, fairly, well I’ve
had differing kind of, differing things, one is a percentage of the deal, but it wouldn’t really be
prudent to start talking about what we are going to deal, so it can’t be that, bluntly. You know what
I’m saying.
[14:23] GS: I wouldn’t go near somebody who says that.
GW: Yeah well that is what we thought, I mean that would be bonkers.
GS: Um, it’s something that needs to be handled very, very carefully um because these days it’s a
different story than it was even 5 to 10 years ago.
GW: Here?
GS: Yeah.
GW: OK.
GS: All those sorts of mobilisation fees really ought to originate from offshore.
GW: Ah ok, well that wouldn’t be a… I have to say I was a little uncomfortable with that as a
mechanism. It seemed crude and I think some of the people even as you say three, four, five years
ago, they are basing it on that time and I think things may have, if you like, the environment for
scrutiny is greater.
GS: Here?
GW: Here, yeah. I think so, that is
GW: So does that mean all political transactions are subject to scrutiny then?
GS: Yeah, basically. Unless you want to front up with a bag of cash.
GW: Well that was being suggested but I just frankly think that ..
GS: Why not just throw the money down the street.
[16:17] GW: Yeah I mean we can’t account for it, it can’t be.. yeah. What was suggested to me was
as a more reliable or more desirable route was that in terms of ministerial feeding, we’d be
approached and that we’d have to do it via another jurisdiction so it would never come anywhere
near here which would seem to me as a cleaner and more safe way of doing it.
[16:49] GS: Yeah. Those particular ministers would probably have their own arrangements already in
place.
GW: Yeah. Well I’m told I know certainly one of them has, but I’m assuming they would
automatically have some sort of facility in Singapore, Hong Kong, whatever, that would be useable.
My concern is anything coming onshore here.
[17:22] GS: It has to be, you have to have, any transaction that you do because even Singapore and
Hong Kong these days are not confidential. The monetary authority in Singapore routinely demands
explanations
GW: Oh ok.
[17:40] GS: And they seize your money and they close you down and they charge you with criminal
offences. So you’ve got to have a very commercial aspect to everything you do.
GW: Well yeah OK that would appear to be step one is the appearance of a commercial transaction.
GS: Yeah.
GW: But I presume then that it would be either for services or a company to company…
[18:09] GS: You um yeah you could uh, services is always a good one. But you know you really need
to make sure it’s documented so that it has unquestionably a commercial …
GW: Right.
[18:33] GS: You know. I had some clients recently who made a deposit to a Hong Kong company. The
Hong Kong company then sent a large percentage of that money to Singapore.
[phone call]
[18:49] GS: And um, the Hong Kong side said it was for maintaining computer equipment. The
Singapore side said it was a commission. The Singapore authorities saw the inconsistency and
arrested everybody.
GW: OK. OK so there needs to be a clear and irrefutable chain to give it authenticity.
[19:24] GS: A consistent chain and something that is commercial. Um, all I can really say is that a
contract for services is what you need, is the way you need to go. And the people who are making
those demands will probably have their own suggestions. The proper way of looking at it is that you
can’t do these things, it’s illegal.
GW: Yeah.
[19:51] GS: But there are other commercial arrangements which aren’t illegal that you may be
permitted to enter into providing you get a clearance from your lawyer.
GW: Ok, yeah.
GS: Because you know if the CIB come knocking on your door, you want to be able to say “oh this
transaction was for this reason, bang bang bang, here is the clearance from my lawyer”. You don’t
want to have one side saying it was services and the other side saying it’s … [inaudible]
GW: Well that’s a continuity issue.
GS: Yeah, yeah.
GW: I mean there are some greater considerations, I mean there is the sheer kind of well for a start
are we likely to be, is there a repetition likely for this? Um, you know someone suggested seven
figures to me, which is you know a percentage.
[20:51] GS: Look if you were to pay seven figures to anybody, the world would fall in on top of you.
Just don’t even contemplate that sort of nonsense.
GW: Right.
GS: Um, small dribs and drabs are the only way to go.
GW: Really? Oh OK, so –
[21:10] GS: Anybody who says they want seven figures, they are inviting prosecution.
GW: Right.
GS: Why would any company produce seven figures for anybody? I mean what is the commercial
reason behind it? Well you need to have one.
GW: Of course. Um, yeah this will ... this was for ministerial support. You still think it’s too high?
[21:44] GS: Well you’d want to hear what his arrangements would be, how he intends to handle it.
GW: Yeah well that’s a given.
GS: And it would have to be something that didn’t raise suspicion, something that was ostensibly
commercial.
GW: Yeah
[22:05] GS: You know the days of banging a million bucks into this secret-numbered account in
Singapore is over. Justification for it, that’s ok.
GW: OK. Um, I’m only here till tomorrow. May I sort of take a risk and trust you with a name?
Obviously I’d ask that …
[22:34] GS: What you mean the name of the minister? Is it Pruiatch?
GW: Funnily enough it is. How did you?
GS: He’s, he’s an old client.
GW: OK so you know him. He’ll be able to provide something substantive that we can actually, I can
recommend, in what kind of commercial terms will it be?
GS: Who knows.
GW: Does he have many or is it gonna be one?
[23:04] GS: That I don’t know either. But he…he will have his own way of doing it.
GW: OK. Um, ok. And you think seven figures is too high?
GS: Yeah, he’s the minister for forests isn’t he?
GW: He was, until recently. He’s currently Treasurer.
GS: Mhm.
GW: But I think he’s held like well unusually actually here he’s held quite a number of portfolios.
[23:44] GS: Yeah the other problem with Patrick is he’s already being scrutinised by the
Ombudsman.
GW: Oh is he?
[23:57] GS: Because he did some crazy thing like he let some Malaysian timber guy buy him a house.
GW: Right.
GS: So there was a house in his name and it was paid for by the Malaysian timber guy who wound up
with a nice …
GW: Nice bit of timber?
GS: Yeah, stupid it was.
GW: When he was Forest minister? And it all happened here?
[24:22] GS: They purchased the house here in Port Moresby in Patrick’s name paid for by a bank
check from the Malaysian, you know.
[24:32] GW: That’s not very reassuring. Is that recently?
[24:35] GS: No, this was six to eight years ago.
[24:38] GW: OK, I trust he’s got smarter since then.
[24:44] GS: I hope so. He will have a plan. But if it’s just popping it into my bank account, don’t even
bloody think about it.
[24:59] GW: No. It would appear to me that almost all the politicians in PNG are constantly in
litigation. I mean great for you presumably as a lawyer but I mean it’s one of the most litigious
societies I’ve ever been in.
[25:15] GS: Isn’t that wonderful? What do you think I’m here for, my health?
[25:20] GW: You know all those things. Umm, but I still think
[25:25] But then the rewards are huge. Everything is an elephant here, there’s no pygmies.

by CYRIL GARE

• Secretary of Treasury, Timothy Geithner: member of BG and TC;
• Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton: BG, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) married to TC member William Jefferson Clinton;
• Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates: BG, TC, CFR;
• Deputy Secretary of State, James Steinberg: BG, TC, CFR;
• Ambassador to United Nations, Susan Rice: member of TC;
• State Department Special Envoy, Richard M. Haass: BG, TC and CFR President;
• State Department Special Envoy, Richard C. Holbrooke: BG, TC, CFR;
• State Department Special Envoy, Henry Kissinger: BG, TC, CFR;
• National Security Advisor, General James L. Jones: BG, CFR, TC member;
• Deputy National Security Advisor, Donilon: TC, CFR;
• Chairman Economic Recovery Committee, Paul Volcker: BG, TC, CFR;
• Director of National Security, Admiral Dennis C. Blair: BG, TC, CFR;
• Presidential Advisor, Alan Greenspan: BG, TC, CFR; and
• The list goes on and on.

The idea of development stands like a ruin in the intellectual landscape. Delusion and disappointment, failures and crime have been the steady companions of development and they tell of a common story – it did not work, at least the American way!

Convicted criminal and former Commissioner of Police Geoffrey Vaki has filed an urgent appeal against his conviction and sentence of 3 years imprisonment with hard labour by Chief Justice Salamo Injia

Vaki's lawyers were frantically signing affidavits in preparation for their client's appeal even before the Chief Justice handed down Vaki''s sentence at 11:30pm today.