Amazing appointments need scrutiny

OUT of Imbonggu district, Southern Highlands, comes two remarkable cases for legal examination.
Imbonggu Member and Justice Minister Pila Niningi told this newspaper last week that his nephew McRonald Nale, principal of Jema Lawyers, had been representing the State long before he (Niningi) took his present office.
The minister raised this in answer to Opposition and public outbursts over appointments of relatives to senior positions in the public service and preferential treatment in Government contracts.
Niningi has taken pains to point out that he had written to the Ombudsman Commission in February 2023 to inform the commission of the conflict of interest situation and had received a letter back from the OC stating it was in order as the man had been representing the State prior to Niningi’s appointment.
That is the second matter.
In the first case, in the good year 2000, another Imbonggu Member, Peter Ipu Peipul, was referred to a leadership tribunal for a very similar matter.
On Aug 7, 2000, the Ombudsman Commission referred Peter Ipu Peipul to the Public Prosecutor for possible prosecution by a leadership tribunal on five charges pertaining to the appointment, revocation and reappointment of one Moses Tawa, the blood brother of Peipul, as chairman of the Public Services Commission.
On Jan 31, 2001, the Public Prosecutor did refer Peipul to the Chief Justice to appoint a leadership tribunal to inquire into the
charges.
The Chief Justice appointed Justice Maurice Sheehan, Ori Karapo and Iova Geita to comprise the tribunal.
This tribunal duly sat and recommended that Peipul be dismissed from office on April 19, 2001.
An appeal for judicial review of the tribunal’s decision was struck down and a member of Parliament and a serving minister was dismissed from office for the grievous crime of nepotism.
Nale was appointed acting chairman of PNG Power in the dying days of the last Parliament.
At that time, his uncle, Niningi was minister for Provincial and Inter-Government Relations.
Nale, before he was appointed acting chairman, was the lawyer representing the Government and continued to do so after his appointment.
Last week, also, another matter hit the headlines. Sandra Sungi, the daughter of Public Services Minister Joe Sungi, was appointed as head of the Office of Climate Change.
Immediately, the cry went up that it was another instance of vested interest and cronyism and nepotism.
The defense went up that Ms Sungi was suitably qualified, she had the experience and that her father had disqualified himself and excused himself from Cabinet when the shortlist of candidates went to Cabinet for her selection.
We are placed in a quandary here. Why should a person not be appointed to senior positions on their own merit regardless of their relations holding positions of authority in government or the private sector?
If the person is qualified, is competent and has the relevant experience, that person should be considered equally among his or her peers.
But, there is a catch, and it is an important catch?
We have a law in place that clearly states that such instances constitute misconduct in office.
And, as the example above of Peter Peipul demonstrates, beyond any reasonable doubt, instances of blood relatives being appointed at a time when one relative holds high office, and can easily influence decision making, is prohibited under the Leadership Code.
The Leadership Code prohibits such cases and the penalties are quite severe.
In the Peipul case, Tawa, his brother, was pre-eminently qualified. He held all the credentials for the position but Peipul had appointed him and that was held to be wrong.
In the case of Nale and Niningi above, and Ms Sungi above, there are slight variations in circumstances but the principle remains the same. Peipul was dismissed from office, a very severe penalty.
Unless the law is changed, and based on that precedent, we hold that the two cases referenced above must be subjected to the same scrutiny.