Change in laws should support Constitution


THE Supreme Court has removed 10 provisions under the Organic Law on the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates (Olippac) law recently because these provisions were against the spirit of the Constitution, freedom of movement and rights of elected leaders.
I think this revised Olippac to cater for the 10 removed provisions should be shelved.
The reason being that, in the absence of a clear voting system (preferably electronic), the current law should remain unchanged for a while.
For example; if you vote for a prime minister after an election, you cannot vote against the same prime minister in a vote of no confidence.
This provision and other substitutes are deterrence and stumbling blocks to freedom of choice and the right to liberty of our elected leaders.
There is no guarantee that the prime minister voted in would be perfect all the way serving five years because of the human nature to do whatever one wishes, including dictatorial leadership.
Being in power that long can result in manipulating the next election more easily when our voting system is manual.
These provisions can come into effect when electronic voting system is implemented and when every voter has access to some sort of electronic devices such as tablets or mobile phones where you cast your vote from the comfort of your home.
This process is transparent and reliable.
Under this process, the leaders, when voted into office, will serve the people knowing that they can be voted out easily in the next election.
Our Registrar of Political Parties Dr Alphonse Gelu should not rush to go against the spirit of the Constitution by amending so-called provisions in a review to have the same effect.
Such judicial review of the cases are not easily perused when the laws passed are undemocratic.
There are two MPs known for taking up such cases in the interest of democracy.
They are former Morobe governor Luther Wenge and current Opposition Leader and Vanimo-Green MP Belden Namah.
Other MPs don’t care what laws they pass. They just pass laws without considering how it will affect the nation.
Therefore, the current reviewed Olippac before parliament should be shelved and/or further ironed out to repeat the same mistake.
One such case is the recently passed law on public servants contesting elections, which is not in the best interest of the democratic spirit of our Constitution.
The nation is watching MPs closely.
MPs in the right mindset will take ownership and test this law in a competent court of law to determine the validity of such a law.

Democratic Advocate,
Baiyer River