Independence of all arms of govt

THE independence of the legislature (Parliament), the executive (cabinet) and the judiciary (courts) is automatic and an unyielding tradition of the Westminster system of government.
The laws, rules and regulations which govern each separate arm establish that independence while, at the same time, establishing the manner in which one must relate to the other.
The centrepiece to good governance is unflinching respect between these three arms of government for each other’s independence and duties and responsibilities.
You erode that respect and you erode the building blocks, the foundation stone, for democratic good governance.
Papua New Guinea’s parliamentary democracy has survived many tests because the respect for the independence of the separate arms of government has been intact for the four decades and four years of nationhood.
Today, there is a growing disquiet that, at long last, the lines are beginning to blur, the duties and responsibilities to merge or be subsumed and that there is some quite serious encroachment by one branch into the operations of the others.
There is a growing unease, for instance that Parliament (legislature) has become a mere rubber stamp of the executive government.
This can be seen in the way so many laws have been passed without debate and with glaring errors. The laws are normally introduced by the executive government in Parliament. It will most normally have certain provisions or the entire law is directed at something advantageous for the government or towards its policies and programmes.
At that point the law is introduced to Parliament, however, the law becomes the property of Parliament. Parliament, with its own committee on bills and laws, is supposed to scrutinise the law, ensure it meets the drafting standards and then list it in the notice paper to come up for mention in Parliament. Once it is introduced, Parliament may debate the merits of the bill, make changes to it if it so pleases and may throw out the bill or accept it in the format presented. That, in brief, is what is supposed to happen in a situation where the executive and the legislature are operating independently.
Today, with its numerical strength well beyond three quarter majority of Parliament, the executive government has virtual control of the executive as well as the legislature. Laws are introduced and passed on voices on the same day without debate. The legislature appears a mere tool of the executive government to do as it pleases.
Important decisions on policy, on budgets and allocation of money, and on changes to the constitutional arrangements governing this State can happen in this manner which might further the interests of the government but which might not be truly in the long-term interests of Papua New Guineans or to good governance.
Papua New Guineans will now begin to appreciate why a strong opposition in Parliament is critical to good governance.
It will not be long before moves are made in Parliament to take another look at the arrangements in the third arm of government – the judiciary, if it has not started already.
If the courts stand in the way of the government achieving its policies or goals by constantly reviewing them or stalling them as they are brought before the courts for legal interpretation, then it will be a very short time before some smart aleck in the executive decides to curb the powers of the judiciary.
 Moves of this nature would be insidious, beginning at the outer fringes and working its way to the core. The scheme of things at the judiciary is not exactly pristine and well oiled machinery presently. There is far too much work and too few judges and magistrates to attend to them. The backlog of cases is just too much, it will take two or more judges more than six months to clear.
The office of the attorney-general and the state solicitor is desperately in need to experienced and qualified lawyers. More state money has been lost through the courtrooms than it would be thought possible.
It behooves this nation to be on guard against such moves. Regardless of the sincerity or nobility of intentions, once that sacred line of independence between the three arms of government is crossed, the road is set towards more guided forms of democracy.