Namah, Pomat, Kaluwin refused intervention in Olicac case

By KARO JESSE
OPPOSITION Leader Belden Namah, Parliament Speaker Job Pomat and Public Prosecutor Pondros Kaluwin have been refused by the Supreme Court to intervene in a special reference questioning certain laws of the Organic Law on the Independent Commission Against Corruption (Olicac).
The special reference is filed by the Ombudsman Commission (referrer) which seeks opinion of the Supreme Court on questions relating to the interpretation or application of Constitutional Laws and specifically in relation to certain laws on Olicac.
On Friday, Justice Derek Hartshorn, sitting as a single judge at Waigani, upheld objections raised by the Solicitor-General Tauvasa Tanuvasa, who lobbied for the trio’s application for intervention in the special reference to be refused.
Tanuvasa is representing Attorney-General Dr Eric Kwa as the first intervener in the proceedings.
Consequently, Justice Hartshorn, given the reasons provided to court by Tanuvasa, refused the trio’s application to intervene.
He agreed with Tanuvasa’s submissions which read that Pomat did not enunciate (spoke clearly) a right or liability recognised in law, rather peculiar to the Office of Speaker, which is directly or which is likely to be directly affected by the issues in this special reference.
As to Namah’s application for intervention, court also agreed to the objections that section 50 of the Constitution as invoked by Namah’s lawyer did not confer a right peculiar to the opposition leader, further, that Namah was not present in Parliament when Olicac was debated and passed did not in some way provide him a right to intervene on the special reference.
Thus, if Namah was allowed to intervene, he would only be repeating submissions by the referrer.
Kaluwin’s application was ousted simply because he relied on wrong rules of the court.
The trio were ordered to pay the cost for the first intervener.