Respect ruling on appointment

THE decision by the court to nullify the appointment of David Manning as police commissioner should be respected.
Any further judicial review should be done on the ‘grounds of ruling’ and not ‘changing of governing law’ or acts by the National Executive Council to undermine the mandatory qualification criteria requirements for police commissioner role.
The commissioner and or any other interested party have the right to do so but to propose changes to existing laws governing the appointment requirements under the current circumstance would set a wrong precedent.
It may be deemed as ‘political interference’ to undermine the independence of the judicial review process and subsequent ruling in accordance with existing laws.
The office of the police commissioner is a constitutional office and whoever occupies it is a constitutional office holder and as such, it is important to ensure the integrity of the process and procedure in the appointment is maintained and not compromised under any circumstances.
Manning has undoubtedly done an exceptional job as a police commissioner since his appointment and should be commended for his performance and achievements during his tenure, however, the integrity of the process and procedure in appointments should not be interfered with nor politicised to suit a person, intent or agenda.
History has shown that past commissioners were performing below par and their roles were compromised by political interference and other interests.
Manning and former police minister Bryan Kramer had introduced and undertaken reforms and structural changes within the Royal PNG Constabulary operations to refine, revamp and equip the police force to carry out their work effectively and efficiently without fear or favour.
That was within the provisions of law.
They contributed to re-establishing the integrity of the police force and should be commended for their efforts.
I admire and applaud them for that.
Nevertheless, the office of the police commissioner belongs to the people of Papua New Guinea and not any individual, minister or government.
Laws governing constitutional offices should only be reviewed for change if in pursuant to improving positional and or institutional capacities i.e. to improve efficiency and effectiveness of offices and departments to improve accountability and transparency and not to suit or justify personal or individual appointments.

Samuel Ilau,
Concerned Citizen, Lae