“One constitutional office cannot interfere with the operations or responsibilities’ of another constitutional office.”
This was made clear by the Chief Ombudsman, Michael Dick in a press conference on Sunday.
The Ombudsman Commission has maintained a strong interest in the integrity of the 2017 National General Elections and in this case the Commission is not interfering with the operational responsibilities of the Electoral Commission.
Chief Ombudsman, Michael Dick said the Ombudsman Commission is entrusted with the responsibility to lift the overall standards of public administration in Papua New Guinea.
Firstly, the Ombudsman Commission has participated in voter awareness to ensure people elect quality leaders.
Secondly, it has been involved in the observation of the counting of the votes and thirdly, the Commission has challenged the increase in the nominations fees and cost for deposit for security costs.
“It does not exist simply to assist individual citizens but has a much broader constitutional mandate to protect the interest of its citizens against abuse by those in power.”
He said it is one of a limited range of public bodies authorized by the Constitution to make special reference to the Supreme Court, to seek the Court’s binding opinion on questions relating to the interpretation or application of the Constitutional Laws.
In this respect, the Ombudsman Commission on Friday 28th July 2017 filed a Supreme Court Reference seeking interpretation of a number of provisions of the Constitution and the Organic Law on the National and Local Level Government Elections.
The provision concerned relates to the power of the Electoral Commission to extend the dates for the return of writs.
“The Ombudsman Commission was concerned that a good number of electoral seats were not declared within the extended time for the return of writs.
According to past Supreme Court precedents, an extension can only be given once for the writs to be returned and for the writs to be returned five days before the 5th anniversary of the return of writs from the previous election.
Any extension beyond that would be unconstitutional and in this case, the 5th anniversary of the return of writs will be on Tuesday, 1st August.
“The Ombudsman Commission is concerned about what happens to the legal status of those members not returned by the due date. Would we be depriving their rights and that of their people to elect the Speaker and the Prime Minister?”
On the basis of this scenario, the Ombudsman Commission also pursued an urgent interim order to preserve the status quo in the interim.
The Courts saw that it was a matter of national interest, therefore granting the interim orders, extending the return of writs to Monday 31st July at 2pm.
A copy of the order was served to Electoral Commissioner, the Clerk of Parliament and the Secretary of Justice as required by the Court.
Chief Ombudsman, Michael Dick said there was no order made as to whether the seven days required to meet after the return of writs are to be extended as consequential orders.