Ombudsman Commission

Chief Justice Sir Salamo Injia dismissed the appeal on Thursday. However, he said the Ombudsman Commission is at liberty to file a Supreme Court review of the National Court’s decision of Jan 28, 2015.

He said if a review is filed by the Ombudsman, it will be determined on its merits.

The Ombudsman’s appeal was dismissed after the court was told that the documents for the appeal could not be located in the registry, despite a Supreme Court reference number or court file number being given for the case on March 6, 2015.

Lawyers representing the Ombudsman Commission told the Supreme Court on Monday afternoon they are appealing against the decision of Jan 28, 2015 which saw the National Court allowed Prime Minister, Peter O’Neill certain orders restraining the Ombudsman Commission and obtain a reference under section 18(2) of the constitution for interpretation.

Prime Minister Peter O’Neill, who is the committee’s chairperson, only announced that a meeting will be convened in the New Year.

The Chief Ombudsman's position is currently vacant after Mr Rigo Lua's term in office expired last year.

Ombudsman Phoebe Sangetari now serves as the Acting Chief Ombudsman.

This comes after concerns were raised by Opposition Leader Don Polye who said the delay was worrying him.

The Prime Minister’s office says the meeting before Christmas was deferred as there was not a  quorum.

Prime Minister Peter O’Neill says the appointment process must be independent of politics and it is “inappropriate’’ that the Opposition Leader continually tries to interfere in this process through the media and “his network’’.

Acting Chief Ombudsman Phoebe Sangetari said the commission’s input into the community was one of the reasons for a reasonable degree of good governance and quality leadership in the country today.

“Forty years on despite whatever the challenges it has faced, it is fair to say the commission has lived up to its duties and responsibilities and the general expectations of it by the founding fathers of the nation and the people,” said Sangetari.

A similar order was refused by the National court earlier.

His lawyers Mal Varitimos (QC) and Nelson Saroa, argued that the Ombudsman Commission acted beyond its jurisdiction by not giving Micah the opportunity to respond to further investigation information after his first response in August 2014.

Varitomos said there were subsequent events that led to additional information through summons issued to the Managing Directors of IPBC and Grand Papua Hotel where the allegations arose.