It was my understanding that, when consulted by current opposition leader Don Polye, the supreme court, made up of three eminent judges including the chief justice, ruled that in June’s adjournment of parliament, sections of the PNG Constitution had been overlooked in an ‘unlawful’ manner.

On Thursday, Governor Powes Parkop (pictured) of the Social Democratic Party, came out and stated that he felt the supreme court’s determination breached the principle of separation of powers. It was reported that parliamentary speaker Theo Zurenuoc said the same thing.

The separation of powers, as both politicians observed, is an immutable pillar of a modern democracy -  providing, within their own roles, independence of determination between judiciary, legislature and executive.

But it was remarkable that the doctrine of ‘separation of powers’ was suddenly raised by Mr Parkop as his voice had been absent on the many occasions the principle was breached in the past.

The PNG legislature (parliament) frequently assumes the role of the executive (public service) by commonly making decisions in an arbitrary manner without reference to policy or legally binding official procedure.

Stories abound of local MPs walking around with government cheque books in their hip pockets and offering government funds to their supporters. These funds are supposed to be for deserving local projects but appear to have become re-election ‘gris moni’.

Of course this money is only made available to MPs who demonstrate their loyalty to the governing coalition. Opposition members need not apply.

If the principle of separation of powers was to be followed faithfully, then surely any member of parliament making decisions and dispensing public funds outside established and lawful policy and procedure would be guilty of breaching this principle.

There was a particularly glaring example when the Health Minister, supported by the prime minister, chose to go outside the properly constituted Tender Board to approve a vastly more expensive bid to supply and distribute pharmaceuticals in PNG.

I can’t remember Mr Parkop remonstrating then about the principle of separation of powers.

As it happened, this contract was never effectively discharged but still cost PNG taxpayers K70 million.

A chagrined Australian government, angered by the way in which the tender was handled, refused to pay for the deal and ordinary Papua New Guineans were the big losers.

If I were Powes Parkop, I would be very careful about how I expressed views about the chief justice’s observations about what is lawful.

It may be that Mr Parkop (and the Speaker) is telegraphing Peter O’Neill’s intent to move the no confidence matter from parliament and into the courts as has been the case in many previous tussles.

Even a short delay of slightly over a week will take the no confidence vote into the period when the constitution prescribes it cannot be held.