Vote of confidence in O’Neill is a victory for corruption in PNG
23 July 2016
FRANCIS NII
SADLY the vote of confidence in the prime minister exercised 85-21 by the PNG parliament on the floor of the Haus Tambaran yesterday is a victory for corruption in Papua New Guinea.
The vote of no confidence against prime minister Peter O’Neill was a test of leadership ethics and good governance for parliamentarians.
The victory has not vindicated Peter O’Neill of alleged corruption relating to the K81.7 million paid out to Paul Paraka Lawyers.
This was the core issue that prompted civil society, university students, national pilots, port workers, doctors, health workers and opposition members of parliament to call for O’Neill to step down. It still remains.
Members of parliament who voted for him have indirectly condoned the alleged crime committed by O’Neill.
They did not want this alleged corrupt pay out by the prime minister – an act that drained millions of kina of the people’s money into private hand – to be a consideration in parliament’s decision of whether it should have confidence in O’Neill.
Their action has also downplayed the call made by students, civil society and others for O’Neill to step down, action that included the death of a University of Technology student in Lae.
There is evidence of decadence in the leadership principles of this country which is very unhealthy for our democracy.
In the face of the new National Joint Security Task Force schemed by O’Neill and his mob, the decision of the majority of politicians has also, in principle, endorsed the application of a tyrannical scheme which, when applied, will aggravate the weakening of our democracy and suppress freedom of expression and the rights of citizens to strike and will fast lead us towards tyranny.
Disgustingly there was total moral decadence in the way O’Neill played his game. He made his followers puppets as he pulled the string with K3 million borrowed money disguised as DSIP funding disbursements. And the corrupt MPs followed him like little kids begging for lollies.
In ethical terms, it seems to me that O’Neill practiced venality in buying votes for money and he should not brag that he is clean and victorious. He only added more filth to the mountain of filth he has created for himself and this country.
Until and unless Peter O’Neill is vindicated by a competent police investigation or court of law, as long as he plays is defiant, evasive and self-protective game against justice, he is capable of being suspected of an alleged crime.
All of those selfish MPs bribed by O’Neill should be ditched in 2017. They should be totally rejected.
O’Neill can lie and bribe and get away with a vote of no confidence but he cannot get away with the truth and, ultimately, the courts.
“There is a higher court than court of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supersedes all other courts,” said Mahatma Ghandi.
And I would add, all wickedness has a cost. At the ripe time, the perpetrator will pay each his price.
Papua New Guinea, hold your breath, time will reveal all.
True, John, except for Kerenga Kua, member for Sinasina-Yongomugl, the rest - for greed of money - accepted O'Neill's bribe and condoned the corruption allegation against him and all the consequential damage to state institutions namely Task Force Sweep, the police and universities including the loss of life.
This is disgustingly unethical and they will pay the price come 2017.
Posted by: Francis Nii | 25 July 2016 at 07:38 AM
We are disappointed with Leaders of Simbu. I thought they were going to stand for principles and morality but they chose expediency and greed!!
Posted by: John K Kamasua | 24 July 2016 at 07:07 PM
And may I add that one can escape from the court of this world's justice system through cunning and false devices but the court of conscience is inescapable and sometimes the justice meted is fatal.
Posted by: Francis Nii | 23 July 2016 at 08:36 PM
PNG's judiciary is people's ultimate bastion of hope and justice will still prevail. It's a matter of time. Unless there is a smarter and short cut way under the prevailing circumstances to get around O'Neill's cunning defense.
Posted by: Francis Nii | 23 July 2016 at 07:48 PM
Well said, Sir.
Posted by: `Robin Lillicrapp | 23 July 2016 at 08:41 AM
Thurgood Marshall's loose legal philosophy was that you do what you think is right and let the law catch up.
Posted by: Bernard Corden | 23 July 2016 at 08:28 AM