PORT MORESBY: The action of O’Neill government in sabotaging the motion no-confidence vote in the last session of Parliament is being tested in the Supreme Court. The Opposition filed a Supreme Court application last Thursday, stating that Permanent Parliamentary Committee on private business which entertains the motion of no-confidence vote against a prime minister, has erred in rejecting the motion when it went before the committee. Opposition Leader, Don Pomb Polye through his lawyer, Loani Henao filed the application requesting the court to declare that: 1. It is mandatory for the process of a motion of no confidence in a Prime Minister prescribed by section 145 of the constitution which includes standing order 130 be fully complied with when the motion is given to the chairman of the permanent parliamentary committee on private business and in particular, after the committee has satisfied itself that the motion is technically in order; 2. The decision by the Permanent Parliamentary Committee on Private Business (the committee) in purporting to reject the motion of no confidence in the prime minister, the Honourable Peter O’Neill dated 3rd November 2015 is invalid on the basis that a motion of no confidence by its very nature is a matter of national importance and therefore does not require the examination by the committee on private business as regards its nature as the committee’s responsibility is simply to ensure that a motion of no confidence is in order in so far as its form is concerned; 3. The standing order 130 is justifiable for the purposes of and to the extent of giving full effect to section 145 of the constitution; 4. The said motion of no confidence is order and that the committee shall deliver a copy of its terms to the Clerk of parliament who at the first convenient opportunity shall report the terms of the notice of motion of no confidence to the parliament pursuant to standing orders 130(3) and (4) and standing orders 131 and 132; 5. And the court to order the Speaker to reconvene the Parliament to deal with the said motion of no confidence. It is the view of the Opposition that the constitutional provision for a motion of no confidence in a prime minister has been sabotaged by the government through the permanent parliamentary committee on private business which committee has the duty to determine whether the motion is in compliance with the procedures fixed by section 145 of the constitution. The Opposition argues that committee does not have the power to determine the merit of the motion. This is the matter for the Parliament.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Papua New Guinea Breaking NewsPapua New Guinea daily News updates Let Your Voice be heard: Submit your news articles, commentaries, letters , Photos, Media Releases etc to us on this email: pngfacts@gmail.com
Mining & PetroleumTop Links |