Kapris' jail term put off

Prison escapee and bank robber William Kapris, attributing his suspended sentencing yesterday to a “miracle from God”, before boarding a guarded Toyota Landcruiser for the trip back to the Bomana prison camp

PRISON escapee and robber William Kapris got off lightly yesterday for his part in the armed robbery of the Metals Refining Operations (MRO) in 2007.

National Court judge Justice Bernard Sakora sentenced him to five years in jail, then deducted two years for time already spent in jail, and suspended the remaining three years, The National reports.

The judge felt he deserved to be placed on good behaviour bond for this period.

The sentence was light because the robbery did not involve violence, Kapris admitting to the crime and cooperated and others, who were involved, were still out there.

Sakora described Kapris as “a sacrificial lamb” who should “not be held accountable for the sins of others”.

A smiling and elated Kapris told the media just before boarding the Bomana-bound 10-seater Toyota Landcruiser that the courts decision was “a miracle from God”.

When handing down the decision, the judge noted that there were many others involved in the MRO robbery of Feb 14, 2007, in which K78, 000 cash and four gold bars valued at K2, 066,115.56 were taken.

These have not been recovered.

The judge said the court took into account Kapris’ cooperation with the authorities.

“He over-cooperated with police and everybody and anyone who wanted to talk with him.”

The judge said the sentence he imposed could be seen as a deterrent.

The judge said based on the evidence before him, there were many unanswered questions as to the whereabouts of others who were involved in the “inside job” robbery.

He called on relevant government authorities to fully investigate and prosecute “the others” involved in the “highly sophisticated and properly planned” armed robbery.

“Where are the others who were involved in this highly-organised armed robbery with him?” the judge asked, saying that Kapris should “not be held accountable for the sins of others”.

“Others were involved; it was night, how could MRO employee Fiona Augerea answers readily to the tooting of the bus?

“You would not have got into MRO without insiders,” the judge said, pointing out that he had watched the MRO close circuit television (CCTV) replay of the robbery taking place on the night of Feb 14, 2007.

Sakora said the CCTV replay showed no indication that the MRO employees were being held under threat while the robbery took place.

“Even the man with the pistol was holding it with the muzzle pointing downwards.

“You don’t just walk into a tightly secured setup like MRO. Someone from inside knew the safety lock,” he said.

“What happened to Alfie (Alphonse Silas), the supposed mastermind of the MRO robbery?

“There was proper planning; vehicles were hired and the provision of the police uniforms. Who gave it to them; where did they get it from?”

Chief secretary: Process begins on power-sharing

THE national government has started a consultative process that will see more power-sharing with increased legislative and service delivery functions passed onto the provinces, The National reports.

Chief secretary Manasupe Zurenuoc told a news conference yesterday that the word autonomy, used by people, was a misrepresentation and that what provinces really want was power-sharing.

He said the consultative process would start today in East New Britain, and then New Ireland and the rest of the country.

He said any legislative amendments to effect changes would most likely be at the end of the year.

Zurenuoc said cabinet had approved a discussion paper on power-sharing between the national and provincial governments.

“This is not the final position of the government.

“The discussion paper outlined many important issues and is intended to stimulate discussion,” he said.

“There have been many calls from provincial governments, in particular New Ireland and East New Britain, for more power and responsibility and, in some cases, greater autonomy.”

He said last June, cabinet resolved that the Bougainville model of autonomy would not be applied to any other province, adding the arrangements for Bougainville was a special case.

“My department has had some discussions with the East New Britain and New Ireland autonomy committees and governments.”

Zurenuoc said the discussion paper raised issues in four broad areas:

*Increased legislative powers and service delivery functions;

*Reforming the public service;

*Greater financial control; and

*Stronger political representation.

He said for the increase legislative powers and service delivery functions, a single administrative process to transfer specific service delivery functions and responsibilities for the national to provincial governments was proposed.

As a counter measure, it was proposed that in some circumstances, powers and functions might be withdrawn from provincial and local level governments if they do not have the capability and capacity.

Zurenuoc said public service reforms must be undertaken to support increased legislative powers and service delivery functions.

He said many provincial governments were seeking greater financial powers and the paper outlined a mechanism that would allow provincial governments to gain more control over recurrent grants.

He said many provincial governments had also sought changes to their political system.

“However, any policy must apply to all provinces; individual governments cannot have their own unique political system.”

The discussion paper also briefly outlined:

*The current situation as well as considering the composition of provincial assembly;

*Direct election of members of the provincial assembly;

*Whether LLGs should be brought under the control of provincial governments;

*Whether the office of the speaker for the provincial assemblies should be created; and

*Should the number of LLGs, and the way they were created, be reviewed.

“It is expected that by next month, the proposal would be finalised for consideration by cabinet.

“Any legislative amendments would most likely be made towards the end of the year,” Zurenuoc said.

 

'Hear me out,' said Sir Michael

From PAUL OATES

'Hear me out,' said Sir Michael
Under a newspaper heading 'Sir Michael gives judiciary, NGOs and the media a tongue-lashing', Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Somare yesterday reportedly lashed out at his country's judiciary, NGO's and media over the delays in dealing with high profile legal cases and his government's amendments to the Environment Act.
Sir Michael is quoted as saying he is outraged at the constant delays in processing court cases involving himself, his son Arthur and former chief secretary Lupari.
Yet could it not be said that Somare himself is the author of his own discontent? If his lawyers had not constantly raised objections and delays, surely these cases could have been dealt with in a timely manner? If he had provided sufficient resources to his own Ombudsman Commissioners to allow them to perform their proper role, these apparently irritating delays may not have occurred.
On the issue of the Amendment to the Environment Act, Somare "accused the media of misinforming the public and described NGOs as an unelected group representing no one. He said the amendments were done after getting "the best advice from three best brains". (I wonder who they belonged to?)
Sir Michael reportedly went on to explain that he himself had gone to China four years ago and convinced the Chinese government that they should invest K800 in developing the Ramu nickel mine. "The government will lose a lot. No country can come to PNG and put US$800 million on the spot" he is quoted as saying.
Yet again, Somare has only himself to blame. Why wasn't there full and open debate on the Amendment prior to the vote being rushed through Parliament? Why hasn't there been effective legislation passed to ensure the PNG people are protected by effective and robust environment laws? If there was effective legislation in place already, there wouldn't be a need for the people to have to take their own legal action to stop the government and the developer from potentially destroying their environment? If Sir Michael did indeed convinced the Chinese to develop the mine, and not vice versa, why didn't he use those four years to pass proper environmental legislation to protect his people. Why leave it up to his own people to defend themselves and then criticize them for doing it? There has been plenty of previous indications that this and other developments require effective legislation to protect PNG's environment from being potentially destroyed.
Clearly the PNG PM has been caught out and is behaving like a cornered animal, enmeshed in its own web of dishonourable deceit.
So perhaps his country should either 'hear' or in fact see Sir Michael out?
Err.. which way did he come in?

More gobbledegook from the PNG government

From PAUL OATES

Reportedly the latest press release from the Somare government purporting to justify changes in Papua New Guinea's environment legislation preventing any legal challenges to resource development companies once the director has issued a permit of approval for the company's operations to commence.
What a classic example of bureaucratise and public service 'gobbledegook'.
It was probably written by some high-priced help and paid for by AusAID.
A complete 'snow job' if ever I saw one.
______________________________________-

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION

OFFICE OF THE MINISTER

Press Statement on Amendment to Environment Act 2000

Hon Benny Allen, Minister for Environment and Conservation clarified misunderstanding on amendments made to the Environment Act and subsequent Environment (Permit Transition) Regulation passed by Government last week in Parliament.
The Minister said the Amendment is intended to give more clarity to the current saving provisions in the Environment Act 2000. The public will recall that during passing by Parliament of the Environment Act 2000, all development projects approved under the repealed Environment Planning Act 1978, the repealed Water Resources Act 1982, the repealed Environment Contaminants Act, 1978 needed to be saved and continue to operate as though they had environment permits issued under the Environment Act 2000.
These development projects had followed due process under each of the repealed legislations and on satisfying the requirements of each of the legislation were approved. It will be irresponsible for the Government not to protect these investments and thousands of jobs created. To give more certainty to the investors of development projects and the various environmental approvals issued before coming into operation of the Environment Act 2000, the transitional and saving provisions became a critical section in the main legislation.
The Amendment passed by Government last week will give added clarity to as well as remove doubts on the application of the saving and transition provisions in the Environment Act 2000. The Amendment in effect gives added certainty and confidence to development projects, who following due process, obtained relevant environmental approvals before the Environment Act 2000 come into operation.
At the time of coming into force of the Environment Act, there were development projects in different stages of development. There were those in very advance stages of development where in the permit they are referred to be in the operation stage. There were projects in early years of commencement and are referred to in the permit as being in the construction phase. And there were project in proposal stage and have just been issued with approvals.
The Transition and Savings provision there provides a guide to how these projects will be saved and rolled-over into the new Environment Permit arrangement. Conditions set out in the permits cover the various stages of project development to give added clarity and guidance to permit holders and the Department as the regulator on key parameters to manage, monitor and report on. As the project progresses to advance stages, some of the permit conditions become redundant and are no longer applicable. Permit conditions are then reviewed accordingly by the Director who has powers to call up permits and review conditions. Once issued, the permit is a contractual obligation that is reviewed and updated from time to time.
The Minister added that all environmental approvals issued under the various repealed legislation are being rolled over into the new permitting arrangements in the Environment Act 2000. This exercise has been going on since the Act came into force. These development activities are allowed to continue to operate under a deemed environment permit saved by virtue of the transition and saving provisions. While the transitional and savings provision is adequate, many permit holders are seeking urgent and immediate roll-over into the new permitting arrangements under the Environment Act for fear of being non-compliant with PNG laws. The Department is managing the roll-over as provided for under the Environment Act and the Amendment is intended to give added clarity and comfort to those who have yet to be rolled-over into the new permitting system.
The Public and particularly Environment Permit holders wanting more clarification regarding the Amendment can call the Department for more information.

Approved for Release:

HON. BENNY ALLEN, MP
Minister for Environment and Conservation

Prime Minister lashes out

Hear me out ... Prime Minister Sir Michael expressing his anger and frustrations over delays in the courts and calls on the judiciary to speed up cases

Sir Michael gives judiciary, NGOs and the media a tongue-lashing

Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare yesterday attacked the judiciary, the NGOs and the media over delays in dealing with certain high profile cases, and criticisms of the controversial amendments to the Environment Act, The National reports.
Walking into the conference room of his office at Morauta House, aided by a walking stick because of a sprained ankle, and flanked by senior ministers and advisers, he launched his tirade.
He expressed outrage at the constant delays by the courts in dispensing cases, like his own with the Ombudsman Commission, that of Public Enterprises Minister Arthur Somare, and the case involving his former chief secretary Isaac Lupari.
“This is the first time that I will address my concerns about the judiciary,” Sir Michael said.
He said just like Members of Parliament, the judiciary owed it to the people of this nation to speed up cases that had been pending for years.
He pointed out the Tewai-Siassi election case as an example, where former deputy prime minister Mao Zeming had to wait five years before learning a decision.
“Why? We cannot go and question the courts. When there is no decision taken, it makes you frustrated.
“With me running a country with six million people, you will be very, very frustrated. We want reasonableness,” Sir Michael said.
“We are seeing the same with other election petitions like the Madang provincial seat.
“Equally, cases before the courts delay the government’s ability to effect change quickly.”
Sir Michael said former chief secretary Lupari took the government to court over his removal and the matter was pending, three years later.
In the meantime, Manasupe Zurenuoc and Margaret Elias can only act in their positions.
“The Prime Minister’s Department has been held to ransom (by the judiciary). We want some decisions made,” Sir Michael said.
Defending the amendments to the Environment Act passed by Parliament last week, he accused the media of misinforming the public and described NGOs as an unelected group representing no one.
He said the amendments were done after getting “the best advice from three best brains” in the chief secretary to government, secretary to the prime ministers office and the attorney-general and also from a Scottish consultant.
He said the deep sea tailings disposal was the best option for Ramu.
He admitted the Ramu nickel project delay by the courts was the main reason for the change of laws.
“We have to make changes to (the law) have a speedy process to carry out that project,” Sir Michael said.
“We want the mine to continue that’s why we make the change.
“That project has a target and we have to achieve that target.”
He said any delay would cost the country.
He credited himself for going to China to convince the regime there four years ago to come and invest a massive US$800 million to start the mine.
“The government will lose a lot. No country can come to PNG and put US$800 million on the spot.”

Momis victory

By REUBEN KALAUNG in Buka

 

FORMER Catholic priest, national politician and ambassador John Momis has won the Bougainville presidential election by an overwhelming majority, The National reports.

Momis polled 43,047 votes, or 52.35% of the total votes cast in the second Autonomous Region of Bougainville general election.

Incumbent James Tanis could only muster 17,205 votes.

The declaration was made yesterday at the Hutjena counting centre in Buka by the regional returning officer George Tarala.

Mothers and children were seen celebrating openly when the declaration was heard on NBC Bougainville at 2.30pm yesterday.

Momis was escorted by police to the counting for the declaration and signing of the writs.

He was met and welcomed by Tanis at the counting centre.

Momis was accompanied by his wife, Elizabeth, to witness the signing of the writs which will be returned tomorrow.

He told a packed crowd that his win was for the people of Bougainville.

While expressing his gratitude to the outgoing president, Momis promised to continue the work done by the previous government.

He said the administration, under his presidency, would work towards completing the arms disposal programme in the autonomous region.

He added a lot more needed to be done in that area.

Momis said his government would also look at other ways of generating revenue to finance much-needed public service and public infrastructures.

He also plans to build up investors’ confidence within the region and offer opportunity to generate wealth for all Bougainvilleans.

“Bougainvilleans must be able to sustain their own living.

“They must be able to pay for their children’s school fees, food, vehicles and such,” Momis said during his speech at Hutjena.

He thanked all Bougainvilleans for respecting the democratic process of election in this second election.

Tanis thanked the voters for their support and pledged to work closely with the president-elect for a smooth transition of powers.

A total of 40 declarations were made over two weeks – the presidential seat, seats in 33 constituencies and seats for ex-combatants and women.

The elected leaders will be sworn in next Tuesday as members of the second Bougainville house of representatives.

 

 

PM: Why should I listen to Kapris?

PRISON escapee and robber William Kapris would be dead if not for the good laws of PNG, Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare said yesterday, The National reports.

He was angry the media was giving a lot of prominence to what Kapris was claiming.

He said the criminal had accused three of his MPs without providing proof.

“Kapris goes to jail and he says what he likes and accuses three of my members of receiving money; he has not proven that they were party to this.”

“He is a murderer, a looter, everything, very dangerous, in other countries he would have been shot long time ago, particularly in developing countries, brown skin countries, they would have shot him. You are lucky, we made good laws, that’s why he is protected by law to go and say what he wants to say,” he said.

He brushed aside calls for him to act on the allegations Kapris raised against suspended treasurer Patrick Pruaitch, Correctional Services Minister Tony Aimo, and Deputy Speaker Francis Marus.

“Without any evidence, commentaries are being made by the media (in print and on radio) for government to act on the words of a convicted criminal.

“You all know very well that it is not my job to conduct investigations. If the police have video taped this interview and made it public, it is for the police commissioner to explain whether his men were under instruction to do so and for what purpose.

“To go straight to head of government to demand answers shows the people’s ignorance in the processes of government.”