Magistrate: Lands officers, not the accused, cheated PNG
News that matter in Papua New Guinea
Image for illustratioon only. For more info on the image, go to https://dlpp.gov.pg/
Magistrate: Lands officers, not the accused, cheated PNG
PORT MORESBY: The Waigani committal court on Thursday (March 18, 2021) found that the Lands officers, not the accused, are the ones who defrauded the State.
Magistrate Gary Unjo then discharged Mina Karo from a false pretence accusation.
Isn’t this case most embarrassing for the Papua New Guinea Government?
Here are the full details of the court proceedings as reported by The National:
Court: Lands officers at fault
March 19, 2021The NationalMain Stories
By BOURA GORUKILA
WAIGANI Committal Court Magistrate Gary Unjo yesterday ruled that it was the Lands officers who defrauded the State and not the accused.
With that scathing remark, Magistrate Unjo discharged Mina Karo from a false pretence accusation based on insufficient evidence.
Karo was alleged to have been invited by the landlord of section 142, allotment 21, in Hohola, Port Moresby, to live with him and develop the land.
On Oct 17, 2011, it was alleged that Karo had consultations with the landlord and Lands officers and had the property title forfeited and transferred to her name. Magistrate Unjo relied on the statements of five witnesses – three Lands officers and two police officers.
“The evidence by Lands officers were unreliable as they did not disclose Karo’s intention,” he said.
According to police statements, Karo was invited by the landlord who was the complainant, to live with him. “While living with him, Karo went to the Lands Department and fraudulently completed and signed statements, which she did not know that the property had already been transferred to a Lands officer,” Magistrate Unjo said.
“In my findings, the action of the forfeiture is not the action of Karo.
“It is an action of an officer in the Lands Department. The Lands officers knew very well the circumstances surrounding the property.
“They are the ones who defrauded the State and not Karo.”
“Therefore, I find insufficient evidence against Karo.
“She is (to be) discharged and her bail is to be refunded.”
Comments
Post a Comment