Former CJ Sir Arnold: Unethical, inappropriate to go ‘judge shopping’
News that matter in Papua New Guinea
Sir Arnold Amet Bryan Kramer
Former CJ Sir Arnold: Unethical, inappropriate to
go ‘judge shopping’
PORT MORESBY: Former Chief Justice Sir Arnold Amet says
it is unethical and inappropriate for lawyers to go “judge shopping”.
He made the remarks when
testifying as a defence witness in a leadership tribunal looking into 12
allegations of misconduct in office against suspended Madang MP Bryan Kramer on
Friday (Dec 16, 2022).
The remarks werer in
relation to allegations of social media publications by Kramer when he was the
police minister, purportedly scandalizing the judiciary – the conduct of Chief
Justice Sir Gibbs Salika, in suggesting “a conflict of interest”.
The tribunal proceedings were reported by The National:
Sir Arnold testifies
in tribunal
December 19, 2022The
NationalMain Stories
By CLARISSA MOI
FORMER chief justice
Sir Arnold Amet says it is unethical and inappropriate for lawyers to go ‘judge
shopping’.
He made this remarks when testifying as a defence witness in a leadership
tribunal looking into allegations of misconduct in office against suspended
Madang MP Bryan Kramer on Friday.
This was in relation to allegations of social media publications by Kramer when
he was the police minister, purportedly scandalising the judiciary — the
conduct of Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika, in suggesting ‘a conflict of
interest’.
Kramer’s lawyer Miglshi Giruakonda asked Sir Arnold for his opinion in relation
to ex-prime minister Peter O’Neill’s lawyer George Lau’s letter to the chief
justice to issue directions to deal with O’Neill’s warrant of arrest case in
October 2019.
“That is unethical for lawyers to do that. I wouldn’t have done that. The
matter has already been dealt with by another judge (Justice Nicholas Miviri),”
Sir Arnold said
“Don’t go judge shopping, wanting the chief justice to hear your case. That is
unprofessional. They have placed the chief justice in an untenable position to
direct Justice Miviri to hear the matter.”
Giruakonda further asked Amet whether Kramer’s post, that read: “A relevant
matter to note is that the Chief Justice was only recently appointed by O’Neill
late last year…”, would suggest a conflict of interest.
“There is a perception of a potential conflict of interest,” Sir Arnold said.
“Again, the lawyers have put the chief justice in a position to compromise his
judiciary independence and integrity to deal with matters which they shouldn’t
have.”
Sir Arnold said the primary facts were not disputed given that Sir Gibbs was
appointed by the O’Neill-led government.
Giruakonda also asked Sir Arnold for his opinion in relation to Kramer’s Facebook publication
which he was alleged to have also published materials scandalising the
judiciary and accusing O’Neill and his lawyers for filing a fake warrant of
arrest to deceive and mislead the court in 2019.
Sir Arnold said, in his opinion, the letter was “explicitly requesting the
Chief Justice to intervene and hear the matter and I describe it as
inappropriate”. On the allegation of publishing a letter of complaint to the
police by Sir Gibbs, Sir Arnold said if there was a complaint laid against
someone, that person had the right to find out what the complaints were so they
could be prepared to respond. The tribunal returns on Jan 16 for status
conference.
Comments
Post a Comment