Papua New Guinea’s Chief Justice Sir Gibbs Salika has been formally referred by the Ombudsman Commission to the acting Public Prosecutor, a move Prime Minister James Marape described as “unprecedented territory” for the nation and one that raises serious constitutional questions.
In a statement, Marape said the referral of the head of the judiciary was not a matter to be taken lightly and directed Chief Secretary Ivan Pomaleu to convene an urgent meeting of senior officials to review the implications and ensure the integrity of the judiciary and constitutional processes. The prime minister stressed the government’s commitment to respecting the independence of constitutional institutions, saying he had no authority to compel the Ombudsman Commission in carrying out its duties.
Pomaleu has been instructed to bring together the Secretary for Justice and Attorney‑General, the State Solicitor and the Secretary for Judicial Services for the emergency session. The meeting’s purpose, government sources said, is to assess the procedural and administrative consequences of the referral and to safeguard the continued functioning of court services while the matter proceeds through the constitutionally prescribed channels.
Justice Minister and Attorney‑General Pila Niningi — who also chairs the Judicial and Legal Service Commission — confirmed the Ombudsman had issued a notice of referral to the Acting Public Prosecutor but emphasised that Sir Gibbs has not been charged with any offence under the Leadership Code. “The Chief Justice of Papua New Guinea was not charged but only referred in a notice by the Ombudsman Commission to the Acting Public Prosecutor. There is no tribunal set up yet,” Niningi said, reassuring the public and judicial staff that administrative operations and court functions would be maintained “as usual as possible.”
Niningi reiterated that the referral initiates a constitutional process rather than an immediate punitive step. The Acting Public Prosecutor must review the Ombudsman’s notice and decide whether to file charges or take other steps, and only then would the prospect of a leadership tribunal arise. He also outlined the contingency for any vacancy in the chief justice’s office: the deputy chief justice, or if unavailable the next most senior judge, would assume the role of acting chief justice to prevent disruption to the judiciary.
Marape’s comments highlighted the delicate balance between upholding the law and protecting the separation of powers. While affirming the government’s non‑interference, he framed the situation as one that demands careful constitutional navigation given the centrality of the chief justice to the country’s legal system. The referral represents a rare escalation by the Ombudsman Commission and marks the latest development in a matter that will now move into the prosecutorial and potentially judicial oversight stages.
The Acting Public Prosecutor’s forthcoming assessment will determine whether formal charges are pursued and whether a tribunal will ultimately be convened. For now, officials say, the focus is on ensuring continuity of judicial services and allowing the constitutional process to follow its course.
Leave a comment