Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback National Court of Papua New Guinea

Lambu v Ipatas [1997] PGNC 113; N1614 (22 September 1997)

Unreported National Court Decisions

N1614

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

EP 74 OF 1997
DAVID LAMBU - PETITIONER
PETER IPATAS - 1ST RESPONDENT
EDWARD KONU - 2ND RESPONDENT
THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION - 3RD RESPONDENT

Waigani

Woods J
22 September 1997

PARLIAMENT - Elections - Organic Law on National and Local-level Government Elections - Representation of Parties by Lawyers - Section 222.

PRELIMINARY RULING ON REPRESENTATION

24 September 1997

WOODS J: This matter has come before me by way of compulsory conference in accordance with Practice Directions to enable the Court to have matters planned and all necessary steps for the eventual trial of the matter and to ensure that the trial comes on as early as possible.

The Petitioner is appearing for himself without the assistance of a practicing lawyer and is objecting to the Respondents appearing through practicing lawyers. This objection is being made by virtue of the requirement in section 222 of the Organic Law:

(1) A party to a petition shall not, except by consent of all parties or by leave of the National Court, be represented by counsel or solicitor.

(2) In no case shall more than one counsel appear on behalf of a party.

At this compulsory conference the respondents to the petition are appearing through the representation of practicing lawyers. I have given these lawyers leave to appear today and make submissions on this objection.

Petitions to dispute the election of representatives to the Parliament of the Country are creatures of Statute. And such are treated very seriously seeing as they challenge the representation of the people in the Parliament. Therefore the whole procedure as laid down in the Organic Law for the hearing and resolution of such a dispute points to a speedy resolution of such matter with no provisions for lengthy pleadings and opportunity for delay. And as the representation of people in the Parliament is a matter that concerns every citizen the procedure has been made as simple as possible for all citizens to undertake if they feel that such is warranted. Thus it is felt that the ordinary aggrieved citizen should not have to avail themself of the cost of lawyers but should be able to make the complaint or petition themselves and then present it to the court.

Section 222 of the Organic Law requires the Court to consider the representation of the parties at the very beginning of the proceedings and a Petitioner who has filed a petition himself and who intends to prosecute the petition himself is therefore quite entitled to object to the other parties having separate representation - note the requirement in Section 222 for consent or leave.

The Petitioner has submitted that the first respondent in this matter is an educated man of great experience and status and should be quite able to give the court all the assistance needed to answer the petition. And further why should the petitioner run the risk of substantial legal costs against him if he fails yet the respondent will not have that risk. The petitioner is asking for all things to be equal before the court and for the spirit of the Organic Law to be enforced.

The petitioner is making the same application in respect of all the respondents. It is submitted that whilst the Electoral Commission is a statutory office it can still be represented by an officer of that office duly appointed to appear as the representative of the Commission for the purpose of the petition.

Now if all things were equal then I may consider acceding to his request.

I might note there that the question of the level of costs for a losing party when a party is not represented by a lawyer is a separate matter to be considered in due course at the conclusion of the case and obviously the equality of representation may have some bearing on the way the costs are allocated or ruled upon.

However it is well known, and the petitioner does not deny, that he is a graduate in law with many years experience as a practicing lawyer although he is not registered at present with a practicing certificate. In the circumstances therefore, recognising the qualifications and experience of the petitioner and to ensure that matters do appear fair before the court and to assist with the expeditious hearing of this petition I grant leave to the Respondents to each be represented by a lawyer.