Public Order In Png: A Hot

Potato Comes Off The Boil

From a Port Moresby correspondent

Papua New Guinea’s new Public Order Bill has created something of a furore here. It has been bitterly at tacked by the parliamentary opposi tion and the trade unions.

The students of the University of Papua New Guinea staged a protest march from Koke Market to Parlia ment House, and were joined by students from the Sogeri National High School, who had started out on foot from their school 40 kilometres out of Port Moresby at one o’clock in the morning in order to reach the assembly point at Koke in time for the march. Other student protests have been staged at Goroka, Lae and Madang.

There are elements of irony in the situation. The original Public Order Act of 1970 was introduced by the colonial administration ostensibly to counter the supposed threat to public order posed by the Mataungan Association on the Gazelle Peninsula.

It was supported by the Highlands based United Party and opposed by the Pangu Party led by Michael Somare.

Now the Public Order Bill of 1976, which is basically a re-hash of the 1970 Act with a few modifications, las been brought down by Prime Minister Somare and is being op posed by the United Party.

The reason for these provisions laving to be re-enacted is that under he Constitution of the Independent state of Papua New Guinea any enactment which seeks to impose estrictions on the rights and reedoms guaranteed under the con titution must set out which rights and reedoms are to be restricted, and nust be passed by an absolute majori -1 of parliament, that is a majority of rie total membership of parliament, ot just a majority of those members resent when the vote is taken.

Consequently the bill starts with a reamble stating that its provisions or regulate freedom from ar itrary search and entry; freedom of onscience, thought and religion; eedom of expression; freedom of

assembly and association; and freedom of movement. A pretty for midable list, and it’s a bit difficult to imagine how the bill’s provisions could, in fact, restrict some of these freedoms. But, 1 suppose that the legal draftsmen have to be on the safe side and provide for all possible con tingencies.

Probably it is this preamble rather than the actual provisions of the bill which has caused such a violent and emotional reaction to it. The bill’s ac tual provisions do not differ material ly from those of the 1970 Act. In cidentally, it was a reaction from that act which led to the tabling in 1971 of a private member’s bill which became the Human Rights Act, the provisions of which were later incorporated, in a modified form, in the constitution.

In the first place, opponents of the bill claim that, in fact, its provisions, originally designed overseas to deal with phenomena such as anti-war demonstrations, have little if any relevance to our own Highlands problem and would not help in dealing with it. If the object is to deal with tribal fighting, they claim, what is needed is an act dealing specifically with tribal fighting.

The present bill, its opponents say, would be dubiously effective for its

declared purpose, but could be used by the government in power to harass and muzzle its political opponents, particularly at election times.

Bowing to the storm, the Prime Minister has postponed further con sideration of the bill to the next meeting of parliament, scheduled for November. This delay will give members more time to study it and prepare amendments, and also give the government time to take another look at it in the light of the criticisms which have been levelled at it.

Even with the delay, Mr Somare’s chances of getting the necessary 51 votes to pass the bill do not appear to be very bright. Parliament has almost run its course, and many members seem to be tired and indifferent.

Attendance in the chamber has reach ed an all-time low. There are frequent delays due to lack of a quorum; and party discipline is too weak for the whip< to be effective.

Whether the bill succeeds or is defeated, it can hardly fail to have an adverse effect on the coalition’s chances in next year’s general elec tions; and it is a matter for surprise that a politician as astute as Mr Somare should have taken the risks involved in sponsoring so unpopular a measure.