The news magazine of the South Pacific · since 1930

Pacific Islands Monthly, 1 September 1988Vol. 59, No. 9

Diro Reprieved: Charges Dismissed

p. 16 · Read in the full issue

By Frank Senge

ON August 7, Papua New Guinea’s Supreme Court ruled that the Bar nett Commission of Inquiry into the forestry industry had no power to refer perjury charges against former PNG De fense Force Commander Ted Diro.

The ruling effectively clears Mr Diro of five charges of lying under oath and tears a gaping hole in the Royal Commis sions of Inquiry Act. People called before any future commissions can now lie with impunity.Mr Namaliu has given no indi cation that he will take the matter up, though Justice Minister Bernard Nara kobi said he would push for amendments in the August 23 sitting of Parliament.

Deputy Prime Minister and fellow

Papuan Akoka Doi has said that if the People’s Action Party requested his post he would relinquish it to Mr Diro, who already has the backing of the Papuan bloc (which he leads) and PAP The only stum bling block is his own promise to Parlia ment that he would accept no ministry until he has been cleared of all implica tions before the inquiry.

The Commission of Inquiry has already referred Mr Diro to the Police, the Chief Collector of Taxes, the Ombudsman Commission and the Collector of Cus toms for possible criminal prosecution.

Mr Barnett found Mr Diro to have been “disgraceful and dishonest... in addition to his lies before the Commission he made

false declarations in his annual returns to the Ombudsman Commission and in his tax returns.”

Mr Diro told Parliament, however, that members of the Inquiry team and senior members of the former Government had a “personal vendetta” against him, and that he was a “victim” of an “economic tussle” between PNG and “others”.

Mr Namaliu has granted the inquiry an extension and wants it to finish its course .. . but should the various authorities want to charge Mr Diro they would have to con duct further investigations, since infor mation brought before the Commission of Enquiry cannot be used in evidence in other proceedings. □