Several terms of our Parliament have been characterized by incumbent governments, adjourning sessions for unjustifiably long periods to avoid a possible vote of no confidence (VONC).

Several terms of our Parliament have been characterized by incumbent governments, adjourning sessions for unjustifiably long periods to avoid a possible vote of no confidence (VONC) brought on by MPs opposed to the government. The governments usetheir numerical strength on the floor to adjourn Parliament for many months. By the same token you would expect that in the spirit of the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy we follow, the MPs on the government side would stay intact and vote out the VONC when the motion is put on the floor of Parliament. But this has rarely happened.

If anything, the action of the members of the government side, to vote and adjourn parliament for many months in fear of a VONC demonstrates the lack of maturity in our Parliamentary democracy.

The immaturity continues to be demonstrated by the leader of the ruling party who is the Prime Minister and his inner sanctum of advisers opting to go for a deferral of sitting of Parliament in fear of some of their MPs crossing the floor. The question I have and many citizens also do is why would MPs hop here and their instead of sticking with the government and out-voting the VONC motion on the floor of Parliament. That way you safeguard the sanctity of the parliamentary democracy we have and retain your integrity as a legislator who respects our system.

The immaturity is overtly demonstrated by the weak political party system that often results in MPs party-hopping when the political ‘fortunes’ are about to change or have changed. This term of Parliament (2017-2022) is no exception.

By hopping from one party to another, the MPs essentially tell the people of Papua New Guinea that they stand for nothing and they lack decorum and respect for the democratic system we use. The actions of the MPs suggest that they stand for themselves or are at their whims of other interests they may be representing under the guise of being our legislators. If the MPs and the decorum and respect for our system of government they would stand by the policies of their parties and hence the government they are members of or if they are in the opposition.

And if the system was respected, incumbent prime ministers and ministers would not blackmail fellow MPs that if they do not support the government in office they would not receive project funds or development assistance for their districts and provinces. The fear of this blackmailing has resulted in MPs hopping here in there and not standing up for their political parties on the government side and the opposition.

In 2001-2002, the government of “reformist” Prime Minister the late Sir Mekere Morauta tried to address the above aspects of the weaknesses in our Parliamentary system by passing the Organic Law on Integrity of Political Parties and Candidates (OLLIPAC). Sir Michael Somare as opposition leader at the time of the National Election in 2002 and his National Alliance party were the first beneficiaries of the OLLIPAC when the Governor General invited them to form the next government because the NA had more members

elected than other parties. Sir Michael and his NA party also served the full five year term (2002-2007) courtesy of the restrictions the OLLIPAC placed on MPs moving from party to party willy nilly as in the past. The Somare government also was about complete its second full term in office when it was unexpectedly voted out on 2^nd August 2011 when the PM was hospitalized in Singapore with then Wabag MP filling in for Sir Michael as Acting Prime Minister.

Incidentally, the Somare government was removed one year after a landmark Supreme Court decision annulled key components of the OLLIPAC, among them were the movement of MPs between parties in 2010.

Two Supreme Court interpretation on the ouster of the Somare government stated that there was no vacancy in the position of PM and Parliament erred in voting in a new Prime Minister Peter O’Neill hence a new government. The Court took into account that the incumbent PM Sir Michael was hospitalized in Singapore and there was an Acting PM Sam Abal in the office. However, Parliament vehemently proferred the argument of separation of power between the three arms of government and maintained that the judiciary was encroaching on the work of Parliament to decide who should be the PM. Following the two court decisions PNG (or more precisely the MPs and their minders and beneficiaries in Port Moresby) went into what was termed as a “political impasse” where there was at one time two prime ministers, two governments, two PNG Defence Force Commanders and two Police Commissioners. The Government of Peter O’Neill used its backing of the head of the Legislature (the first arm of government) in Speaker Jeffrey Nape and stood its ground as the legitimate government. The O’Neill government did not budge and went to the National Election in 2012 and returned with a majority to retain the government. Following the 2012 Elections, the NA and Somare joined the O’Neill government and months later a Melanesian peace ceremony of sorts was held between Somare and the O’Neill government leaders concerning the “political impasse” saga.

What happened in the “political impasse” saga and the constant threats of VONC and movement of MPs suggests that our Parliamentary system is weak or those who principally participate in it lack the decorum to stand up and be the custodians of the proper processes of our parliamentary democracy.

Yes, I know some people often say our Parliamentary democracy has ‘matured’ by noting in particular the fact that citizens do not revolt and there has been no bloody uprising in response to various crises in Parliament in recent years.

I differ from this argument. Our people not revolting against the poor conduct of Parliament and te national leadership is largely a reflection of our socio-economic development and status. The majority of our people are under-educated and not conversant with our system of government and their rights and the what goes in Waigani, National Capital District. The often-quoted statistic of 80-plus percent of our people live in the rural and remote areas and most of them lead a basic subsistence way of life. These citizens are hardly informed or have least understanding of what goes on in Parliament and the seat of government in Waigani, National Capital District.

Much of what the majority of our people in the rural and remote areas know and perhaps care about is when the local MP would return to their areas to build the promised road or health centre and perhaps offer cash-handout under the guise of funding community projects.

Another reason why our people do not revolt against political opportunism at the Parliament and corridors of power in Waigani is because our country is so fragmented into many small tribes and cultural groups and their as no one or two dominant groups that can railroad protest against the rot in Parliament and government. This aspect of our national mantra “unity in diversity” comes out during various crises in politics, especially when MPs play around when a VONC is mooted.

Another reason would be that some citizens are close to MPs and even bureaucrats and benefit from them or have a sense of tribal pride for their positions and the people would not want to rock the boat by protesting. I lot of this mindset has played out on Facebook and other social media platforms in the manner people pose their comments or reflections of the politics and management of the country.

I am no pessimist but as I see it, the self-serving politics in Parliament with no regard for the set processes will continue into the future. This will be the case as long as we have a weak political party system and when candidates and supporters in a national election have to fork out their own money and resources to contest. These self-funding politicians and their supporters then use the elected offices to seek their “refund” through kick-back projects and the like thereby engaging in VONC threats and party-hop to be in government. I wrote about this debilitating aspect of PNG politics last year.

Things can change for the better when we have a critical mass of better educated, informed and economically empowered citizens who could speak up and protest or engage in controlled ‘civil disobedience” and more importantly demand change by voting objectively in an informed manner without duress.

As it is now, we do not have the benefit of a critical mass of educated, informed and economically empowered citizens who could hold Parliament and government to account. By government, I don’t only mean the executive government in Parliament, but the public service machinery as well, whose members are some of the main abusers and poor stewards of our systems and processes including money as well.

The lengthy adjournments of parliament to avoid a VONC happened throughout the near two-term tenures of the National Alliance (NA) party-led government (2002-2011) and Peoples National Congress (PNC) party (2011-2019).

The current Pangu Pati-led government under Prime Minister James Marape is merely following the precedence set by previous governments. Mr Marape as the former member of PNC is a beneficiary of the VONC provision of the constitution on 30 May 2019.

Mr Marape has been one of the dominant members of the two previous governments of NA and PNC that have been adjourning Parliamentary sittings to avoid the VONC, which as we know, is a parliamentary process mandated by our Constitution. Mr Marape has been a senior member of both parties and was the Leader of Government Business in the PNC-led government, which he ousted on 30 May 2019. A Leader of Government Business is a key minister who controls business in Parliament on behalf of the government in office. This including matters such as moving a motion on the floor of Parliament to adjourn sessions.

So the incumbent Prime Minister is very conversant with the technique of lengthy adjournment of Parliament to avoid a VONC.

Some commentators on the social media platform, Facebook, are saying the current government is merely following the precedent set so people should not make a fuss.

Other critics on Facebook are saying that there islittle over 12 months left before the next national election in 2022 so there is no need to change the government in a VONC at this time.

Both arguments are logical on a face value but they are wrong. They are wrong because they defeat the need to preserve the process of parliamentary democracy. This means allowing the motion of VONC to go through its mandated process and respect it. At the end of the day, it is democracy and political integrity at play when a VONC is allowed to go through and the serving government voting out using its numerical strength of opponents voting out. Which over way it goes and however painful it can be for some, the parliamentary democracy we have must win all the time. We must be clear the Westminster parliamentary democracy we follow does not place the executive arm of government above the other two arms of government. Our system and the Constitution does not give a free reign to the executive arm to do whatever those holding positions to do what pleases them. Let us learn to respect our Westminster system of parliamentary democracy.