Home > Corruption, Papua New Guinea > You are wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

You are wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

November 1, 2012 Leave a comment Go to comments

Lawrence Stephens | Transparency International

You are wrong! Wrong! Wrong! How dare you suggest TI PNG or I have dismissed the findings of any CoI – see TI dismisses Commission of Inquiry findings. It sounds good as a headline but you know it is far from the truth.

So where do we put a headline which points out that PNG Exposed is involved in astonishing displays of arogant ignorance with its nameless correspondents insulting all Papua New Guineans through blatant disregard for the right of individuals named by commissions of inquirey to have their days in court?

Come on oh nameless ones! Take some deep breaths and ask yourselves if you are really prepared to publicly defend the rights of Papua New Guineans and if it is really necessary for you to throw stones from the shelter of annoninimity. Much as you might like to claim the oppositie there is nothing astonishing in any loyal Papua New Guinean seeing the difference between accusations and convictions. Shame on you, whoever you are.

Let’s go through this once more. Cmmissions of Inquirey look into the issues which give rise to their being convened. They are not courts. Their findings generally raise quetsions as to the behaviour of individuals and groups of individuals whose activities have caused concen. Often there are recommendations made to government and law enforcement agencies that these people be subjected to invesigation and possible prosecution. Until this happens all we have are indications that the CoI saw evidence of possible wrong doing.

Oh nameless one(s) whoever you are. Your efforts to expose wrong and help us do better are greatly appreciated. We thank you for thiese.

There are excellent reasons for us to scrutinise appointees to many positions. There are excellent reasons also to show respect for those with whose activities we may be concerned but against whom no court of law has recorded criminal convictions,
Please do not insult members of TI PNG by suggesting the findings of CoI have been dismissed by them. TI PNG has constantly reminded governemnts and law enforement agencies that these issues have not been addressed. And we will continue to do so.

And please understand that TI PNG exisits to work with government to bring about lasting change in governance, Dpn’t be afraid. Come out in public and join us in our effoorts to encourage PNG to do as well as its people have a right to expect.

  1. November 1, 2012 at 2:48 pm

    I agree with one thing Lawrence, that reporting and blogging by nameless people is not really the way to make a credible argument, however true that report might be.

    • Kris
      November 1, 2012 at 8:32 pm

      TolaiMan, my research center conducted an investigation into the demolition of Paga Hill. Rex Paki appeared to be a significant player in the project between 1997-2000. In our report we noted Paki’s record; this was relevant in the context as the Public Accounts Committee had suggested in 2006 that the State Lease over Paga Hill had been acquired through “corrupt dealings”. Our comments on Paki were attacked as baseless by a writer on PNG Blog. I felt compelled to write a defense, which was picked up here.


      This seems to have kicked the debate off. But you can see my full name and institutional affiliation is clearly signposted.

      So with respect to Rex Paki it is myth that recent critical commentary has been made by faceless bloggers.

      But I can understand why people writing on corruption in PNG might want to remain nameless, particularly when they are making fearless attempts to expose people in senior positions. Ask Sam Koim about how many threats have been made against his life? Or Tos Barnett for that matter. I doubt they could be counted with my fingers and toes. But someone like Sam Koim has security. You can appreciate that those who don’t may be hesitant to reveal their true identities.

      • Tipil Kyak
        November 2, 2012 at 8:48 am

        But what if this nameless blogger is someone who may have a personal grudge against the accused and continously mislead public with false information? The followers on this blog presumably wouldn’t bother to verify the information used as evidence before believing.

  1. October 4, 2013 at 10:58 am
  2. October 5, 2013 at 6:04 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: