THE issue regarding the Office of the Provincial Administrator for Madang Provincial Administration is very much alive and is yet to be properly resolved by the courts, says Madang Provincial Administrator Mr. Frank Lau.
He made this statement in response to a misinterpretation of the Waigani National Court Orders by Mr. Daniel Aloi (Fourth Defendant) and his lawyer Mr Martin Kombri involving Lau’s judicial review application challenging the NEC decision to revoke his appointment.
He said despite the dismissal of his judicial review application on technical grounds by the Waigani National Court on Friday 7th March 2025, the court didn’t give any other orders that the Fourt Defendant resumes office as the acting Madang Provincial Administrator.
According to the Court’s judgment received by this paper, the exact terms of the Court Orders made from the ruling of Judge Purdon-Sully were as follows:
- Leave is granted to the Fourth Defendant to withdraw its Notice of Motion filed on 11 July 2024.
- Pursuant to Order 16 Rule 13 (13)(2) (a) and (b) of the National Court Rules, the proceedings are dismissed in its entirety being incompetent.
- The Plaintiff pay the Defendants costs on a party and party basis to be agreed or taxed.
- Time to abridge.
However, Mr. Lau claimed following the court ruling, Mr. Aloi’s Lawyer, by way of email copied to lawyers involved, submitted to the Judge’s associate the Court Orders for the Judge to sign or endorse.
“In the Court Orders, Mr. Kombri added a completely new Order regarding the setting aside of the Stay Orders staying the NEC Decision.
“The exact terms of draft Orders as prepared by Mr. Aloi’s letter submitted for endorsement are as follows:
- Leave is granted to the Fourth Defendant to withdraw its Notice of Motion filed on 11 July 2024.
- Pursuant to Order 16 Rule 13 (13)(2) (a) and (b) of the National Court Rules, the proceedings are dismissed in its entirety being incompetent.
- The Court Order of 27th March, 2024 staying the decision of the First and Second Defendants dated 16 February 2024 and published by way of the National Gazette No. G102 on Wednesday 21 February 2024 and the Plaintiff to resume duties as the Provincial Administrator for Madang Administration forthwith pending determination of the substantive review is set aside.
- The Plaintiff pay the Defendants costs on a party and party basis to be agreed or taxed.
- Time to abridge.
“This is a blatant and direct abuse because Mr. Kombri was already given a copy of the Court Ruling in the Court containing the exact Court Orders made by the court, and yet he had decided to added an extra Term 3 to the Court Order for the Court to sign.”
“Justice Purdon-Sully dismissed my judicial review proceeding OS (JR) No. 22 of 2024, and in making the orders the Judge simply ruled that the mode of proceeding used was incorrect and therefore summarily dismissed the case,” Lau explained.
“Apart from the Order for dismissal, the Judge never made any other major orders regarding the office of the Provincial Administrator,” Mr. Lau added.
Mr Lau’s lawyer Kevin Makeu also clarified that there were no other orders from the court for Lau to vacate office.
“The court found that we did not follow the correct mode to file the judicial review application, that is why it was dismissed on that basis alone.
“No other additional orders were issued and we have options to refile the case through the proper mode as suggested by the court,” Mr Makeu said.
He also clarified that there is another proceeding, OS266 of 2022, still pending and there is an existing court injunction in place stopping the State and its agents from interfering with the functions of the Madang Provincial Administration under Mr Lau.
“This judicial review proceeding that was dismissed on technical grounds is a case against the NEC decision to appoint an acting Administrator Mr. Daniel Aloi.
“The substantive merits of the case are still there and we will still pursue it through the correct mode,” Mr Makeu explained.
“The pending case, OS266 of 2022, is against the Secretary of Personal Management, which an interim injunctive order is in place,” Lau’s lawyer further clarified.
He said there must not be any confusion because any attempts to remove Mr Lau would amount to contempt of court.
Mr Lau called on the lawyers of the other party, particularly the lawyer for Madang Provincial Government not to mislead the public and the people of Madang.
“As a senior lawyer, Mr Kombri should exercise professionalism in properly interpreting court orders by giving proper advice to his client before going on public media.
“Disseminating misleading information because of your own motives can cause harm to people on the ground,” Mr Lau said.
Lau was responding to a WhatsApp video that was circulated in which Mr Kombri was speaking to the media and claimed that the dismissal of his judicial review application effectively puts Daniel Aloi as the acting administrator.
Mr Lau and his lawyer Mr Makeu said the statement by Mr Kombri was misleading as there was no specific order made by the court for Mr Aloi to take office as acting administrator.
“Once again, I call on the people of Madang not to be misled with such very misleading statements.
“Until the court deals with the substantive merits of the case and formally orders my vacating of the office, I’m still the administrator,” Mr Lau said.
