Strengthening – and questioning – PNG’s defence capacity
The Treaty promises to bolster the Papua New Guinea Defence Force (PNGDF) through joint training, infrastructure upgrades, and enhanced maritime surveillance. Marape conceded that the country’s forces have long struggled with under-resourcing.

“The reality is that our Defence Force needs enhanced capacity to defend our sovereign territorial integrity. This Treaty will help us build that capacity – through shared resources, intelligence, technology, and training,” he said.

Yet, retired Major-General Jerry Singirok, former PNGDF Commander, has urged caution.

“Signing a Defence Pact with Australia for the purposes of strengthening our military capacity and capabilities is most welcomed, but an Act of Parliament must give legal effect to whatever military activities a foreign country intends,” Singirok said in a statement.

He warned that Sections 202 and 206 of PNG’s Constitution already define the Defence Force’s role and foreign cooperation limits, stressing that any new arrangement must pass parliamentary scrutiny to avoid infringing sovereignty.

The sovereignty debate
Singirok’s warning reflects a broader unease in Port Moresby – that the Pukpuk Treaty could re-entrench post-colonial dependency. He described the PNGDF as “retarded and stagnated”, spending just 0.38 percent of GDP on defence, with limited capacity to patrol its vast land and maritime borders.

“In essence, PNG is in the process of offloading its sovereign responsibilities to protect its national interest and sovereign protection to Australia to fill the gaps and carry,” he wrote.

“This move, while from face value appeals, has serious consequences from dependency to strategic synergy and blatant disregard to sovereignty at the expense of Australia.”

Former leaders, including Sir Warren Dutton, have been even more blunt: “If our Defence Force is trained, funded, and deployed under Australian priorities, then whose sovereignty are we defending? Ours – or theirs?”

Canberra’s broader strategy: Defence to rugby league
The Pukpuk Treaty coincides with Australia’s “Pacific Step-up,” a network of economic, security, and cultural initiatives aimed at deepening ties with its neighbours. Central to this is sport diplomacy – most notably the proposed NRL Pacific team, which Albanese and Marape both support.

Canberra views the NRL deal not simply as a sporting venture but as “soft power in action” – embedding Australian culture and visibility across the Pacific through a sport already seen as a regional passion.

Marape called it “another platform of shared identity” between PNG and Australia, aligning with the spirit of the Pukpuk Treaty: partnership through shared interests.

However, critics argue the twin announcements – a defence pact and an NRL team – reveal a coordinated Australian effort to strengthen influence at multiple levels: security, economy, and society.

The US factor and overall strategy
The Pukpuk Treaty follows last year’s Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) signed between Papua New Guinea and the United States, which grants US forces access to key PNG military facilities, including Lombrum Naval Base on Manus Island.

That deal drew domestic protests over transparency and the perception of external control. The Marape government insisted the arrangement respected PNG’s sovereignty, but combined with the new Australian treaty, it positions the country at the centre of a US-led security network stretching from Hawaii to Canberra.

Analysts say the two pacts complement each other – with the US providing strategic hardware and global deterrence, and Australia delivering regional training and operational partnership.

Together, they represent a deepening of what one defence analyst called “the Pacific’s most consequential alignment since independence.”

PNG’s deepening security ties with the United States also appear to have shaped its diplomatic posture in the Middle East.

As part of its broader alignment with Washington, PNG in September 2023 opened an embassy in Jerusalem – becoming one of only a handful of states to do so, and signalling strong support for Israel.

In recent UN votes on Gaza, PNG has repeatedly voted against ceasefire resolutions, siding with Israel and the US. Some analysts link this to evangelical Christian influence in PNG’s politics and to the strategic expectation of favour with major powers

China’s measured response
Beijing has responded cautiously. China’s Embassy in Port Moresby reiterated that it “respects the independent choices of Pacific nations” but warned that “regional security frameworks should not become exclusive blocs.”

China has been one of PNG’s longest and most consistent diplomatic partners since formal relations began in 1976.

China’s role in Papua New Guinea is not limited to diplomatic signalling – it remains a major provider of loans, grants and infrastructure projects across the country, even as the strategic winds shift. Chinese state-owned enterprises and development funds have backed highways, power plants, courts, telecoms and port facilities in PNG.

In recent years, PNG has signed onto China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and observers count at least 40 Chinese SOEs currently operating in Papua New Guinea, many tied to mining, construction, and trade projects.

While Marape has repeatedly said PNG “welcomes all partners,” the growing web of Western defence agreements has clearly shifted regional dynamics. China views the Pukpuk Treaty as another signal of Canberra and Washington’s determination to counter its influence in the Pacific – even as Port Moresby maintains that its foreign policy is one of “friends to all, enemies to none.”

A balancing act
For Marape, the Treaty is not about choosing sides but strengthening capacity through trust.

“Our cooperation is built on mutual respect, not dominance; on trust, not imposition. Australia never imposed this on us – this was our proposal, and we thank them for walking with us as equal partners,” he said.

He stressed that parliamentary ratification under Section 117 of the Constitution will ensure accountability.

“This is a fireplace conversation between neighbours – Papua New Guinea and Australia. We share this part of the earth forever, and together we will safeguard it for the generations to come,” he added.

The road ahead
Named after the Tok Pisin word for crocodile – pukpuk, a symbol of endurance and guardianship – the Treaty embodies both trust and caution. Its success will depend on transparency, parliamentary oversight, and a shared understanding of what “mutual defence” means in practice.

As PNG moves to ratify the agreement, it stands at a delicate crossroads – between empowerment and dependency, regional cooperation and strategic competition

Pacific leaders are expected to reaffirm the Forum’s recognition of Indonesia’s sovereignty over West Papua at the Leaders’ Summit but equally try to secure a visit.

New Caledonia’s former collegial government President, Louis Mapou said West Papua holds an important place on the Pacific countries’ agenda.

“Regional stability is a major concern of the Forum, and decolonization issues-like New Caledonia, French Polynesia, and West Papua-remain troubling,” he said.

Louis Mapou was at last year’s leaders’ meeting in Tonga where civil unrest in New Caledonia was front and centre.

While he met with Melanesian leaders to discuss sovereignty issues he did not speak to the media.

One year on, Mapou told RNZ Pacific that for “the West Papua issue” to be addressed Papua New Guinea – which shares a land border with Indonesia’s West Papua – needs to get involved, as well as the Melanesian Spearhead Group.

“In this stand-off with Indonesia, there are many interests at play, since Indonesia maintains strong diplomatic and economic ties with Papua New Guinea and Fiji,”Mapou said.

“And that’s the reality of today’s world-a constant tension between defending human rights and serving the interests of states.”

Actions speak louder than words

In 2018, Indonesia’s then president Joko Widodo extended an invitation to the UN Human Rights Commissioner to visit Papua but it never happened.

Pacific leaders have been asking Indonesia to facilitate a visit to West Papua since 2019.

In 2023 the prime ministers of Fiji and Papua New Guinea were appointed special envoys to visit the region.

While neither managed to finalise a mission, both leaders went to Indonesia to visit President Pabowo Subianto.

Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape told RNZ Pacific in 2024 both him and his counterpart Sitiveni Rabuka “could not find a time” where they could go together.

At the Leaders’ Summit in Tonga last year, the then Vanuatu Prime Minister and sub-regional bloc’s chair for 2024, Charlot Salwai, said there have been concerns surrounding West Papua for some time.

“Some issues in relations to human rights…because the [Pacific Islands] Forum back in 2019 decided to ask [for a] UN mission to do a fact-finding mission in Indonesia,” Salwai said.

“It is good to have a face to face meeting with the President of Indonesia.”

“If an invitation comes to the other leaders of the MSG, maybe they can go together to meet with the new president of Indonesia.”

Despite Vanuatu’s chronic political instability with five prime ministers in four years successive governments have been consistent in their advocacy for the region.

Violence ‘intensifying’

In the lead-up to this years’ meeting which kicks off Monday, Jakarta based Human Rights Watch Researcher Andreas Harsono said the conflict has been intensified to the extent it’s on par with some of the most violent periods in the past 60-years.

“Indigenous Papuans are running away from their villages, there are low intensity conflicts between Indonesian security forces, including the army and the police, against the West Papua National Liberation Army,” Harsono said, adding both sides of the conflict are getting more aggressive.

“If you take a look at the so-called ‘hot areas’ within West Papua, they are spreading in the central highlands, from central Papua to the border with PNG on the west.”

New Zealand Green Party member of parliament Teanau Tuiono wants to see Pacific leaders follow through.

“To talk with the community to get their perspective, their side of the story in terms of human rights violations,” he said.

“The expansion of the military is incredibly problematic so it’s important for us to express our solidarity with our West Papua brothers and sisters.”

Specifically, he wants Pacific leaders to condemn Indonesia clamping down on protesters who were marching against the transfer of four political prisoners.

Louis Mapou said there are two major concerns: The violation of human rights and the obstacle of sovereignty in the region.

“On a different scale, we face the same issue [in New Caledonia].

“The struggle for independence, New Caledonia’s future, and human rights concerns tied to law enforcement practices.”

Caleb Fotheringham, in Honiara

caleb.fotheringham@rnz.co.nz

Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific presenter/bulletin editor

lydia.lewis@rnz.co.nz

Throughout Melanesia, from the highlands of Papua New Guinea to the islands of Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, land holds significance beyond its physical characteristics. It embodies ancestral heritage, cultural identity, and community well-being. The principle that “Land Is Life” captures a fundamental and enduring truth at the heart of Indigenous societies.

The sale of Indigenous land represents the loss of more than property; it endangers the future of communities, their cultures, and their dignity. Land preserves history, protects sacred sites, and provides for nourishment and health. Without secure land tenure, communities face the risk of dispossession within their own homelands.

The Critical Importance of Land Retention

For Indigenous peoples in Melanesia, land is not simply a commodity. Its value encompasses:

• Food security through agriculture, hunting, and fishing
• Medicinal resources and traditional ecological knowledge
• Economic stability based on subsistence and local enterprise
• Spiritual and cultural continuity, grounded in sacred and ancestral sites

When land is transferred to corporations, foreign investors, or private interests, communities lose access to vital resources and self-determination. Reliance on monetary compensation is often short-lived and fails to provide lasting security, leaving people without food security, cultural foundation, or influence over their own future.

Impacts of Land Alienation on Dignity and Autonomy

Land is intrinsically linked to both identity and the right to self-governance. The loss of land may result in:

• Diminished cultural knowledge, as elders are unable to transmit traditions rooted in the land
• Social fragmentation and increased vulnerability to issues such as substance abuse and conflict
• Greater dependence on external actors, as landlessness erodes self-sufficiency and choice

Notably, the alienation of land is often permanent. Once lost, customary land is rarely recovered, and future generations are deprived of their heritage and connection—a situation with consequences beyond financial loss.

The “Land Is Life” Movement: Professional Strategies for Customary Land Protection

Organisations such as the Melanesian Land Defence Alliance (MLDA), Melanesian Spirit and Nature, and other Indigenous groups are working collaboratively to prevent the unsustainable transfer of customary lands. Key strategies include:

1. Legislative and Policy Advocacy

• Promoting legal frameworks that restrict or prohibit the permanent transfer of Indigenous land to non-customary owners
• Establishing community land trusts to secure collective ownership and prevent sales

2. Community Engagement and Education

• Implementing outreach initiatives to inform communities about the long-term impacts of land alienation
• Highlighting positive examples of communities that have retained land ownership and achieved sustainable development

3. Sustainable Economic Development

• Encouraging land leasing as a development approach, thereby maintaining Indigenous ownership
• Supporting eco-tourism, agroforestry, and traditional agriculture as income-generating activities that preserve land tenure

4. Accountability and Advocacy

• Identifying and holding accountable intermediaries, officials, and companies that exert undue influence on communities to sell land
• Coordinating peaceful demonstrations, legal actions, and public awareness campaigns to uphold Indigenous land rights

Conclusion: Upholding Land Stewardship and Collective Responsibility

The “Land Is Life” initiative is a critical call to protect Melanesian heritage and future prosperity. Indigenous communities must remain united and steadfast, as the sale of land undermines the very fabric of their societies.

It is essential to prioritise long-term sovereignty and stewardship over short-term financial gains. Land is not merely an asset—it is a trust passed down through generations. Its preservation is integral to identity, well-being, and the continued vitality of Melanesian communities.

The present generation is faced with a pivotal decision: to be recognised for protecting the land, or to be remembered for its loss.

#LandIsLife #MelanesiaRising #NoLandNoLife

In a letter to the Prime Minister, Hon, James Marape, Acting Director General of the MSG Secretariat, Ilan Kiloe, said, “while a poignant and sombre occasion, celebrations provide a great opportunity to reflect on the successes and challenges of statehood since 1975 – a time for celebration, reflection and renewal therefore”.

He noted that as a founding and senior member of the MSG family, PNG has continued to embody the qualities of Melanesian solidarity, of a big brother to the rest of Melanesia and the broader Pacific family.

This he said, was exemplified recently on the margins of the 54th Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting in Honiara, last week, with the signing of security frameworks between PNG and Solomon Islands.

“As a matter of fact, PNG’s Kumul-force’s intervening in the Santo rebellion is widely considered a first in regional intervention, and greatly assisted Vanuatu achieve unified statehood post-independence in 1980,” he stated.

“This, might I add, is a responsibility that we owe the Peoples of Melanesia and Oceania as a whole, notwithstanding principles of national sovereignty, territorial integrity and common geographic and ethnocentric regional classifications.

“These efforts all contribute to the achievement of the “MSG 2038-Prosperity for All” Plan, which envisions an MSG community that is strong, integrated, enlightened, happy, prosperous, secure and caring,” he said.

ADG Kiloe said Papua New Guinea remains an archetypical defender of democracy, social justice, equitable and sustainable socio-economic growth and development, notwithstanding steep challenges, both internal and external in nature, including the existential threat of climate change.

“Moreover, I wish to congratulate you on your exemplary political and astute regional leadership. We look forward to the same leadership and support, as the Secretariat endeavours to takes its rightful place in the CROP family, and going through to the 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly,” he stated.

He further expressed profound appreciation to PM Marape for his wise counsel and direction rendered to the Secretariat during the 23rd MSG Leaders’ Summit held in Suva, Fiji last June.

This he added, is something that the Secretariat greatly values as it strives to better serve the MSG Membership.

Caption: Members of the PNG community in Vanuatu during the 49th Independence Anniversary celebrations in Port Vila last year.

Many of these members were young and some were new to politics: Chief Minister (later Grand Chief) Michael Somare was 37, Minister of Finance Julius Chan was 33, and Josephine Abaijah, the only woman, was 32.

Within three years, these trailblazers would steer the country from a colonial territory of Australia to a newly independent nation, declared on September 16 1975, 50 years ago this week.

As they moved from colony to self-government to independence, the members of the Third House of Assembly held sophisticated debates on decolonisation.

Leaders did not simply inherit Australian institutions. They reimagined them, arguing about land, law, unity, culture and what the concept of “development” should mean in a Melanesian society.

These speeches and debates are captured in Debating the Nation: Speeches from the House of Assembly, 1972–1975, the recently published book we co-edited along with Keimelo Gima, a historian at the University of Papua New Guinea.

The formation of the ‘mother law’

Papua New Guinea prepared for independence with a radical approach to the drafting of its constitution. The task fell to the Constitutional Planning Committee (CPC) — led in practice by Bougainville priest-politician John Momis.

Over three years, the committee held meetings across the country, gathering the “raw materials” of people’s views on citizenship, governance and development. The result was a constitution known as the “mother law”. It was one of the most inclusive in the world, and, in Momis’ words, a truly “home-grown” document.

At its heart was a redefinition of development in the context of PNG. Momis believed progress should not just be measured in gross domestic product (GDP) and prestige projects, but also in the continuation of the traditional values of PNG – liberally sprinkled with the progressive ideals of the 1970s, which celebrated small-scale societies.

Momis declared that true development was “integral human development” – measured by people’s wellbeing, not wealth or power.

This was a radical stance in the 1970s. It defined development in terms of human dignity, fairness between regions, grassroots participation and the preservation of cultural and spiritual values. It foreshadowed the “Melanesian Way”, the celebration of Melanesian communalism developed by another central figure in PNG independence, the esteemed jurist and philosopher Bernard Narokobi.

This concept remains strikingly relevant today. Allan Bird, the governor of East Sepik province, recently invoked the spirit of this philosophy in an address to students at the University of Papua New Guinea’s 60th anniversary symposium last month.

Putting policy into action

If the constitution set out the vision for the nation, the Eight-Point Plan put forth by Somare, who would become the country’s first prime minister, translated it into policy.

It called for Papua New Guinean control of the economy, decentralisation, support for village industries, equal participation for women and self-reliance. Somare warned against foreign dependency and of a “very rich black elite [emerging] here at the expense of village people.

Turning ideals into practice also required new institutions. That task fell in part to Chan, the finance minister, who in 1972 delivered the first budget by a Papua New Guinean — a symbolic moment in the transfer of power.

For Chan, controlling the purse strings was the foundation of self-government, and he insisted the country must “look to its own resources” if it was to pay its own way. Within three years, the Central Bank and the kina were also in place.

Citizenship proved explosive. Many Australians living in the territory feared they would be expelled from an independent PNG and were loud in their demands. Parliamentarians such as Ron Neville urged an open, multi-racial citizenship model to attract investment.

Momis argued, however, that three million Papua New Guineans “had nothing” and needed protection from Australian control. United Party leader Tei Abal rejected dual citizenship for Papua New Guineans and Australians and insisted the law should be “firm but not racist”.

The eventual compromise — single citizenship, no automatic rights for expatriates, but scope for naturalisation — reflected the balancing act between inclusion and integrity. But if citizenship defined who belonged to the new nation, the harder question was whether the nation itself would hold together.

The trials of decolonisation

Unity was not guaranteed. Secessionist movements such as Abaijah’s Papua Besena, which advocated for an independent Papuan state separate from New Guinea, threatened the territorial integrity of the new nation, but it was not the only threat.

At the same time, leaders on the island of Bougainville pushed for their own secession, citing grievances over the Panguna copper mine, which began production in 1972 under a subsidiary run by Rio Tinto.

Somare declared, however, that unity was not up for negotiation. He staved off the disintegration of the nation by introducing provincial governments and a federalised system in the months before independence.

Holding the country together was only part of the challenge. Independence also demanded a deeper transformation — freeing PNG from the colonial institutions and mindsets that still shaped daily life.

As Momis argued in 1974, true freedom was a difficult task when education and the very institutions of nationhood were all created by the colonial regimes, first under the Germans and British, and then the Australians. Decolonisation meant more than simply raising a new flag – it entailed building a society grounded in justice, dignity and local values.

Those ideals still shape PNG today, but they also matter for Australia. PNG’s independence is part of Australia’s story.

When PNG became independent in 1975, many people on both sides of the Torres Strait feared fragmentation or chaos. But despite secessionist pressures and economic challenges, PNG has remained a parliamentary democracy for 50 years: no coups, no military takeovers, no descent into dictatorship.

That outcome was not inevitable. It was the product of hard debates and principled choices in the 1970s. Leaders such as Somare, Chan, Abel, Momis, Abaijah and John Guise fought over unity, land and development — but they fought in parliament, not through violence.

Half a century later, their words still resonate. At the University of Papua New Guinea symposium we attended in August, speaker after speaker referred to the ideals of the founders. They reminded us the constitution was never just a legal framework. It was a profound statement about what development actually means. This is not simply growth, but dignity, participation, fairness and cultural identity.

That is a legacy Australians should not forget.

That was the resounding message from NCD Governor Hon. Powes Parkop as he officially launched the “PNG Story” celebration at the Sir Hubert Murray Stadium, marking the beginning of a historic month dedicated to telling Papua New Guinea’s remarkable journey of nationhood—starting with the Southern Region.

July’s event is part of a three-month national initiative that began in May, exploring PNG’s identity through Pacific and Asian stories. Now, as the country counts down to 50 years of Independence in September, the Southern Region proudly takes centre stage.

“Southern Region is where the PNG story began,” Governor Parkop said. “In Hanuabada, the Union Jack was first raised in 1884, and from this region, the journey to nationhood took root.

It is only fitting that we begin this final chapter of celebration here.”

Governor Parkop shared his personal story—starting school in 1968, watching his parents vote for leaders who dreamed of independence, and singing the national anthem while donning the red, black, and gold in 1973. “We started imagining a country built on unity, despite our thousand tribes and languages,” he recalled.

Governor Parkop urged the younger generation to reflect on their place in PNG’s future: “Our time is almost up, but your time is now. Ask yourselves—where do you see your city and country in 2075?”

He reminded the audience of the Southern Region’s pivotal role: from Yule Island, where the PNG flag was created, to the Haus of Assembly where leaders from all four regions unanimously voted for independence.

“We did it peacefully, and we must continue that spirit of unity,” he said in a media statement.

As traditional dances, songs, and cultural displays from Central, Gulf, Oro, Milne Bay and Western provinces captivated the crowd with their with their own storytelling, Governor Parkop’s message rang clear: celebrate the past, honour the present, and shape a better future—together as one people, one country, one nation.

He thanked the performers and the public for their attendance and participation, as well as appreciated the National Capital District Commission and Amazing Port Moresby teams for staging yet another great event.

Next Saturday 12th of July is New Guinea Islands Day so get ready to be inspired by the people from the provinces of East New Britain, West New Britain, New Ireland, Manus and the Autonomous Region of Bougainville.

Following the end of the second world war, global leaders gathered and established a framework of institutions including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to build a more equitable and just future for all. To help all nations and their people prosper not just a few. The endeavour was noble.

Seventy-five years on and the IMF’s noble goals has morphed into it being the global lender of last resort. The IMF is who countries on their last legs turn to as with the big loans comes big shackles binding the borrower to conditions that are unable to be deviated from until the loans are repaid.

PNG has been a member of the IMF since 1975 and willingly participated in monitoring and evaluation but wisely, successive governments preferred to maintain very conservative levels of public debt to GDP of no more than 35% and to steer away from highly conditional loans from the IMF.

From 1975 to 2001, a total of US$163m was borrowed by PNG from the IMF. During the period 2001 to 2022, no money was borrowed from the IMF and no office of the IMF existed in PNG.

Perhaps it is just a coincidence but since massive corruption and election rigging has taken hold in our country, since 2020, PNG has borrowed over four and a half billion Kina (K4.58 billion) from the IMF.

These are not grant funds but debts to be repaid back. Loans our children will be responsible for long after all the current MPs are dead and gone.

The IMF tied each of the loans since 2020 to good governance including mandating the establishment of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption (ICAC).

In every report completed by IMF staff and endorsed by the IMF Board in Washington, D.C. the IMF states that the PNG Government is progressing well with reforms to counteract corruption and therefore agreed to borrowing requests made by Marape and Ling-Stuckey.

In June 2025 the IMF reported that ICAC was operating well and handed out seven hundred and seventy million Kina to PNGs dodgy Government.

Fifteen million Papua New Guineans know very differently. We all know this Marape led government is rotten to its core. The IMF now has a fulltime office in Port Moresby, it surely must also know this government is not only rotten but has lost the trust and confidence of its people.

A simple google search by the IMF would tell it that the Chief Commissioner of ICAC, a no-name

private lawyer from Brisbane was unqualified for the job. How did he come to rise to such an important role we are not to know but it’s clear he has made a mess of it in record time?

In June as the IMF disbursed nearly three quarters of a billion Kina into the hands of Marape and Ling-Stuckey, ICAC was in turmoil and not functioning.

How could the IMF let the people of PNG down so badly?

Surely the sensible thing to have done would have been to withhold funding until Marape got his house in order and re-established a truly independent ICAC.

Instead, the IMF chose exactly that moment to provide another massive injection of cash into the corrupt public purse where the winners are a select few cronies, and 15 million Papua New Guineans continue to go without basic medicines and essential government services.

I call on the shareholders of the IMF, including Australia, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, our Pacific Island neighbours and China, to demand accountability from the IMF.

We are not stupid. I and my 15 million plus countrymen and women know the sinister and shameful deeds that are going on behind closed doors in Waigani and Washington D.C. to cripple our young country under this tyrannical regime.

Mark my words, the people of PNG will only stay respectful and silent for so long until we have had enough and demand real change.

Hon. Peter O’Neill, CMG, MP

Member for Ialibu-Pangia

Leader, People’s National Congress Party

Sources:

Consultation-Fourth-Reviews-Under-the-Extended-Arrangement-567819

under-ecf-eff-1st-rev-of-arrang-under-rsf-art-iv

suspended/105476836

20241003-p5kfno.html

The Department of Works and Highways is on the brink of collapse—crippled by incompetence, corruption, and leadership failure under Minister Solen Mirisim and Secretary Gibson Holemba. What was once a vital engine for national development through the Connect PNG Program has now been turned into a personal cash machine for cronies and wantoks.

Sources from within the Department reveal that Minister Mirisim is running the Department like his private business, completely ignoring due process, abandoning legitimate contractors, and stranding dozens of incomplete projects across the country. All while funneling millions in public funds into the pockets of friends and political allies.

It is alleged that over K600 million in Connect PNG funds were mismanaged and misappropriated during the close-of-accounts period from September to December 2024, with no transparency or accountability. While contractors wait helplessly at project sites, Mirisim and Holemba are believed to be approving payments to shady operators in exchange for backdoor cuts.

Insiders say it plainly: “The Department has gone to the dogs.”
There is no leadership. No vision. No commitment to the Marape-Rosso Government’s flagship infrastructure policy. Just greed, deals, and decay.

The people of Papua New Guinea deserve answers.

Why are genuine contractors unpaid while ghost companies are rewarded?

Why is there no audit of how Connect PNG funds were spent during the final quarter of 2024?

Who are the beneficiaries of these questionable payments?

This is no longer speculation. It is a developing scandal. And soon the truth will come out—names, amounts, and the networks behind them.

If Prime Minister James Marape is serious about clean leadership, the first action must be a total cleanup of the Department of Works and Highways—starting with the immediate suspension of Minister Solen Mirisim and Secretary Gibson Holemba, and an independent investigation into the K600 million mess.

The people are watching. The crooks will be named. And the Department must be taken back from the hands of corruption before it’s too late.

Whistleblower,
Works Department and Highways

STATEMENT BY

THE HON. SERGE VOHOR RIALUTH, MP

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER AND MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, EXTERNAL TRADE,

ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY – FIFTY SEVEN SESSION

NEW YORK, 18 SEPTEMBER 2002

Mr. President,

Mr. Secretary General,

Excellencies,

Distinguished Delegates,

I begin by bringing to this august gathering greetings and thoughts from the people of the Republic of Vanuatu. Our future will be determined by nations who are represented here today.

Mr President

I also wish to take this opportunity to press again the question of West Papua. At the Millennium Summit the then Prime Minister of Vanuatu touched on this important matter, that of the principle of self-determination for the people of West Papua. The special case of West Papua has always been high on Vanuatu’s foreign policy agenda. The Charter of the United Nations espouses the principles that continue to guide the Organization’s efforts in the process of self-determination.

It is our strong conviction that in order for the United Nations to be consistent in its decisions for the recognition and respect of the fundamental rights to self-determination we are again strongly requesting that the case of West Papua be placed for discussion on the agenda before the Committee of 24. The closed-door policy towards the pleas of West Papuans is continuing to undermine the credibility of the United Nations in addressing an outstanding matter. I believe it is in the best interests of the international community that the case of West Papua must be revisited. We are also requesting if a commission of enquiry can be conducted to verify information on atrocities alleged to have been committed in West Papua.

Gaining independence could have significant environmental implications for West Papua, particularly in terms of biodiversity conservation and the preservation of bio-cultural diversity hotspots. With control over its own resources and governance, the West Papua Provisional Government could implement policies and initiatives aimed at protecting the region’s unique ecosystems and cultural heritage.

One of the key features of the Green State Vision of the West Papua Provisional Government is to promote sustainable development practices that prioritize environmental conservation. This vision includes commitments to protect biodiversity hotspots, promote eco-tourism, and support indigenous communities in managing their natural resources. By prioritizing conservation efforts, West Papua could potentially become a global leader in biodiversity protection and climate change mitigation.

Several case studies and scientific research have highlighted the importance of New Guinea Island as a biodiversity hotspot. The island is home to a diverse array of flora and fauna, with a high proportion of species that are found only in this region. For example, the island is known for its unique birds of paradise, which are iconic symbols of the island’s biodiversity.

In addition to its ecological richness, New Guinea also boasts a high level of bio-cultural diversity, with numerous indigenous communities that have traditional knowledge of the land and its resources. By supporting the rights and autonomy of these communities, the West Papua Provisional Government could potentially strengthen conservation efforts and promote sustainable land management practices.

Overall, the independence of West Papua has the potential to bring about positive environmental outcomes for the region and the planet as a whole. By adopting a Green State Vision that prioritizes biodiversity conservation and sustainable development, West Papua could play a crucial role in global efforts to combat climate change and protect the world’s natural heritage. With the implementation of targeted conservation strategies and support for indigenous communities, West Papua could emerge as a shining example of how environmental protection can go hand in hand with social and economic development.