Re Tribal Fighting in Wapenamanda and its Impact on the Work of the National Court and the Education of Children [2025] PGNC 357; N11501 (29 September 2025)

N11501

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

HROI NO. 06 OF 2025

IN THE MATTER OF ENFORCEMENT OF BASIC RIGHTS
UNDER SECTION 57 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA

RE: TRIBAL FIGHTING IN WAPENAMANDA
AND ITS IMPACT ON THE WORK OF THE NATIONAL COURT
AND THE EDUCATION OF CHILDREN

WABAG: ELLIS J
25, 26, 29 SEPTEMBER 2025

HUMAN RIGHTS – Tribal fighting in Wapenamanda - Matter commenced by the Court on its own initiative – Breaches of the right to life, right to freedom, right to freedom of assembly and association, and right to freedom of movement – Consideration of orders required to prevent further breaches – Continuation of matter until tribal fighting ceases and peace is restored

Cases cited
No cases are cited in these reasons.

Counsel
E. Minok for The Hon Mikki Kaeok MP, Member for Wapenamanda Open
G. Bon for Sandis Tsaka, Provincial Administrator

REASONS

1. ELLIS, J: These are the reasons why Interim Orders were made urgently last Friday. The orders that were made are set out below (correcting typographical errors):
   

“1. The Acting Provincial Police Commander is directed to take steps to have removed by 4pm today:

(a) all rocks on the highway in Wapenamanda and the approaches to Wapenamanda, and
(b) any roadblock not authorised by the Police.

2. This Court confirms the Preventive Orders previously issued to the Yakuman tribe and the Yangakin/Yangakun tribe.
   
3. No bush knife, axe, gun or other offensive weapon is to be carried in a public place in Wapenamanda District at any time of any day.
   
4. As a result, the Police will be entitled to arrest, detain and bring before the National Court in Wabag:
   
   • (a) any person who breaches those Preventive Orders by reason of them being in contempt of Order 2, and/or
   • (b) any person who breaches Order 3 by reason of them being in contempt of that order.
     
5. The hearing of this matter is adjourned to 8am on Wednesday 1 October 2025.”
   

Overview

2. The Court, having become aware of problems caused by tribal fighting in Wapenamanda initiated this matter to consider:
   

(1) whether there had been breaches of the human rights provisions of the Constitution and, if so

(2) what were the effects of those breaches, and

(3) what orders should be made.

3. After hearing from 18 representatives of impacted institutions and four out of the five leaders who were summoned to give evidence, the Court concluded:
   

(1) there had been multiple, clear breaches of the right to freedom, the right to life, the right to freedom of assembly and association, and the right to freedom of movement (provided by s 32, s 35, s 47 and s 52 of the Constitution),

(2) those breaches have given rise to significant effects, and

(3) those effects warranted making urgent orders aimed at preventing further breaches of those rights by tribal fighting in Wapenamanda.

History of the proceedings

4. Upon becoming aware of the concerns of educators in Wapenamanda and having been made aware by the head of the correctional facility in Baisu that remandees due to stand trial on Monday 29 September 2025 feared for their safety when travelling through Wapenamanda, on Monday 22 September 2025 the Court initiated this human rights matter, based on section 57 of the Constitution.
   
5. Two school principals were summoned to attend the National Court in Wabag on Thursday 25 September 2025. When it was said that the summons could not be served by the Police as they did not have fuel, the resident judge went to the local service station and paid the requested K150 himself to prevent avoidable delay. On Wednesday 24 September 2025, five leaders were summoned to attend the National Court in Wabag on Friday 26 September 2025.
   
6. Although only one of the principals attended on Thursday 25 September 2025, there were no less than 16 other people who sought to provide evidence to the Court. (The second principal was able to attend the Court the next day.) Given the urgency of this matter, that evidence was heard after the Court dealt with two criminal matters and before a third criminal matter was heard that afternoon.
   
7. Four of the five leaders summoned to attend the Court on Friday 26 September did so: (1) the Acting Provincial Police Commander, Kelly Sombe, (2) the Provincial Administrator, Sandis Taska, (3) the Commander of the Defence Force unit currently based in Enga Province, Major Kents, and (4) Danny Katie (a member of the Yakuman tribe). Again, given the urgency of this matter, evidence from those witnesses was heard after the Court considered one civil matter, before a further four civil matters were considered later that day.
   
8. The member for Wapenamanda Open, The Hon Mikki Kaeok MP, who is also the Minister for Works and Transport (from the Yangakun tribe), did not attend the Court on Friday 26 September 2025. Instead, he sent a lawyer who told the Court:
   

(1) his client had told him that he had not been served until late the previous day, Thursday 25 September 2025, and

(2) his client was currently in Port Moresby.

9. When he was directed to use his mobile phone to call his client to ascertain when was the earliest that he could attend the Court, including Saturday and Sunday, the response was Wednesday, 1 October 2025. A time of 8am was allocated so that the other work of the Court, namely the joint trial of eight accused persons, was not affected.
   
10. The Court notes that:
    

(1) the Police officer who served the summons on the member for Wapenamanda Open provided a document to the Court which indicated that the member was served on the afternoon of Wednesday 24 September 2025,

(2) it was not until after receiving that summons that the member left Enga Province and travelled to Port Moresby, and

(3) that he did so without providing the court with the reason why he would not be obeying the summons, either before travelling to Port Moresby or prior to the hearing on Friday 26 September 2025.

11. After hearing evidence on Friday 26 September 2025, the hearing of this matter was adjourned to 8am on Wednesday 1 October 2025 and it was indicated that the Court would consider what interim orders should be made as a matter of urgency. Shortly after the conclusion of the hearing on that day, the interim orders set out above were made. A copy of those orders was sent to the email address of each of the four leaders who had attended that hearing.
    
12. These reasons have been prepared for publication on the next working day so the basis for making the orders would be clear, not only to those summoned but also to those affected by tribal fighting in Wapenamanda.
    

Relevant law

13. The right to freedom, set out in s 32(2) of the Constitution, is expressed in the following terms (emphasis added):
    

“Every person has the right to freedom based on law, and accordingly has a legal right to do anything that –

(a) does not injure or interfere with the rights and freedoms of others; and

(b) is not prohibited by law, and no person –

(c) is obliged to do anything that is not required by law; and

(d) may be prevented from doing anything that complies with the provisions of Paragraphs (a) and (b).”

14. A right to life is provided by s 35 of the Constitution which is in the following terms:
    

“(1) No person shall be deprived of his life intentionally except –

(a) in execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of an offence for which the penalty of death is prescribed by law; or

(b) as the result of the use of force to such an extent as is reasonable in the circumstances of the case and is permitted by any other law –

(i) for the defence of any person from violence; or

(ii) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained; or

(iii) for the purpose of suppressing a riot, an insurrection or a mutiny; or

(iv) in order to prevent him from committing an offence; or

(v) for the purpose of suppressing piracy or terrorism or similar acts; or

(c) as the result of a lawful act of war.

(2) Nothing in Subsection (1)(b) relieves any person from any liability at law in respect of the killing of another.”

15. Headed “Freedom of Assembly and Association”, s 47 begins with the words: “Every person has the right peacefully to assemble and associate ...”
    
16. A “Right to freedom of movement” is contained in s 52 of the Constitution:
    

“(1) Subject to Subsection (3), no citizen may be deprived of the right to move freely throughout the country, to reside in any part of the country and to enter and leave the country, except in consequence of a law that provides for deprivation of personal liberty in accordance with Section 42 (liberty of the person).

(2) No citizen shall be expelled or deported from the country except by virtue of an order of a court made under a law in respect of the extradition of offenders, or alleged offenders, against the law of some other place.

(3) A law that complies with Section 38 (general qualifications on qualified rights) may regulate or restrict the exercise of the right referred to in Subsection (1), and in particular may regulate or restrict the freedom of movement of persons convicted of offences and of members of a disciplined force.”

17. It is also necessary to note the wording of s 57, set out in full below:
    

“57. ENFORCEMENT OF GUARANTEED RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.

(1) A right or freedom referred to in this Division shall be protected by, and is enforceable in, the Higher Courts of Justice or any other court prescribed for the purpose by an Act of the Parliament, either on its own initiative or on application by any person who has an interest in its protection and enforcement, or in the case of a person who is, in the opinion of the court, unable fully and freely to exercise his rights under this section by a person acting on his behalf, whether or not by his authority.

(2) For the purposes of this section –

(a) the Law Officers of Papua New Guinea; and

(b) any other persons prescribed for the purpose by an Act of the Parliament; and

(c) any other persons with an interest (whether personal or not) in the maintenance of the principles commonly known as the Rule of Law such that, in the opinion of the court concerned, they ought to be allowed to appear and be heard on the matter in question,

have an interest in the protection and enforcement of the rights and freedoms referred to in this Division, but this subsection does not limit the persons or classes of persons who have such an interest.

(3) A court that has jurisdiction under Subsection (1) may make all such orders and declarations as are necessary or appropriate for the purposes of this section, and may make an order or declaration in relation to a statute at any time after it is made (whether or not it is in force).

(4) Any court, tribunal or authority may, on its own initiative or at the request of a person referred to in Subsection (1), adjourn, or otherwise delay a decision in, any proceedings before it in order to allow a question concerning the effect or application of this Division to be determined in accordance with Subsection (1).

(5) Relief under this section is not limited to cases of actual or imminent infringement of the guaranteed rights and freedoms, but may, if the court thinks it proper to do so, be given in cases in which there is a reasonable probability of infringement, or in which an action that a person reasonably desires to take is inhibited by the likelihood of, or a reasonable fear of, an infringement.

(6) The jurisdiction and powers of the courts under this section are in addition to, and not in derogation of, their jurisdiction and powers under any other provision of this Constitution.”

18. For the sake of completeness, the Court notes the wording of the Declaration of Loyalty that is made by a judge during what is commonly referred to as the swearing in ceremony. That declaration includes the following words:
    

“I ... promise that I will uphold the Constitution ...”

19. In addition, a judge is required at that ceremony to make a Judicial Declaration which, so far as is presently relevant, contains the following words:
    

“I ... promise and declare that I will ... in all things uphold the Constitution ...”

20. There is no need to refer to any decided cases, or to use the Latin phrases often adopted by lawyers, since the legal basis for the interim orders is clear and can be summarised in the following three propositions:
    

(1) A judge is required to uphold the Constitution.

(2) The Constitution specifies that certain freedoms are a right.

(3) The Constitution says the Court can enforce such rights on its own initiative.

21. The effect of those propositions is that if a judge becomes aware or is made aware of what appears to be a breach of the human rights, such as those provided by s 32, s 35, s 47 and s 52 of the Constitution, an inquiry can be initiated by the Court into whether any such right has been breached and, if so, what orders should be made as a result. The wording of s 57(5) is such that the Court can make orders in relation to both breaches that have already occurred and breaches that may occur in future.
    

Issues

22. The issues which the Court considered in this instance were as follows:
    

(1) Has there been any breach of s 32, s 35, s 47 and/or s 52 of the Constitution?

(2) If so, what are the effects of any such breach(es)?

(3) Having regard to those matters, what order(s), if any, should be made?

23. It is necessary to consider the effects of any breach as that will impact on what orders should be made.
    
24. It may be necessary to seek to ascertain the cause(s) of any breach, because treating the effects may not address the cause. For example, placing a bucket underneath a leaking roof may stop the damage caused by the leak but does not stop the leak. However, in some cases, it may not be desirable to seek to ascertain the cause(s) if that would involve a significant evidentiary dispute that would delay an outcome, especially when questions of the safety of human life and damage to property are such that urgent orders are required to prevent further breaches.
    
25. It is to be noted that breaches of human rights provided by the Constitution can give rise to criminal proceedings. It is not appropriate, when a matter is initiated by the Court, to venture into that area since the commencement of criminal proceedings is a matter for the Police and the Public Prosecutor.
    
26. Further, breaches of those rights can give rise to civil proceedings. It is not appropriate to stray into that field either since there is no applicant in a matter that is initiated by the Court.
    

Evidence from affected persons

27. To avoid the prospect of reprisals, the Court does not indicate the names of any of the 18 witnesses who gave evidence of the effects of tribal violence in the Wapenamanda region. It was helpful that ten of those witnesses had put what they wished to say in written form, that they did not seek to add to what was included in those documents, and that other witnesses only confirmed that evidence did not duplicate evidence already given.
    
28. Time does not permit going into the detail of that evidence and it is sufficient to record the following summary of the evidence contained in Exhibits 9 to 18 inclusive:
    

(1) At one school, 946 students were affected when classes were suspended.

(2) From that school, 36 teachers and their families, a total of 158 people, were displaced from their homes.

(3) Students affected included those due to sit for grade 10 and grade 12 national examinations.

(4) Violence erupted on the afternoon of Friday 15 August 2025, on which day a teacher in another school was told that “one of the MP’s men was shot somewhere in Wapenamanda District Office”.

(5) In another learning institution, being a vocational centre, 26 students, 95% of whom live in the Wapenamanda District, have experienced disruption of final exams, and orientation for on-the-job training.

(6) At that vocational centre, nine staff members have been affected, including four “mission volunteers” from the Philippines who were evacuated to Mount Hagen.

(7) That vocational centre was said to be in the centre of the area in Wapenamanda District where tribal fighting is occurring.

(8) The facilities at that vocational centre put at risk by that tribal fighting include four classrooms, two workshops, two offices, a demonstration room, a library, a computer laboratory, a three-storey building containing teacher’s apartments and a function hall, and a boys’ dormitory.

(9) Another school, being a training school, has had classes disrupted with safety fears for teachers and students.

(10) A Christian radio station has been severely impacted by that tribal fighting between the Yakuman and Yangakun tribes. Its six staff were taken by surprise when the fighting escalated into a full-scale gun battle, putting the safety of its six staff members at risk, causing operations to be shut down indefinitely because that radio station was not just located within the vicinity of the conflict: its staff were, at times, caught in the direct line of gunfire.

(11) As that radio station depends on financial support from listeners, it has no income, and its staff remain unpaid.

(12) The Foursquare Church Social Services Agency has had to endure daily gunfire and war cries as close as 5 metres from the roadside and as close as 20 metres from the perimeter of its property in Wapenamanda.

(13) A student at Foursquare Primary School in Kumbas was killed by this tribal fighting, staff houses have been burnt and there has been looting, theft and wilful damage.

(14) It was said that “Although ceasefire instruments were signed, non-adherence persists, and lawlessness is rising”.

(15) Although they are located on State land, the Agency’s facilities sit within the Yakuman customary area.

(16) The Agency’s facilities which are at risk due to this tribal fighting have a replacement cost of more than K1 billion.

(17) It was noted that examinations are scheduled for Grade 10 between 6 and 10 October, Grade 12 between 13 and 17 October, and Grade 8 between 20 and 23 October.

(18) The Wapenamanda International Christian School has closed and will remain closed for the remainder of the current term, due to the ongoing conflict between the Yakuman and Yangakun tribes.

(19) It was noted that National Examinations are scheduled on 20-23 October.

(20) Church attendance was not possible “because the enemy always comes on Sunday”.

(21) It was said that: “Lawlessness is taking over our communities”.

(22) The Kumbas Foursquare Primary School, which has more than 500 students, is a “rural school serving the densely populated people of Yakuman tribe and also the neighbouring tribes in the district”.

(23) A grade 7 male student was killed within the school area by tribal fighting.

(24) The son of a staff member was also killed within the school area.

(25) That wife of the Treasurer of that school lost one hand.

(26) School infrastructure worth more than K5 million is now at risk.

(27) The evidence included the following words: “No one lives here now. All teachers and locals have fled. The place is vacant now.”

(28) A Bible College has been unable to continue its work due to tribal fighting.

(29) Foursquare Church Health Services conducts three clinical health facilities within the Wapenamanda District which employ 34 staff to provide basic clinical health care to 15,000 to 20,000 people in that district.

(30) The battlefield between the Yakuman and Yangakun tribes is now about 200 metres from its mission station.

(31) Its Administration Office has been closed for six weeks due to “high-powered machine guns used in the fighting” as they are within close range.

(32) Lives and assets worth millions of Kina are affected by that tribal fighting.

(33) The Foursquare Gospel Church, located in the centre of two warring tribes, has had nearby buildings and properties either destroyed or burnt down.

(34) That Church, which has almost K½ billion (ie K500 million) of assets in the Kumbas region of Wapenamanda District alone, has operated in that area for 50 years. It was said that those assets could disappear within an hour of tribal fighting if security is not provided between Lai Bridge and CIS Mukuramanda.

(35) The Principal of Wapenamanda Primary School said that, due to the tribal fighting, many students left the school which had closed for an indefinite period, affecting well over 1,000 students.

(36) It appeared that students at that school could not sit for national examinations that are to be held on 21 to 23 October 2025.

(37) This witness, like the 17 other witnesses whose evidence preceded his, expressed a desire for the tribal fighting to come to an end.

Evidence from leaders

29. As already indicated, four of the five leaders summoned by the Court gave evidence on Friday 26 September 2025. It is preferable to summarise together, later, the evidence of Dannie Katie (who have evidence last Friday) and the Member for Wapenamanda, The Hon Mikki Yaeok (who is due to give evidence this Wednesday).
    

Acting Provincial Police Commander

30. The Acting Provincial Police Commander, Kelly Sombe, submitted a copy of a letter addressed to the tribal leader of the Yakuman and Yangakun tribes, dated the previous day, 24 September 2025 (Exhibit 19) and a copy of an undated Press Release (Exhibit 20).
    
31. The letter, which it is noted was issued after this matter was initiated and the day before the first day on which evidence was heard, set out what was referred to as a “peace strategy” and said that a press statement had been released to propose “a way forward towards ending hostilities” and achieving a “declaration of a formal ceasefire or truce”. That letter suggested that the Yamuman leadership had no issues with the proposed plan and that “Minister Keaok represents the Yangakun leadership and has requested me to differ and reschedule all meetings to Wednesday next week”. The author of that letter, being Joseph Tondop, the Police Commander Highlands West, responded to that request as follows:
    

“I have respectfully asked Minister Kaeok to reconsider his priorities,

The government’s and nation’s priorities override and take precedence in all emergency or crisis situations. In my capacity as Police Commander Highlands West, I view this Wapenamanda conflict as an emergency and should take precedence. As a minister of state, this should be foremost to him also. It cannot continue to be put off.

...

I have directed a/PPC Kelly Sombe with assistance from OC C Coy 2R to clear all debris along the highway to Wapenamanda from Lai Bridge and for roadblocks and bridges to be controlled by SSF members.”

32. The first four paragraphs of the Press Release are set out below:
    

“The unfortunate and ongoing tribal fight in Wapenamanda district between Yakuman and Yangakun tribes started from a murder incident on Friday August 15, 2025 where the Hon Miki Kaeok, MP for Wapenamanda Open and Minister for Transport was present launching a community project.

We all know this country is governed by laws. Why are the sides taking revenge as if there is no law? The massive destruction of properties, deaths and sufferings would not occur if both sides had respected the rule of law. Reported the matter to the police and handed the murderer to PPC Enga on day one. a/PPC Enga attend the scene on the same day for the suspect to be handed over. The suspect’s tribe must communicate with police leadership to have the suspect dealt with in accordance with the law.

I blame the Yakuman and Yangakun leadership for not taking ownership of the conflict from day one and, act with urgency to uphold the law. All leaders at all levels must now act as leaders as it is their duty to stop this madness. There is no excuse. Two wrongs do not make a right. This “uncivilised” mindset of our people must change.

And why is the victim’s tribe now terrorising innocent women, children, the vulnerable and other innocents over a conflict they have no part in but simply want freedom to access basic services and equal protection of the law? This conflict in the heart of Wapenamanda cannot be allowed to continue. We must all work with urgency to end this conflict and restore the rule of law allowing it to take its course. Tribal fighting is a thing of the past and must be buried in the past.”

33. That Press Release went on to outline proposals intended to end the tribal fighting now under this Court’s consideration. It is to be hoped that the combination of those proposals and the orders made last Friday will bring the tribal fighting in Wapenamanda to an end. As this matter was commenced because tribal fighting has started, this matter should not conclude until that tribal fighting ends.
    

Commander of the Defence Force unit

34. Major Kents did not provide any document to the Court. The essence of his evidence was that the operations of the Defence Force unit were carried out at the request of the Police.
    

Provincial Administrator

35. The Provincial Administrator, Sandis Tsaka, handed up an affidavit (Exhibit 21) which offered to “assist the Court with information as and when need by the Court”. That affidavit went on to indicate a chronology of events which may be summarised as follows:
    

Fri15 Aug 2025 Conflict commenced when a man, reportedly from Yangakun tribe, was shot, reportedly by a man from the Yakuman tribe, an event attended by the MP for Wapenamanda Open.

Sat 16 Aug 25 Yangakun tribe, in retaliation, burnt down several house of the Yakuman tribe and the Yakuman tribe agreed to hand over the prime suspect. However, the Yangakun tribe identified up to six people of the Yakuman tribe who they considered should surrender.

Tue 19 Aug 25 A total of 28 police from a Mount Hagen based Mobile Squad (MS 5) were engaged and Preventive Orders were issued to both tribes, directing them to cease fire.

Subsequently MS 5 from Mount Hagen were replaced by MS 11 from Enga Province and those 28 officers are currently camping at Wapenamanda at the expense of the Enga Provincial Administration (EPA) with Defence personnel also present.

Thu 21 Aug 25 Identified areas were declared a Fighting Zone by the EPA.

36. A copy of the Fighting Zone declaration and Preventive Orders were annexed to the affidavit which went on to indicate that the provincial administration had spent well over K500,000 dealing with this matter and will continue such expenditure until the fighting stops. Details of that expenditure were also provided.
    
37. In oral evidence, this witness said that the Preventive Orders that had been issued had been defied. He said that any orders made by the Court “would go a long way” to aiding a resolution of this conflict. In particular, he sought what he called “a restraining order”. While no further details were obtained from this witness it was clear he sought to have this Court make some form of order designed to bring the tribal fighting to an end.
    

Consideration

38. The Court notes that there was a time when it was proposed to include in this matter the failure to complete the Correctional Facility at Mukuramanda. While that would not address the cause of tribal fighting in Wapenamanda, it would remove one of the effects, namely the risks associated with transporting between Baisu and Wabag those awaiting trial and those who have been sentenced.
39. To that end, a well-prepared and up-to-date report was obtained from Mr Bannah, the Provincial Works Manager. However, it later transpired that there is an existing matter, also based on s 57 of the Constitution, dealing with the need to complete that facility at Mukuramanda, that has been conducted for some time by Deputy Chief Justice Kandakasi. It does not make sense to duplicate that matter and there are two reasons why the completion of the facility at Mukuramanda should be left for Deputy Chief Justice Kandakasi to deal with.
    
40. First, he has had a lengthy involvement with the question of how and when the completion of the correctional facility at Mukuramanda can be achieved. Secondly, the people now most relevant to the completion of that facility appear to be based in or near Waigani, where the Deputy Chief Justice is based. For those reasons, this matter has been confined to the tribal warfare at Wapenamanda.
    
41. It should also be placed on record that the National Court in Wabag appreciates the cooperation between Police and Correctional Services officers to enable prisoners to be transported between the Baisu Correctional Facility and the National Court in Wabag so that the backlog of criminal matters can be cleared by the end of October.
    

Findings of fact

42. Based on the evidence, the Court makes the following findings of fact:
    

(1) On 15 August 2025 a man from the Yangakun tribe was shot by a man from the Yakuman tribe, at an event attended by the MP for Wapenamanda Open.

(2) Instead of allowing the Police to handle this matter, so that it could be considered by the Courts, tribal fighting broke out between those tribes.

(3) That fighting has included the use of high-powered guns.

(4) That tribal fighting has resulted in the loss of human life, including students inside school grounds who were not involved in that tribal fighting.

(5) That tribal fighting has resulted in property being damaged and a number of schools and a radio station being closed.

(6) Assets worth more than K1 billion have been put at risk of destruction by that tribal fighting.

(7) That tribal fighting has caused well over 100 people to be displaced from their homes and people to be evacuated from Wapenamanda.

(8) Many people, who are not involved in that tribal fighting, fear for their lives.

(9) People are unable to attend their church due to that tribal fighting.

(10) The movement of people and vehicles along the national highway is restricted by rocks and other roadblocks.

(11) Drivers and passengers in those vehicles, travelling along that highway fear for their safety as they pass through Wapenamanda due to that tribal fighting.

(12) Preventive Orders issued to both the Yakuman and Yangakun tribes have not been effective to stop that tribal fighting.

(13) The declaration of a Fighting Zone has not been effective to stop that tribal fighting.

(14) On 22 September 2025 this matter was commenced.

(15) On 24 September 2025, Joseph Tondop, the Police Commander Highlands West, initiated attempts to bring the tribal fighting in Wapenamanda to and end.

The right to freedom

43. As the ability to attend school and the ability to attend church are activities that fall within the right to freedom provided by s 32 of the Constitution, there have been clear breaches of that right due to the tribal fighting in Wapenamanda.
    
44. At the risk of stating the obvious, s 32 of the Constitution does not permit tribal fighting because that interferes with the rights and freedoms of others. Tribal fighting is likely to involve breaches of the criminal law, but that is, in the first instance, a matter for the Police. It follows that the Police are the “front line” in the enforcement of the right to freedom provided by s 32 of the Constitution. The orders made last Friday, notably Order 4, demonstrates that Police officers have the support of the Court for their work.
    

The right to life

45. The evidence clearly establishes that this right, provided by s 35 of the Constitution, has been breached. A student attending school, not involved in tribal fighting, being killed is not only a breach of s 35 of the Constitution but also a national tragedy.
    

The right to freedom of assembly and association

46. Freedom to assemble and associate, a right provided by s 47 of the Constitution, is clearly breached when students are unable to attend school and people are afraid to go to church. There is no point in having free education if schools are closed due to tribal fighting. Despite Papua New Guinea being said to be a Christian country, people in Wapenamanda are unable to attend their church.
    

The right to freedom of movement

47. When the drivers of vehicles, and any passengers in those vehicles, are unable to travel along the main transport artery, being a national highway, without (1) having to dodge obstacles such as rocks, (2) being impeded by unauthorised roadblocks, and (3) fearing for their lives, there are flagrant breaches of the right to freedom of movement provided by s 52 of the Constitution.
    

Appropriate orders

48. The first of the five orders made last Friday was intended to clear the way for those travelling through Wapenamanda. There is no reason why drivers should be required to navigate an obstacle course of rocks on the highway. Likewise, there is no reason why any unauthorised roadblock should be used to restrict the movement of vehicles along the highway through Wapenamanda. As there was no reason given why such an order could not be implemented by the Police without delay, same day compliance with that order was required. Such an order mirrors the instruction given by the Police Commander Highlands West to the Acting Provincial Police Commander for Enga Province last Wednesday.
    
49. Secondly, it was noted that Preventive Orders have previously been issued to the Yakuman and Yangakin/Yangakun tribes. Those orders do not appear to have been effective. They each contain a note which reads:
    

“If you disobey this order you may be fined K1,000 or imprisoned for six months”

50. The fact that tribal fighting has continued after those Preventive Orders were issued suggests they have not been enforced. With the aim of improving the effectiveness of those orders, the Court confirmed them so that those orders would become an order of the National Court. As a result, any breach of those orders will constitute contempt of this Court.
    
51. Thirdly, there should be no reason why any person needs to carry a bush knife as there is no grass that needs cutting in public areas in Wapenamanda. There is no need to carry an axe as there is no tree that needs to be cut down in public areas in Wapenamanda. No-one should ever need to carry a gun in Wapenamanda District. It only takes one blow with a bush knife or axe or one gunshot to start another round of tribal fighting. Making an order to remove offensive weapons from public places should reduce the prospect of further tribal fighting. Furthermore, if there are no offensive weapons carried in any public place in the Wapenamanda District at any time of any day, then there is no need to carry defensive weapons. Again, failure to comply with such an order will constitute contempt of this Court.
    
52. Fourthly, there needs to be a mechanism whereby any breach of either the third or fourth order could be enforced. Hence, the fifth order made it clear that the Police will be entitled to arrest and detain any person who breaches either of those orders and bring them before the National Court in Wabag.
    
53. Finally, the matter was adjourned to 8am on Wednesday 1 October 2025 so that evidence can be obtained from the Member for Wapenamanda Open.
    
54. Given that the Court has already identified breaches, has obtained evidence of the effects of those breaches, and has made orders intended to prevent further breaches, the only issue that remains to consider is what steps are being taken to stop waging war and start pursuing peace.
    
55. For the avoidance of doubt, the focus of this inquiry will now be on:
    

(1) dealing with any failure to comply with the orders made last Friday, and

(2) ascertaining the status of any peace negotiations since this matter will not be considered to have been finalised until peace is achieved in Wapenamanda.

Observations

56. These observations have been aided by the book They Chose Peace, written by Daniel Kumbon, published earlier this year by First Nation Writers Festival Limited, trading as First Nation Publishers. A copy of that book was received by the National Court in Wabag the day this matter was initiated. It sets out the personal experience of its author in relation to tribal fighting in Enga Province. The leaders of both the Yakuman and Yangakun tribes should obtain a copy of that book and read it, even if they do not get beyond its title.
    
57. There was a time in Papua New Guinea when tribal fighting involved the use of sticks and stones as well as bows and arrows. Over time, the weapons of choice became the bush knife and the axe. Now, it appears to be high-powered guns. That escalation raises the question of how such guns are obtained.
    
58. There was a time in Papua New Guinea when tribal fighting was dealt with or even prevented by elders and kiaps. Now, the kiaps are gone, and the influence of elders appears to have declined. While it is hoped that elders will continue to play a role, it is necessary for what might be termed the educated elite to step up: politicians, business leaders and senior public servants should all do what they can to either prevent tribal wars from starting or stop tribal wars that have started.
    
59. It is not as if there is no alternative to tribal war. With independence came the Constitution, which may be termed the nation’s birth certificate. That Constitution established human rights and reinforced the message that this nation was to be governed by the rule of law: not the axe, bush knife or gun.
    
60. The National Court in Wabag is expected to have eliminated the backlog of criminal cases by the end of October. After that, it should be the case that any person who is committed for trial can expect to have their case finalised within one month. A prompt decision by the National Court in Wabag should be the way in which disputes are resolved: not tribal fighting.
    
61. In this case, tribal fighting began when a person was murdered. Under tribal fighting, the person who committed that murder remains in the community, perhaps with an increased reputation for violence. Under the rule of law, that person is arrested, charged, tried and, if convicted, sentenced to prison. Under the rule of law, that person is removed from the community, making it safer for everyone. It is to be regretted that a choice appears to have been made, in relation to a murder in Wapenamanda, to resort to tribal violence instead of relying on the rule of law.
    
62. The failure to rely on the rule of law appears to be the result of one or more of: (1) indecisiveness, (2) a failure to think of and weigh the consequences, (3) a complete disregard for human life, (4) people unwilling or unable to take responsibility. (5) ignorance of or defiance of the law, and (5) a failure to act appropriately when a crime is committed.
    
63. Removing the backlog of criminal cases in Enga Province should enable the Police to be pro-active rather than reactive: able to take steps to prevent tribal fighting from starting instead of trying to stop it after it has started. It is clearly preferable to save blood from being spilled rather than try to “mop up” afterwards.
    
64. Tribal fighting is sometimes metaphorically referred to as “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. If the tribal fighting now under consideration by the National Court in Wabag is not stopped then, to continue with that metaphor, in Wapenamanda there will be a lot of blind people in need of dentures. Tribal fighting is like civil proceedings in a court: it takes one party to start but requires both parties to stop.
    
65. The consequences of tribal fighting include (1) deceased victims, (2) widows and orphans as a result, (3) people injured, with unnecessary suffering, (4) destroyed homes, (5) difficulties faced by people who are either displaced or have to be evacuated, (6) community services hampered or interrupted, (7) the assets of those service providers and businesses being either damaged or destroyed, and (8) ordinary citizens and residents living in fear because they are confronted with a problem that is not of their own making.
    
66. While tribal fighting is often resolved by compensation, no amount of money or pigs can bring back lost lives, and it may take years to repair or replace properties that are damaged or destroyed.
    
67. If even a small number of people in Enga Province choose tribal fighting instead of peace (1) children will be deprived of a proper education, (2) people will not invest in businesses, and (3) any money spent on tourist promotion will be wasted.
    
68. It is difficult to see how anyone benefits from the death and destruction caused by tribal fighting which raises the question of what progress Enga Province would make if that kind of conflict ceased. Something is needed to free the residents of Enga from the bondage of tribal war. Tribal fighting in Enga Province is like a sickness that needs to be cured, because this province needs peace to prosper.
    
69. As Daniel Kumbon put it (They Chose Peace, p50):
    

“As long as your people are not involved, you think you are safe. But it’s an illusion. You will be drawn involuntarily into a conflict whether you like it or not. Your life is not your own anymore. You can’t live a normal life in modern Enga.”

70. Tribal fighting in Enga Province does not just give this Province a bad name: it gives the nation a bad name. September 2025 will go down in history in Enga Province as the month which combined the achievement of the dream of independence and the goal of eliminating the nightmare of tribal violence.
    
71. Noting that a peace process has been initiated by the Police, if any attempt is made to derail that peace process by somebody who wants to continue tribal war, the Police now have the power, by reason of the orders made last Friday, to arrest and detain any such person and bring each such person before the Court. The National Court in Wabag is ready to deal with any such arrests, although it is to be hoped that will not be necessary.
    

Orders Accordingly.
__________________________________________________________________
Lawyers for the Member for Wapenamanda Open: Minok & Company Lawyers
Lawyers for the Provincial Administrator: Gibson Bon Lawyers