VONC Motion To Continue Despite Proposed Constitutional Ammendment скачать в хорошем качестве

VONC Motion To Continue Despite Proposed Constitutional Ammendment

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition,Hon. James Nomane, has confirmed that the motion of no confidence (VONC) against Prime Minister James Marape will proceed, despite a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at delaying such motions. His statement follows recent rulings by Papua New Guinea’s Supreme Court regarding the legality of parliamentary procedures and the amendment. On March 4, 2025, a five-judge Supreme Court bench dismissed objections against the Opposition’s application, affirming Hon. James Nomane's right to challenge Parliamentary Standing Order 165. This decision allows him to move forward with his case, questioning the rules governing VONC motions. The next day, March 5, 2025, the Supreme Court rejected Nomane's request for an interim injunction to block the proposed amendment to section 145 of the Constitution. This amendment would require an 18-month waiting period before another VONC could be introduced after a successful one. Critics argue this change is intended to protect Prime Minister Marape’s leadership until the 2027 elections. However, the Court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to intervene in parliamentary processes, allowing the amendment to proceed. Despite this, the Court clarified that the amendment would only apply to future no-confidence motions and would not affect those already in progress. As a result, the current VONC against Marape can proceed as planned. Additionally, the Court stated that the amendment’s legality could still be reviewed under section 19 of the Constitution, ensuring continued judicial oversight. In summary, while the government seeks to impose restrictions on future VONC motions, the ongoing challenge against Marape remains unaffected. The Supreme Court’s rulings have upheld the Opposition’s right to contest parliamentary rules and constitutional changes while keeping the amendment process under legal scrutiny.