BY MELVILLE TITIULU

The High Court has thrown out two applications by the GNUT government in the political impasse case.

The case returns to court on Wednesday next week at 10am for pre-trial conference (PTC).

Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer today at the High Court courtroom 1 made the ruling dismissing both applications – for joinder and security for cost.

The application for joinder which was filed by Kadare Party lawyer, Barnabus Upwe, was first heard. It was dismissed with cost, to be awarded on indemnity basis. The applicant for joinder to pay cost for the respondents, Claimants in the judicial review (JR) claim.

The second application was filed by the Attorney General (AG) for the security of cost. The court held that the proceeding raised constitutional questions of merit and that balance of justice requires court to dismiss the application for cost. Instead, award cost of application to claimants.

Claimants’ counsels were informed by the AG in court after the ruling that he intended to recall his ‘application for strike out’. The application to strike out was filed on Thursday, April 2 but was not served and deliberated by parties.

Chief Justice Palmer issued directions hearing for parties to attend court on Wednesday, April 8, for PTC.   

At the PTC hearing, Court is required to consider key questions such as whether the claimant has an arguable case, and whether the claimant is directly affected by the subject matter of the claim.

A lawyer for the claimant, Gabriel Suri asked the AG to reconsider withdrawing the application for strike-out in view of the ruling that was delivered today.

Mr Suri told court that the same issues to be dealt with at the PTC has already been deliberated and ruled on in court today. No need to raise it again at the PTC on Wednesday.

“We should be conscious of court’s time and resource,” he told court.

Chief Justice Palmer also reminded parties that ‘time is of the essence’.

Palmer directed that parties can go straight to PTC and that application for strike-out be heard with substantive JR claim as well hence, any submission including sworn statements to be filed by close of business on Tuesday, April 7.

Counsel Suri told Island Sun outside the High Court, that attempt on the part of the AG to strike out would be weakened as the AG loses a procedural tool to block the case given the outcome of the ruling.

Thus, Suri was of the view that ‘delay tactics’ was employed to give ample time for the minority Government to lure MPs from the opposition coalition having the majority.

A Counsel of the Claimants, John Taupongi also told Island Sun outside High court that to be fair the application to strike out was filed on Thursday last week prior to ruling today but otherwise he also concurred with what Suri said.

The AG also confirmed that the application for strike-out was filed Thursday, April 2.

The claimants were represented by counsels, Mr Taupongi, Mr Suri, James Ronnie Kaboke and Francis Waleanisia, and the AG John Muria Jnr with his legal team represented the respondents in this matter.

The claimants include PFP Wing Leader Fredrick Kologeto, Opposition Leader Matthew Wale, Independent Members Leader Manasseh Maelanga, and six political parties in the new majority coalition of 28 MPs.

The respondents include the Governor-General, the Prime Minister, the Speaker of Parliament and the Attorney General.

For feedback, contact: [email protected]

Editor: [email protected]

BY MELVILLE TITIULU

The Magistrate Court on Monday, March 30, discharged a man accused and charged with causing a public nuisance by playing loud music from a Bluetooth speaker after the matter was reported by White River Police.

Leon Toaki, 22, of Malapu, Reef, Pele district, Temotu Province, was initially charged with one count each of Common Nuisance contrary to Section 172 of the Penal Code [Cap 26] and disobeying lawful orders and directives contrary to S200 of the Police Act 2013.

Principal Magistrate Joyceth Paile presided over the matter when it came for mention on Monday, March 30, at the Juvenile Court room.

Police Constable Anthony Pirinimatawa notified the court of his intention to withdraw the charge of common nuisance and rather proceed with count 2; disobeying lawful orders and directives contrary to S200 of the Police Act.

PC Pirinimatawa informed the court that the decision to withdraw the charge came after the Police Prosecutions Department (PPD) found that there was ‘insufficient evidence’ to substantiate the element of Common Nuisance.

The offence of Common Nuisance carries a maximum sentence of one year’s imprisonment.

The court heard that on Friday, February 6, 2026, at around 1 am, Mr Toaki and others were drinking and playing loud music from a Bluetooth speaker at the Namaruka junction, White River, West Honiara.

They were later spotted by the White River Police Officers conducting night patrols.

The officers directed them not to play loud music on the street so as to not disturb the general residents of the Namaruka area, White River. The accused argued with the police officers and was later arrested and charged.

PC Pirinimatawa told Island Sun that the reason why he intended to withdraw charges is that it was the White River police who reported and charged the accused with Common nuisance instead of the public during the night in question. Thus, PC Pirinimatawa said this essential element of the offence was missing.

The matter was adjourned to Tuesday, April 7, at 9 am for plea- whether or not the accused pleaded guilty or not guilty to count 2; disobeying lawful orders and directives contrary to S200 of the Police Act.

The Police Act 2013 makes it an offence for anyone disobeying lawful order or direction given by a police officer in the performance of his or her duty and is liable on conviction to a penalty of $5,000- or six-months imprisonment or both.

In the meantime, bail for the accused was extended.

Police Constable Anthony Pirinimatawa represented the Police Prosecutions Department (PPD) and Defence Counsel Weigant Jagilly from the Public Solicitors Office (PSO) represented the accused.

For feedback, contact: [email protected]

Editor: [email protected]

BY MELVILLE TITIULU

The Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer, will deliver his ruling this morning on the ‘security for cost’ and ‘joinder’ application at the High Court courtroom 1.

This is in relation to the Judicial Review Claim filed against Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele by the coalition group heard in court earlier this week.

After ruling on the applications for security cost and Joinder the court will then give further directions on when it will hear the substantive Judicial Review claim as initially filed by the opposition coalition.

On Thursday, April 2, when the matter came for a directions hearing, the Attorney General John Muria sought court orders for security of costs of $30,000.00 to be paid by each claimant within 72 hours from the date of the orders.

Mr. Muria submits, in default of compliance, that he seeks the court’s discretion to order the JR claim to be striked out, as he viewed it as ‘’weak, speculative and lacking proper basis’’.

Counsel Gabriel Suri, in response to AG submissions, was of the view that Mr Muria was trying to ‘’sneak those arguments under the security of cost’’ with a view to applying for a strike out for the JR claim.

Mr Suri further told the court that the prevailing facts leading up to the filing of the JR claim are “legal points not political points’’ and hence, are “justifiable and not speculative’’ as parliament cannot move and GG denied power.

He further said in court that these create a platform for a constitutional crisis as the Government is run by a minority, which affects the Parliament itself.

Constitutional legal issues to consider are the implied and reserved powers of the GG still not yet determined.

He told the court, “both GG and the Prime Minister were confused about who had the power to convene parliament”.

Mr Suri raises questions on why the Prime Minister delayed convening a meeting.

“If the PM can encourage the GG, I can advise the claimant to withdraw the matter’’, he told the court.

Mr Suri raised eyebrows as to how the AG came up with the figure of $30,000, which he said should be deemed as an ‘’unjust enrichment’’. Thus, he was of the view that $16,000 to $20,000 is appropriate in view of the standard of cost as provided under Schedule of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).

Therefore, he submits that “the application for cost lacks a fundamental threshold both in application and evidence’’. Thus, it should be dismissed with costs.

Counsel John Taupongi concur on Suri’s submissions. Mr Taupongi was of the view that issues for consideration in applications for security for cost are clearly regulated under Rule 24 of the CPR.

Thus, it makes no sense for the respondents to rely on rules and not elaborate on them in court.

As to the second application for joinder. Counsel Barnabas Upwe was interrupted by the Chief Justice halfway through his oral submissions, asking counsel to show issues and relevance on why the Kandere party wants to be a party to the JR claim.

Mr Suri and Mr Taupongi were of the view that the critical question to ask is whether or not including the Kandere party is necessary to address the issues raised in the JR claim.

It follows, that Counsels James Ronnie Kaboke and Francis Waleanisia weighed in and submitted that the joinder application is an abuse of process and should be dismissed with costs on an indemnity basis.

The claimants were represented by Counsels, John Taupongi, Gabriel Suri, James Ronnie Kaboke, and Francis Waleanisia and the AG John Muria with his legal team represented the named respondents in this matter.

For feedback, contact: [email protected]

Editor: [email protected]

BY MELVILLE TITIULU

The High Court will resume on Saturday (April 4) at 10am over the case between the majority opposition coalition and government.

Court has not yet heard the main matter of public interest – which is the legal challenge by the opposition coalition that the Prime Minister has failed to advise the Governor General to call parliament while government is ruling with a minority.

Court however is first settling minor issues with the case.

On Saturday Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer is expected to deliver his ruling on the ‘application for cost’ filed by the respondents and the ‘Joinder application’.

These two applications were deliberated by parties at the High Court today (April 2).

Application for security cost was filed today by the Attorney General’s (AG) legal team. It was accompanied with three supporting sworn statements as deposed by the Prime Minister, the Speaker of Parliament and Secretary for the Governor General.

It seeks a security cost of $30,000 – to be imposed on each claimant (nine in total).

The AG said the claimants’ judicial review (JR) claim lacks legal standing thus weak and speculative in nature, therefore should be struck out.

Claimants questioned how the AG came up with $30,000 figure, suggesting a security for cost much lower than that figure as more accurate and appropriate.

Claimants are of the view that their claim is constitutional in nature and not political as claimed by the AG. It seeks court’s determination on the express and implied powers of the GG to convene parliament.

The second application was the Joinder application. This was filed by the lawyer for Kadere Party, Barnabus Upwe.

Claimants’ lawyers questioned the legal basis for this application. They were of the view that it should be dismissed with cost on indemnity basis as it was an abuse of process.

Chief Justice Palmer will make a ruling and determination on the outcome of these two applications when the matter came for ruling on Saturday, April 4, at the High Court Courtroom 1.

Directions for the matter of public interest – which is the PM allegedly failing to advise the GG to call parliament – could be made known on Saturday following ruling on the above matters.

For feedback, contact: [email protected]

Editor: [email protected]