Leadership Tribunal: 7 Findings of Guilt Against Hon. Bryan Kramer.MP

On February 28, 2023, the Leadership Tribunal delivered its ruling on allegations of misconduct against the suspended leader, Hon. Bryan Kramer MP, Member for Madang Open Electorate. The Tribunal consisted of Justice Lawrance Kangwia ML (Chairman), Principal Magistrate Josephine Nidue (Member), and Magistrate Edward Komia (Member). Below are the highlights of the Tribunal’s 56-page ruling:

Allegation 1 - The leader scandalized the judiciary by posting articles on his Facebook account, insinuating a conflict of interest by the Hon. Sir.Gibbs Salika, Chief Justice of Papua New Guinea.

The Tribunal found that the Facebook publication was untrue, incorrect, and misleading. It demeans the leader's office or position and allows his integrity to be called into question. The allegation is sustained, and the leader is guilty of misconduct in the office.

Allegation 2 - As the Minister for Police, the leader scandalized the judiciary by posting articles on his Facebook account accusing Hon. Peter O’Neil and his lawyers of filing a fake Warrant of Arrest to deceive and mislead the Court in the matter OS (JR) 720 of 2019.

The Tribunal ruled that the Facebook publication was untrue, incorrect, and misleading. It created a negative perception and disrespect for the judiciary. Hence, it demeans the leader's office or position and allows his integrity to be called into question. The allegation is sustained, and the leader is guilty of misconduct in the office.

Allegation 4 - Publicizing the complaint lodged against him (Hon. Kremmer) by Sir. Bibbs Salika, the Chief Justice of Papua New Guinea, and posting it on the Facebook Account.

The Tribunal ruled that there was a Facebook publication. However, there was no dishonesty or conflict of interest on the part of the leader when he published the complaint letter on Facebook. The letter would have ended up in the public domain anyway. The leader is not guilty under this category.

Allegation 3 - Involvement and interference in police operational matters resulting in the termination of Mr. Paul Nii, Director Legal Services.

The Tribunal ruled that there was no concrete evidence to rely on to safely conclude that the leader interfered in the police operation and caused the termination of Mr. Paul Nii, former Police Director Legal Services. Mr. Paul Nii was suspended for unauthorized use of a hire car. The leader is not guilty of this allegation.

Allegation 5 - Allowing an associate company, namely Tolo Enterprises Ltd, to benefit through consultancy services to the Madang District Development Authority.

The Tribunal ruled that Tolo Enterprises Ltd has a close association with the leader. It is a consultancy company owned by Mrs. Hitolo Carmichael Amet, the wife of Sir Arnold Amet. Sir Arnold has a strong political tie with the leader and also assisted the leader before this Tribunal. The consultancy service of Tolo Enterprise was based on dishonesty and conflict of interest. The Leader is, therefore, guilty of this allegation.

Allegation 6 - Misappropriation of K455,751.20 for the use of Tolo Enterprises Ltd, a company owned by an associate.

In line with the findings under allegation 5, the leader had dishonestly applied more than K400,000.00 to the benefit of Tolo Enterprise Limited. The leader is guilty of misconduct in the office under Sections 27(5)(b) of the Constitution and Section 13(1) of the Organic Law of the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

Allegation 7 – Misuse of Madang District Services Improvement Programme Funds for Electoral Office Rentals Company Contrary to SRC Determination 2015 and DSIP Funds Guidelines.

The Tribunal found that the use of DSIP Funds to pay for the rental of the leader's electoral office was improper and contrary to the SRC Determination 2015 and DSIP Funds Guidelines. The leader should not have used DSIP funds to pay for the rental of his electoral office since he already receives electoral allowances. The leader's conduct was improper as he allowed the Madang DDA to pay for his electoral staff office rental, which was also improper. Therefore, the leader is guilty of misconduct in office under Section 13 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

Allegation 8 - Misappropriation of K229,500.00 of District Services Improvement Program & District Support Grants for Rental Payment of Ward Project Office.

The Tribunal found that the K229,500.00 used for rental payments of the ward project office was misapplied and came from the Services Improvement Program (SIP) & District Support Grants. Since the rental payments were already found to be improper in Allegation 7, the leader is also guilty of this misconduct in office under Section 13 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership. (Note: The tribunal later concluded at page 54 of its written judgement that the leader is not guilty)

Allegation 9 – Creation of a Structure within the Madang DDA without Obtaining Approval from the Department of Personal Management.

The Tribunal acknowledged that the Madang DDA has the power to create a staff structure under its Act, but the creation of a separate structure in contravention of Section 22(4) of the DDA Act exhausted the DDA’s DSIP funds. The leader's conduct was improper, and he is guilty of misconduct in the Office under Section 13 of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

Allegation 10- Misapplication of Madang DSIP Funds on Salaries and Wages for Electoral Staff in the Madang District Ward Project Office Contrary to DSIP Guidelines.

The Tribunal found that the leader was receiving electoral allowances intended for his electoral programs, including his electoral staff programs. Therefore, allowing the Madang DDA to use its DSIP to pay for the salaries of his electoral staff amounted to double dipping. The leader's conduct was improper, and he is guilty of misconduct in the office under Section 13 (1) of the Organic Law on the Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership.

Allegation 11 – Leader Allowed the Appointment of Hitolo Carmichael Amet as Head of the Secretariat while being a Member of DDA Board as the Community Representative, which Contravenes Section 23 of the DDA Act.

The Tribunal found that Hitolo Carmichael Amet was not a member of the Madang DDA Board as a Community Representative. Therefore, this allegation has no basis, and the leader is not guilty of this allegation.

Allegation 12 – Withdrawn by the Referrer.

Allegation 13. Misapplication of K15, 649, 312.50 of Madang DSIP Funds through Madang Works and Equipment Ltd in Funding Plant and Equipment without Following Procurement Process.

The Tribunal found that the Madang DDA paid the money to the Madang Works and Equipment Ltd in compliance with a court order, and there was no evidence to support that the money was to be spent in compliance with procurement processes. There was also no evidence that the Madang Works and Equipment Ltd misappropriated the money. Therefore, the leader is not guilty of this allegation