National Goals: National Vision, Personal Strategy. (Part 4 of the "Dreams of a Nation" series)

In this next video in my Dreams of a Nation series, I look into the National Goals and Directive Principles, and try to make a practical connection between those national goals and our personal individual lives.

After the observations on the importance of the National Goals, I look into National Goal #1: Integral Human Development.

FULL PROTECTION OF THE LAW—RIGHT OR PRIVILEGE?

"37(1) Every person has the right to the full protection of the law..." 

Section 37 of the Constitution affords "EVERY PERSON” the “FULL PROTECTION of the law". 

In the practical sense this means every little loophole in the law, no matter how insignificant, can be exhausted in order to avoid or delay an arrest, a questioning, a trial and even a conviction. Every single "i" is dotted and every "t" is crossed. Even if there are 10, 000 "i"s and 10, 000 "t"s to dot and cross. Such is the meaning of FULL PROTECTION of the law. It doesn’t promise just 99% protection, but FULL PROTECTION. 

Realistically though, Section 37 is not available to "every person" because only 1% (maybe less) of the population (i.e. only the rich and powerful) can afford expensive lawyers to identify and fight for every single loophole to be exhausted. FULL PROTECTION of the law under s. 37 is in effect not a RIGHT. It is a PRIVILEGE. It is only afforded to you IF you have the resources to access and utilise it. FULL PROTECTION of the LAW is EXPENSIVE. 

Meanwhile, the ordinary people cannot even exercise their most basic constitutional right to expression, assembly, and to dissent, and must be intimidated into submission. Because these rights are CHEAP. They don’t have the FULL PROTECTION of the LAW. They can’t afford that PRIVILEGE. And therefore must settle for what those in power choose to allow them to enjoy….the BARE MINIMUM protection. And sometimes not even. 

So even though the law also affords the right to expression, assembly and dissent, the LAW is POWERLESS as long as you are exercising those rights in direct opposition to those who can afford FULL PROTECTION. 

The PRIVILEGE of FULL PROTECTION is being used by the authorities to stifle the exercise of the cheaper freedoms. Because that’s the way the world operates. 

Contrary to popular belief, RIGHTS are subservient to PRIVILEGES. 

Such is the nature of the law. It is only as powerful as the Authority allows it to be.  

So YES. Consider it more than cliché. There ARE in fact, TWO sets of Laws in a Country. The Law that Affords FULL PROTECTION to those who can afford it. And then there’s the law for everyone else. 

You can only exercise cheap rights at the mercy of those who can afford the expensive rights. 

GDW

We the People--A snippet from Dreams of a Nation

We The People

Our Constitution opens up with the words "We, the People..." This tells us five important things:

1. EXPRESSION of the People—the Constitution is the voice of the people. It speaks the People's will. When we amend the Constitution and any other law under it, we are changing the will of the people. The will of the people must therefore be understood before it (the law) is changed.

2. UNITY of the People—the People speak as ONE. Unity is assumed. Together We the People spoke into the world, declaring ourselves to be one nation.

3. ESSENCE of State—the existence of the nation rests primarily on the People. Not the law, the boundaries, the physical landscape, the geography etc.

4. SOVEREIGNTY—the People are the ultimate source of Power. They are superior to the Government, Parliament and the laws. They are even superior to the Constitution, but only collectively.

5. RESPONSIBILITY for the Nation—the People, if sovereign, are responsible for both the progress and the problems of the nation. No one else. We cannot claim to be masters of our own destiny whilst blaming external factors for our problems.

See Video 2 here. 

Dreams of a Nation: Part 2--Source of Power

By GDW

In this next video in my Dreams of a Nation series, I discuss the opening three words of the Preamble of the Constitution, which gives a clue as to the source of power in PNG.

PDF copy of the Preamble of the PNG Constitution

I realise that people actually need a copy of the Preamble, so here it is.

Since I am advocating for every citizen (and resident) to have a copy of the Preamble, the least I can do is provide a PDF copy.

Please click on this link to access your copy.

Regards,

Ganjiki

Dreams of a Nation: Intro

I recently started a brand new personal adventure: video blogging. This activates a You Tube account that I have had for several years and never used it for anything apart from watching videos. 

My first project is a series of videos called Dreams of a Nation”, a commentary on the Preamble of the Constitution of Papua New Guinea. I have had the burden for a while now to share my thoughts publicly on the importance of the Preamble in the life of PNG. I have said it before in writing that it should be mandatory reading for Papua New Guineans. I have given a few talks on the Preamble already and found that my audience really appreciated it. 

I had not even thought of putting my thoughts out on video until I got here to the UK for my post-graduate studies. Since technology can go places that I cannot go, it makes sense to use it to share my thoughts. 

So here it is! Not the best quality for now but should suffice to communicate my message. 

My first video post is an introductory video. In it I mention why I am doing this particular topic and the main headings of the Preamble that will be discussing. 

Here’s a synopsis of the introduction. 

The Preamble is a fundamental pivotal piece of literature for PNG. It provides our foundational beliefs, goals, and values. As a statement of our vision, it was vital that the Preamble should have been mandatory reading for Papua New Guineans from Day 1. The tragedy is that that has not been so. And now majority of Papua New Guineans have no clue what the Preamble is, let alone its contents.  

As former US Senator Robert Dole said of the Preamble of the US Constitution (Declaration of Independence), “If the lost art of memorization ever returns to our educational system, I recommend that every American student learn by heart the Preamble of the United States Constitution. Its fifty-two words encapsulate all that our government has aspired to accomplish over the past 200 years and hopes to accomplish in the future.”.” (I slightly err in my quoting in the video). 

I believe the same has to be done for the Preamble of our Constitution. It has to become part of our curriculum. Students have to learn it. If not memorize it, then at least appreciate so that they take it to heart. Then they can live according to those ideals in every day life. And if they become national leaders, they can apply it when they devise national policy. 

At the very least, my hope is that this video series will start raising the conversation regarding the place of the Preamble in our every day life. I hope people will get curious about this important document and begin to seek it out.

 

Below is a link to the first video. 

The Case for Christianity in the Affairs of PNG

By Ganjiki D Wayne

As debate on reforms to our sex laws and other moral questions intensify, conversation often naturally flows on to Christianity and its application in our national legislative programs and social engineering projects. Why should its precepts and principles be applied in shaping our society? Why should it have prominent application over other religious/irreligious opinions? Why do we even call PNG a “Christian Country”???

Increasingly people question the merits of calling PNG a “Christian Country”. Christian leaders often say our Constitution declares PNG a “Christian country” so we must therefore adhere to Christian principles. They are mistaken. Our Constitution does not make such a declaration. However it does subscribe explicitly to the Christian principles.

I’d like to put forward the following argument in light of the Preamble of the Constitution—our “Declaration of Independence”. What does it really say?? The Preamble contains the “spirit” of the Constitution and by extension the Nation. In law the spirit of a document is a significant aid to interpretation. Without the letter the spirit is ineffective and dead; but without the spirit the letter is without ultimate meaning, without coherence and is vulnerable to abusive interpretation. Whilst many argue on the “letter” of the Constitution, few really understand its spirit.

Our founding fathers and the drafters of the Constitution—after nationwide consultation and affirmation from the people—put into the Preamble a pronouncement of certain fundamental beliefs and values that as a nation we would (or should) live by. These foundations provide a coherent ethos for our nation. Such an ethos is necessary for our society to maintain some coherence and, dare I say, order.

Some of those principles include: the declaration of being “united as one nation”; the memory of our ancestors; the people-power basis for our democracy; the prominence of the dignity of the human being and community; the rejection of violence and encouragement of peaceful consensus; and hard work and equitable sharing of benefits for all.

These are but few of the foundation pillars set for our country. Among them, the Preamble declares—in fact it pledges!—to “guard and pass on to those who come after us our noble traditions and the Christian principles that are ours now”. The writers included Christianity as a major facet for our national society. This has, through ignorance of the real wording of the Preamble, been taken to mean that the Constitution declares PNG to be a “Christian Country”. Perhaps it’s only a matter of argument whether it’s a declaration or not. But for me it’s quite clear. Our Declaration lays down a pledge to do two things for the Christian worldview in PNG: to guard it and to pass it on.

Christian principles form part of the fundamental philosophical makeup of our nation, meant to permeate not only the private lives of us the citizens but every objective strategy we think up for progress as a nation. As a people we are called by the supreme document of our land, to guard those Christian principles we had wisely adopted. So when challenged by philosophies and ideologies directly contradictory to those Christian principles, the Christian principles be given prominent consideration. That is our duty under the Constitution. And if our first Basic Social Obligation (under that same Preamble by the way) is anything to go by, we are called to “respect and act” in the spirit of the Constitution. Notice it does not say we must respect and act according to the “letter” of the Constitution. Our writers knew the fallacy of leaning on the letter alone. We must be guided by that “spirit”—and therefore by extension the Christian principles.

For those naysayers who insist we are not a nation built on Christian principles, our Constitution leaves no doubt (unlike the American Declaration of Independence which is not as explicit) that it is indeed part and parcel of our pillars. And a further reading into the writings of John Momis, Sir Michael Somare and late Bernard Narakobi will confirm this explicit subscription to the Gospel of Christ. And to say otherwise would be to disagree with the spirit of the Constitution...the same one that gives us the right to argue one way or the other.

Where there is a need for coherence in our society where shall we get it? Should we spin a bottle on every separate issue and apply that worldview to which it points; regardless of the contradiction and incoherence in society? I contend that we need no such exercise. Our Preamble—the Spirit of Our Nation—provides such a coherence, it defines us sufficiently. If we should look everywhere but there we may end up sufficiently confused, frustrated, without direction and without identity. And even if we gain so much ground yet we may effectively get nowhere...

God Bless Papua New Guinea!

Heavenise Day!

Gg