
Violence In Papua New Guinea Appears To Be Increasing
Most recently there was an horrific murder in Hela where a mother of six was shot after being being burnt and tortured following accusations of sorcery.
In Port Moresby, bus drivers this week retaliated after one of their colleagues was killed in the suburb of Hanuabada.
National Capital District governor Powes Parkop pleaded with the drivers not to take the law into their own hands.
There have also been prolonged battles in various Highlands provinces, and last year a police strike sparked a calamitous riot in the capital.
Paul Barker, the executive director of the PNG Institute of National Affairs, spoke with RNZ Pacific about the violence.
(This transcript has been edited for brevity and clarity.)
PAUL BARKER: We're certainly having law and order problems that have in the past tended to be restricted to certain provinces and locations seem to have extended to additional provinces that were hitherto relatively peaceful, including East New Britain and other places in the islands.
But also, not just in the islands - through down to other coastal provinces, Madang and so on, and as you've seen, conflicts that have broken out in the streets of Moresby.
To some extent it relates to a lack of economic opportunities, frustration by young people, particularly; on the other hand it's also weak capacity for application of the rule of law, not just by the police, but by communities and cooperation between the different parties.
During this year, a major focus of the 2025 budget has been on enhancing police capacity. And that was a bit of a wake up call from the riots in January of last year.
They have got extra police that they've recruited and that are in training. We also know that the commissioner has terminated quite a lot of police over the last period of time for abuse and poor conduct and sometimes aggressive conduct.
Some of these problems emanate from some of the conflict zones in the Highlands, and you get young people, or whole families, who effectively are displaced from these Highlands communities, come to the towns and cities of PNG to escape pretty horrendous conflicts in Upper Highlands, particularly in Enga, Southern Highlands, Hela.
And again, we've had this dialogue with various parties, including the police, saying it cannot be addressed simply by more police on the ground. It needs to have more effective policing, better cooperation.
There are a lot of people who buy into that and who totally agree, including some in the government itself, who say, yes, just adding to the numbers of police without enhanced capacity, discipline and so on, will not, in itself, address these problems. In fact, it could even exacerbate that.
DON WISEMAN: You would like to see what happen?
PB: We would like to see a system of cooperation. In the past, government was seen to be a neutral hand the old system, going back into colonial times, with the Kiap and so on. They were impartial in conflicts. Unfortunately, what we tend to see now is that a lot of people in government are seen to be party to the conflict.
You've got some instigating conflict for their own ends. They may be people who are living in Moresby or even sometimes outside the country, and they have effectively gangs who work for them back in their home provinces and stir up trouble. So we need to effectively neuter them to be able to work with the communities to establish effective community engagement and policing and early warning systems, and we need to make sure, for example, that the police do actually have the resources to be able to respond to cases very promptly.
We've got these sorcery accusation related violence (SARV). As highlighted in the media just lately, it seems that always, the police don't have a vehicle or don't have any fuel for their vehicle at the critical time when you've got to go and intervene to rescue someone.
The whole system of community engagement, the churches are some of the most effective at working on the ground, along with some of these other entities, human rights defenders and so on. But we do need this strong government, civil society.
The answer is not the Terrorism Act, which was rushed through just recently, and which risks making the situation worse by casting everyone, including, school kids, as terrorists just because they may be young and wandering the streets or traveling.
We need to have, instead of that antipathy and effectively, an autocratic approach, we need to establish our systems of community dialogue, and we need the leaders to be engaged and participating, not all remote, overseas, travelling or in their Land Cruisers somewhere else.
We need them to roll up their sleeves. We've got some very good examples where we've actually brought sides together.
There was one in Hagen, an ongoing tribal fight, and the leaders were all in Moresby, but some players on the ground brought conflicting sides together and said, 'Why are you even fighting each other? You're just doing this because your bosses tell you to do it, but if you actually look at it, you've got more in common with each other.' And the end of a long session, they were all playing football with each other and enjoying each other's company. And that was the end of a long conflict.
But it was stirred by old antipathies and power broking by these, they call them warlords, but we're told not to use the word 'warlords,' because that sort of engrandises them. They're not lords of anything. They're just war mongers as it were. So clearly, money is involved. Money gets involved with the arms' trade.
You've also got some of the other trades; the drugs trade and some of the other trades, but it's this melding of power, money, even the sorcery accusation related violence.
It's a new form of power, intimidating people and making yourself powerful and everyone being compliant with you. So we've got to break those systems, and that requires cooperation.
DW: Under the Terrorism Act, that's the lethal force allowance?
PB: Yeah, that means you can go out and shoot anyone who happens to be inconvenient to you, and obviously that can open the Pandora's box. You can shoot political enemies, people who are critics, journalists, anyone else and it's certainly not what PNG needs.
DW: What you're talking about here, it's something of a revolution that would take a huge amount to achieve, wouldn't it? Do you think there is the wherewithal within the country to do it, to achieve it?
PB: I think it's going to need a lot of international assistance, but it's going to have to be ideas,the commitment are going to have to come from within the country, so the outside world can support, in training, in dispute resolution, training for not just police, but for community leaders. We need that commitment.
There are certainly people who are seeing some of these issues, are seeing this is needed, and I think it's part of the dialog we have this 50 year review that's going on looking forward 20 years, 'How do we move forward and avoid many of the mistakes of the past'? So that review team is raising many of those issues.
A committee chaired by former deputy prime minister, Charles Abel, so they're trying to think outside the box and see where we can go forward. But all across the board, if you look at the statistics just lately, which have been put together in the latest economic and social reports from the ADB, from the World Bank and others, you'll see absolutely atrocious social indicators.
You see the economy growing slowly. You're seeing education capacity not growing. You get a lot of these functions, high malnutrition, low job creation, and so on and so forth.
We've got to address those together with the impacts of that, which is growing frustration and conflict developing in the urban areas where people have re-migrated.
The development partners, some of them, are aware of this, and they're throwing their hands a little bit in the air and saying, 'what do we do'? And academics are sort of doing that as well, and saying, 'Hey, look, you know, the only way is cooperation, working with those who are willing and able to provide leadership and think outside the box'.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scoop
7 hours ago
- Scoop
ICJ Climate Ruling: Will The World's Top Court Back A Pacific-led Call To Hold Govts Accountable For Climate Change?
By , for RNZ Pacific in The Hague In 2019, a group of students at the University of the South Pacific, frustrated at the slow pace with which the world's governments were moving to address the climate crisis, had an idea: they would take the world's governments to court. They arranged a meeting with government ministers in Vanuatu and convinced them to take a case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations' top court, where they would seek an opinion to clarify countries' legal obligations under international law. Six years after that idea was hatched in a classroom in Port Vila, the court will on Wednesday (early Thursday morning NZT) deliver its verdict in the Dutch city of The Hague. If successful - and those involved are quietly confident they will be - it could have major ramifications for international law, how climate change disputes are litigated, and it could give small Pacific countries greater leverage in arguments around loss and damage. Most significantly, the claimants argue, it could establish legal consequences for countries that have driven climate change and what they owe to people harmed. "Six long years of campaigning have led us to this moment," Vishal Prasad, the president of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change, the organisation formed of those original students, said. "For too long, international responses have fallen short. We expect a clear and authoritative declaration," he said. "[That] climate inaction is not just a failure of policy, but a breach of international law." More than 100 countries - including New Zealand, Australia and all the countries of the Pacific - have testified before the court, alongside civil society and intergovernmental organisations. And now, on Wednesday (Thursday NZT), they will gather in the brick palace that sits in ornate gardens in this canal-ringed city, to hear if the judges of the world's top court agree. What is the case? The ICJ adjudicates disputes between nations and issues advisory opinions on big international legal issues. In this case, Vanuatu asked the UN General Assembly to ask the judges to weigh what, exactly, international law requires states to do about climate change, and what the consequences should be for states that harm the climate through actions or omissions. Over its deliberations, the court has heard from more than 100 countries and international organisations hoping to influence its opinion, the highest level of participation in the court's history. That has included the governments of low-lying islands and atolls in the Pacific, who said they are paying the steepest price for a crisis they had little role in creating. These nations have long been frustrated with the current mechanisms for addressing climate change, like the UN COP conferences, and are hoping that, ultimately, the court will provide a yardstick by which to measure other countries' actions. "I choose my words carefully when I say that this may well be the most consequential case in the history of humanity," Vanuatu's minister for climate change Ralph Regenvanu said in his statement to the court last year. "Let us not allow future generations to look back and wonder why the cause of their doom was condoned." But major powers and emitters, like the United States and China, have argued in their testimonies that existing UN agreements, such as the Paris climate accord, are sufficient to address climate change. "We expect this landmark climate ruling, grounded in binding international law, to reflect the critical legal flashpoints raised during the proceedings," Joie Chowdhury, a senior attorney at the US-based Centre for International Environmental Law (which has been involved with the case), said. "Among them: whether States' climate obligations are anchored in multiple legal sources, extending far beyond the Paris Agreement; whether there is a right to remedy for climate harm; and how human rights and the precautionary principle define States' climate obligations." What could this mean? Rulings from the ICJ are non-binding, and there are myriad cases of international law being flouted by countries the world over. Still, the court's opinion - if it falls in Vanuatu's favour - could still have major ramifications, bolstering the case for linking human rights and climate change in legal proceedings - both international and domestic - and potentially opening the floodgates for climate litigation, where individuals, groups, Indigenous Peoples, and even countries, sue governments or private companies for climate harm. An advisory opinion would also be a powerful precedent for legislators and judges to call on as they tackle questions related to the climate crisis, and give small countries a powerful cudgel in negotiations over future COP agreements and other climate mechanisms. "This would empower vulnerable nations and communities to demand accountability, strengthen legal arguments and negotiations and litigation and push for policies that prioritise prevention and redress over delay and denial," Prasad said. In essence, those who have taken the case have asked the court to issue an opinion on whether governments have "legal obligations" to protect people from climate hazards, but also whether a failure to meet those obligations could bring "legal consequences." At the Peace Palace at 3pm on Wednesday, they will find out from the court's 15 judges. "[The advisory opinion] is not just a legal milestone, it is a defining moment in the global climate justice movement and a beacon of hope for present and future generations," Vanuatu Prime Minister Jotham Napat said in a statement ahead of Wednesday's decision. "I am hopeful for a powerful opinion from the ICJ. It could set the world on a meaningful path to accountability and action."


Scoop
4 days ago
- Scoop
Ex-Rebel Leader ‘General' Kauona Is Brimming With Confidence In Bougainville Presidential Race
Article – RNZ The former Bougainville Revolutionary Army leader says, 'This time, I'm going to win. I'm confident.'17 July 2025 , RNZ Pacific Senior Journalist Sam Kauona, a former leader of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA), wants to become president of the autonomous Papua New Guinea region. Bougainville is immersed in political campaigning as it prepares to choose 46 MPs from 404 candidates in elections shceduled for the first week of September. Seven people are contesting the presidency, including Kauona and his former BRA colleague, the incumbent President Ishmael Toroama. Kauona, who styles himself as 'General' Kauona, has in recent years been more focussed on developing a potential new gold mine, but now he wants the presidency. He ran unsuccessfully in 2020, but this time, he told RNZ Pacific, he is brimming with confidence. (This transcript has been edited for brevity and clarity.) SAM KAUONA: This time, I'm going to do it. I'm going to get the seat. I'm going to win. I am confident. DON WISEMAN: Why? Given that you didn't do that well last time? SK: Because the government, for the last five years, did not achieve what Bougainvilleans, what we, wanted. They were concentrating on one option only. That's why it wasted the last five years, and we did not achieve anything. DW: And we're talking here about independence? SK: Oh yes. That's the only agenda for Bougainville – independence. There are many approaches that we can consider. One, there is an option in which we can work with Papua New Guinea, and there's an option that we negotiate. You know, it varies. So this government, they went for the option of negotiating for ratification [of the 2019 independence referendum]. They did not achieve what Bougainville wanted. DW: Well, what do you think they should have done? And what would you do? SK: Well, to me, I would go to exercising those powers and function that will make Bougainville realise its independent, meaning to say those powers and functions that concern sovereignty protection, sovereignty rights. Exercising those powers, Bougainville can be able to reach her destiny by exercising the powers of foreign affairs, currency, number two and number three, exercising the powers to protect ourselves – security, defence. In the Peace Process, those powers and functions were reserved for Papua New Guinea. We were not independent at that time, but after the referendum, people voted not for autonomy to be with Papua New Guinea, but they voted to become independent, on their own, exercising the sovereign right. It means that with the referendum achieving independence, the door to exercising those rights, sovereign rights, was open. It was open. It was closed during the peace process, when it was open, we should have put into policies necessary functions. For example, the defence. You see Bougainville is not protected. We are not protected at this point of time, there is fatal incidents happening south to north. We need to exercise the power of security – establishing defence, establishing police powers and functions, protecting our people, our natural resources, our sea boundaries. Of course, whatever we do, we have to consult with Papua New Guinea and establish those functions. Currency, [is] another function that we should be able to now establish our own banks [and] currency, so that we can be able to achieve the level of independence. DW: So you're not talking about making a unilateral declaration or anything like that. You're still talking about negotiating a solution with Port Moresby? SK: Not negotiating, but coming up with a plan, a strategy, that will accommodate Papua New Guinea to participate. When accommodating Papua New Guinea, we need to see Papua New Guinea we are on one side. There is still a common enemy out there: BCL, CRA, Rio Tinto using the system, and then they subjugated us with all their systems, the laws. And here, when we come up with a plan of exercising our rights, Papua New Guinea is part and parcel of that. We need to compensate Papua New Guinea. We need to support Papua New Guinea, also in the economy which, which was incurred during the crisis conflict. They borrowed so much funding, so we should be sharing. DW: What you're talking about, still, is negotiation, isn't it? Bougainville can't do these things you're talking about unless it reaches some sort of a deal with Papua New Guinea, and it's going to need the money. SK: Correct. We need money. Bougainville is full of resources. We are rich in natural resources. But how we manage our resources is a different dimension this time. Before, we were under all those colonial laws, and when we are free now we should be able to come up with the laws to protect our natural resources and use it wisely, together with whoever invests, that comes in. But here, I'm trying to say, not so much negotiation, but it's a plan that Bougainville needs to do. The plan is to be user friendly with Papua New Guinea. And of course, for us, we have won it. We have won the political battle. We need to set away. We need to have a compass that we need to navigate with, and that compass, we Bougainvilleans, we have it in our hands, and that has to be a user friendly direction that we close out. Papua New Guinea will have to be drawn in, we have to participate in that, yes, to a level, it is negotiating, but it is like, you know, we have to lead the way. We have to come up with a plan [that's] user friendly. Not just for Papua New Guinea, let me say that. It is friendly to our Pacific countries, our neighbours, Australia, New Zealand. In terms of security, we will have to make sure that we secure our region together, not just Bougainville, together with the countries that are around us. That's why we need a defence force that is not really big, but enough to protect its internal affairs, internal issues.


Scoop
6 days ago
- Scoop
'Building Deterrence': PNG To Host Part Of Australia's Largest Military Exercise
Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific Journalist For the first time, Papua New Guinea will host a training activity as part of Australia's largest military exercise, which one Pacific defence expert says is about "building strategic deterrence" in the region. Exercise Talisman Sabre, which began its eleventh iteration on 13 July, has over 30,000 personnel from 19 countries taking part, including Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Tonga. The war-fighting exercise involves live-fire drills, air combat and maritime operations, including amphibious landings. Massey University's associate professor in defence and security studies Anna Powles told Pacific Waves that the exercise is taking place during a period of "really unprecedented geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific". "There is a very strong sense amongst a number of those countries participating, particularly Australia and the United States and others, that the Indo-Pacific may well become the location for conflict in the near future," she said. "These types of exercises, including those smaller Pacific militaries in the exercise, is all about building strategic deterrence across the region." On Saturday, the Financial Times reported that US defence official Elbridge Colby asked for clarification from Australia and Japan about what role they would play if the US and China went to war over Taiwan. Australia's Acting Defence Minister Pat Conroy told the ABC that he would not "engage in hypotheticals" or "disclose confidential discussions". Powles said Exercise Talisman Sabre was also significant for the Pacific because of Papua New Guinea hosting part of the event. She said it is becoming increasingly common to include the defence forces of Papua New Guinea, Tonga and Fiji in such bilateral combined training activities, noting they also participate in New Zealand's Exercise Southern Katipo. "What we are seeing increasingly now is a growing sense of wanting to include, like-minded defence partners in these exercises, such as exercise Talisman Sabre, because it is part of growing capabilities and interoperability with Pacific countries." She said relationships between the Pacific Island defence forces and those of Australia and New Zealand have been longstanding.