CONFERENCE REPORT - 23RD PACIFIC ISLANDS LAW OFFICERS
MEETING
Nuku’alofa, Tonga, 27th-29th September 2004
PROFESSOR BOB HUGHES
Head, School of Law, USP
The annual meeting of the Pacific Islands Law Officers Meeting was held in
the Kingdom of Tonga from 27th-29th September 2004. This was the twenty-third
meeting of PILOM. The meeting brings together senior government law officers
from the Pacific countries; most often Attorneys-General, Solicitors-General and
senior Crown Counsel.
The purpose of the meeting is to provide a forum
for the sharing of information regarding major legal issues and developments in
the respective countries of particular relevance to the roles of government law
officers. The format is such that reports on legal developments are usually
provided by each country by way of a country report. This is interspersed with
presentations by invited speakers and regular reports from the Commonwealth
Secretariat, the Forum Secretariat, The South Pacific Police
Commissioners’ Conference and the School of Law at the University of the
South Pacific.
The countries represented traditionally are all of the
USP countries, along with Papua New Guinea, Palau, Federated States of
Micronesia, Australia and New Zealand. For the present conference Nauru, Palau
and the Cook Islands were unable to attend. The location of the conference
shifts from one country to the other in no particular order, the next location
usually being determined by offers to host presented at any particular meeting.
The hosting country provides the conference secretariat and usually the
chairperson for the meeting. The conference was last held in Tonga in 1997.
The holding of the conference in Tonga this year was an important event
given the current legal and political environment in that country. The ever
present theme at PILOM in recent times has been the upholding of the rule of law
and the strengthening and reinforcement of the legal institutions in the region.
Tonga, at this time, is undergoing a degree of political crisis which directly
impacts on the relationship between the political rulers and the roles of key
legal institutions and legal actors in the country. The outcome of the current
events may well have a determining effect on the rule of law in that country and
its role in prescribing and limiting the power of political rulers. Thus the
presence of PILOM was, if nothing else, a significant symbolic
occasion.
Country reports presented to the meeting covered a range of
materials from new legislation introduced in areas such as constitutional
amendment, anti-terrorism, proceeds of crime, mutual assistance and security
measures to reports of major cases recently decided in the courts of the
respective countries. Many of the reports raised issue of common concern such as
in the area of staff training, the need for legislative drafting assistance and
the use of the provisions of model legislation. Many reports also indicated
ongoing problems in relation to political interference and the approaches taken
to cases of contempt and corruption. In some instances it was evidence that law
officers were under pressure, through lack of resources, to deal with heavy work
demands. Absence of senior suitably experienced and skilled staff was also a
factor.
It was generally agreed that PILOM continues to provide a very
useful forum for the exchange of information and provision of mutual assistance
to law officers of the region. From a USP, and indeed a regional perspective it
was gratifying to note the increasing number of USP law graduates participating
in the meeting. At the current meeting these were Iakoba Italeli,
Attorney-General of Tuvalu, Marstella Jack Assistance Attorney-General of
Federated States of Micronesia, Frederick Sam, State Law Office of Vanuatu and
Birimaka Tekanene, State Advocate of Kiribati. Others present at the meeting as
part of the Tongan secretariat included Sarah Raasch and Luisa Fukofuka from the
Crown Law Office of Tonga.
Aside from the country reports presentations
were given to PILOM by invited speakers and observers, Ms. Betty Mould-Iddrisu,
the Director of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Division of the
Commonwealth Secretariat, provided sessions on the Commonwealth Project on
Counter Terrorism and on the International Criminal Court. She gave a further
presentation on the work of the Commonwelath Secretariat. Justice McIlrea of the
Supreme Court of Tonga gave a paper on the role of restorative justice within
criminal justice systems.
Mr. Nicholas Cowdery, the Director of Public
Prosecutions of New South Wales and Chairman of the World Association of
Prosecutors, gave a presentation on the roles of prosecutors and the many
challenges facing them in the upholding of the rule of law, particularly in the
face of political and media criticism. Mr. Terence Arnold, the Solicitor-General
of New Zealand lectured on the role of law officers and the contribution of
their officers to the maintenance of the rule of law. Both papers raised issues
concerning the interaction between the rule of law and legal institutions, on
the one hand, and popular and political opinion, on the other.
A report
was provided to the meeting by Dr. Transform Aqorau, Legal Advisor, Political
and Legal Affairs Division of the Forum Secretariat outlining changes in the
structure and context of operation of the Forum. His report also gave
indications of the possible signficance which the adoption of the Forum’s
Pacific Plan might have for the future operation of PILOM. For example, one
implication of the Plan could be for a more structured and intensified role for
PILOM in the implementation and administration of aspects of the Plan,
particularly in the implementation of cooperative schemes of legal
regulation.
Ms. Lautoa Faleatau, Assistant Police Commander of Tonga
provided the report of the South Pacific Chiefs of Police Conference. She spoke
of moves within the conference to foster improved communication and a greater
degree of cooperation between regional police services and to promote capacity
building. Also addressed were transnational crime issues, terrorism and drug
trafficking measures and the establishment of a womens’ advisory
network.
Professor Bob Hughes provided a report on the further
development of the USP law programme and the Institute of Justice and Applied
Legal Studies. He also raised issues relating to the comprehensive review of the
Pacific Islands Legal Information Institute and the possible future roles it
might take on in serving the legal communities of the region, both by way of
expansion of its law reporting functions and other training and information
provision activities.
At the conclusion of the meeting there was a
discussion of some important areas affecting the future of PILOM. These were as
follows:
1. The implications of the Pacific Plan for the future of PILOM. It
was agreed that members will need to give further consideration to the
implications of the Plan and a possible expanded role which PILOM might have
under it.
2. PILOM Secretariat. The discussion of a permanent PILOM
secretariat had been discussed at previous meetings. It was agreed that the
secretariat functions should remain local to the hosting country for the time
being rather than being permanently established.
3. An expanded role for the
chairperson of PILOM. This issue was raised as a possible means for implementing
and expanded role for PILOM. For the time being, it was decided not to move in
this direction.
4. Possible staff exchanges between member countries. It was
agreed in principle that this was an idea worthy of further consideration. Staff
experience in other jurisdictions would be of considerable advantage to them.
Questions were raised as to admission requirements but these were not thought to
be insurmountable.
5. 2005 and 2006 meetings. It was agreed that the 2005
meeting of PILOM should take place in Vanuatu and the 2006 meeting in
Kiribati.
6. PIOOM Website. It was agreed that a PILOM website will be
established and maintained by Samoa. The content of the website was discussed
and the need to set up links to various relevant sites. It was felt that the
establishment of such a site might provide a focal point for defining the role
of PILOM and provide an information point serving the needs of members.
In conclusion, the meeting of PILOM again demonstrated its value as a forum for the exchange of information between the law officers of the various member countries regarding legal developments in the region and the roles and functions of major legal institutions. Whether PILOM is ever to move beyond this information-sharing function remains somewhat unclear. It has been an issue which has been raised at several past meetings but each time has not moved much beyond discussion. The so-called Forum Pacific Plan, however, might give the discussion much needed impetus.
The Plan is intended to be the primary instrument for the implementation of
the Forum leaders’ Pacific Vision. Its aim is to deliver real benefits to
Pacific people in terms of enhanced economic growth, sustainable development,
good governance and security. One expectation seems to be that PILOM might be
actively engaged in some way in the carrying of those general aims into effect,
at least in the legal context appropriate to it. Just how it might do so and
whether it will do so remains to be seen.