N11529
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

HROI NO. 06 OF 2025

IN THE MATTER OF ENFORCEMENT OF BASIC RIGHTS
UNDER SECTION 57 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA

RE: TRIBAL FIGHTING IN WAPENAMANDA
AND ITS IMPACT ON THE WORK OF THE NATIONAL COURT
AND THE EDUCATION OF CHILDREN

WABAG: ELLIS J
17 OCTOBER 2025

HUMAN RIGHTS – Tribal fighting in Wapenamanda - Matter commenced by the Court on its own initiative – Unconditional cease-fire order – Order to facilitate preparation of Peace Agreement

Cases  cited
No cases are cited in these reasons.

Counsel
E. Minok for The Hon Mikki Kaeok MP, Member for Wapenamanda Open 
G. Bon for Sandis Tsaka, Provincial Administrator

REASONS

1.	ELLIS, J: The Court has today considered again the position in relation to tribal fighting in the Wapenamanda District within Enga Province.  Additional evidence available today included a report from the Provincial Administrator plus two reports from senior Police officers and an affidavits from Hon Miki Yaeok and Danny Katie.

Overview

2.	Previous orders, designed to stop further tribal fighting, appear to have been successful.  However, it is clear there is the prospect of further tribal fighting.  In those circumstances, to prevent further breaches of the human rights provisions of the Constitution, orders should be made to (1) establish an enforceable ceasefire, and (2) require steps should be taken to finalise a peace agreement.

Additional evidence

3.	A report dated 10 October 2025 was provided by Senior Inspector Richard Koki, who is the Operations Commander for the Wapenamanda Tribal Conflict (Exhibit 23).  That report suggested that more remains to be done to stabilise the area to enable a full restoration of services, including flights to and from the airport in Wapenamanda.  Senior Inspector Koki suggested there be a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to facilitate an end to the conflict.

4.	An unsigned, 9-page report from the Provincial Administrator (Exhibit 24) set out what has been done and the current position, which may be summarised by saying that, while there is currently no fighting between  what was described as “the two warring tribes of Yakuman and Yangukun”, the situation remains “tense”, the highway remains “unstable”, and some institutions and facilities remain closed.  Paragraphs 4.7 to 4.10 are set out in full below:

4.7	There continues to be tension and distrust between the leadership of the Yakuman and Yangakuni tribes and both have demonstrated a lack of firm commitment to find a way through the issues and resolve the matter and bring peace and restore order and normalcy.

4.8	There are visible presence[s] of armed men with illegal firearms in the declared fighting zones, meaning that warring tribes have not agreed to ceasefire or laying down of arms.

4.9	There continues to be occasional provocation, incitement and challenges by both Yangakuni and Yakuman clans and their allies. openly challenging each other in public and in social media platforms, which is contributing to the unease and tensions.

4.10	The risk of external and opportunistic elements who can capitalize on the conflict and the environment of lawlessness to engage in criminal behaviour is real and continues to put the public and government services at risk is high. 

5.	That report goes on to say there should be an unconditional ceasefire and a peace process.  It also includes, in paragraphs 5.9 and 5.10 the following recommendations:

5.9	Law enforcement agencies to identify people who are funding and smuggling firearms and ammunitions and bring them to justice to face the law.

5.10	Law enforcement agencies to identify and investigate criminal warlords and mercenaries and prosecute them to face the law. 

6.	What was set out under the heading “Challenges and Opportunities” including the following words:

The tribal fight in Wapenamanda is no different to other tribal fights in Enga Province that have been aggravated by the proliferation of high-powered illegal weapons and hired mercenaries.

Whilst there are key challenges to reduce escalation of the fight.

6.1	The proliferation of illegal firearms and their ease of movement across the province in tribal conflicts;

6.2	The emergence and presence of hired mercenaries and gunmen who are hired to fight and who have no regard for tribal relationships or traditional rules of engagement; 

6.3	Limited resources to continue funding security forces deployment and other efforts;

6.4	Limited Police Manpower with limited resources and capacity;

6.5	Lack of coordination between different government agencies.

There is also a real opportunity for peace and restoration of order and the rule of law with the strengthening of law and order agencies and institutions capacity and performance.

6.6	To gain the support of local leaders to take responsibility for peace and order;

6.7	Opportunity for other tribes and communities to assist in Peace.  The Yangakuni and Yakuman are not neighbouring tribes and as such the tribes that separate those two tribes can be key to stop the tribal fight by restricting access to their land;

6.8	to align all government agencies responsible for law enforcement and other law and justice sector agencies to work together;

7.	The recommendations contained in that report were:

Recommendation 1

Enforce the Preventive Orders and provide framework to ensure compliance and accountability.

Recommendation 2

A[n] Unconditional Ceasefire Agreement to be concluded as soon as possible and signed by the leaders of the Yakuman and Yangakun, namely:

1.	Yakuman tribe – led by Hon. Danny Kati, businessman and Community leader of Yakuman and other leaders;

2.	Yangakun tribe – Hon. Miki [Kaeok], Minister for Transport and Open MP for Wapenamanda and leader of the Yangakun tribe and other leaders; 

Recommendation 3

Following the signing and execution of the Unconditional Ceasefire Agreement, the above two leaders and their tribal leaders, will have to commit with their tribes to surrender the suspects from both tribes involved in the killings that precipitated the conflict.

Law enforcement to lead investigations and prosecutions to ensure “justice is not only done, but seen to be done”.

Recommendation 4

The respective leaders to facilitate the appropriate Customary Obligations and Initiatives for lasting Peace.

Recommendation 5

The National Government and the Wapenamanda [District Development Authority] to support the [Enga Provincial Government] efforts to restore peace to the Wapenamanda District especially the continued deployment of additional manpower/security forces as required.

8.	The document which became Exbibit 25 was a statement from Acting Assistant Commissioner Joseph Tondop, who is the Divisional Commander of the Highlands Western Command of the Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary.  After setting out a chronology of relevant events, he suggested that “without some compelling force applied to both parties” any peace negotiations will be difficult and will take much longer.  He noted the obvious and extreme danger Police officers face if they use force and try to make arrests.  This report then set out suggested orders which may be summarised as requiring the relevant leaders to meet so that the terms and conditions of a formal agreement can be finalised.

9.	Hon. Mik Kaeok chose to submit an affidavit, which has been marked as Exhibit 26.  That affidavit set out his political career and what he maintains is the history of this matter.  In addition to suggesting that there is tribal fighting between Yakuman sub-clans, that seven-page affidavit includes a sentence that reads:

I call for peace and I am willing to engage in resolution to achieve peace in the end.

10.	The Court also this morning received an affidavit from Danny Katie which has been marked as Exhibit 28.  It is not necessary to refer to that affidavit further.

11.	The Deputy Provincial Administrator, who is currently the Acting Provincial Administrator, has drafted a Ceasefire Agreement (Exhibit 27).  While the Court appreciates the effort that went into drafting that eight-page document, a shorter form is to be preferred so that there are not seen to be any preconditions for a ceasefire in relation to the tribal fighting in the Wapenamanda District.

Relevant law

12.	As previously indicated, the Court was provided with clear evidence that there had been multiple breaches of the right to freedom, the right to life, the right to freedom of assembly and association, and the right to freedom of movement (provided by s 32, s 35, s 47 and s 52 of the Constitution).  Upon becoming aware of such breaches, the Court initiated this human rights matter, exercising the power conferred by s 57(1) of the Constitution.

13.	It is now only necessary to note subsections (3) and (5) of s 57 of the Constitution, which are set out below:

(3)	A court that has jurisdiction under Subsection (1) may make all such orders and declarations as are necessary or appropriate for the purposes of this section, and may make an order or declaration in relation to a statute at any time after it is made (whether or not it is in force).
	…
(5)	Relief under this section is not limited to cases of actual or imminent infringement of the guaranteed rights and freedoms, but may, if the court thinks it proper to do so, be given in cases in which there is a reasonable probability of infringement, or in which an action that a person reasonably desires to take is inhibited by the likelihood of, or a reasonable fear of, an infringement.

Consideration

14.	It is neither necessary nor appropriate for this Court to spend days or even weeks inquiring into this matter, when there are numerous criminal and civil cases awaiting hearing.  As previously indicated, this Court does not intend to consider any topic that may give rise to either criminal proceedings or civil proceedings in this Court.

15.	The position is clear: if nothing is done then there is a risk that tribal fighting will resume.  To prevent further breaches of the human rights provisions of the Constitution, it is necessary to make orders to make it clear that there should be an immediate cease fire and that the parties should begin talks aimed at finalising a peace agreement as soon as possible.  

16.	Any suggestion that tribal warfare might continue while the conditions for peace are negotiated is bizarre.  It is not appropriate to make a ceasefire agreement or order subject to conditions: any suggested conditions should form part of the peace agreement negotiations.

17.	Rather than draft an agreement for the leaders of the two tribes to sign, which might give rise to differences of opinion as to what should be the wording of that agreement, the Court considers the preferable course is to make a ceasefire order and to note the effect of that order, which should include that both tribes are to:

(1)	lay down all weapons,
(2)	cease all forms of hostile engagement,
(3)	cease any provocative behaviour, including oral and written communications as well as any such communications on social media,
(4)	not trespass into any area within each other’s traditional land boundaries, 
(5)	not create any disturbance on either the highway or any public road, and
(6)	submit to and obey the direction of any Police officer.

18.	In short, the time has come to stop waging war and start pursuing peace.  

Orders

19.	For the reasons set out above, the following orders are made:

1.	The Court notes that Danny Katie, a leader from the Yakuman tribe, and Hon Miki Kaeok MP, a leader from the Yangukun tribe, have both today agreed to an unconditional ceasefire.

2.	As a result, the members of the Yakuman tribe (today represented by Danny Katie) and the members of the Yangakun tribe (today represented by Hon Miki Kaeok MP) are ordered to ceasefire immediately and it is noted that this order will require each member of both tribes to:

(1)	lay down all weapons,
(2)	cease all forms of hostile engagement,
(3)	cease any provocative behaviour, including oral and written communications as well as any such communications on social media,
(4)	not trespass into any area within each other’s traditional land boundaries, 
(5)	not create any disturbance on either the highway or any public road, and
(6)	submit to and obey the direction of any Police officer.
3.	For the avoidance of doubt, order 2 applies to any tribal fighting either between those two tribes or within either of those tribes.
4.	By 12 noon today, those two leaders are to ensure that the existence and effect of that ceasefire order is communicated to their respective tribes.

5.	In addition to their existing powers, the Police will be entitled to arrest, detain and bring before the National Court in Wabag any person who is alleged to have breached Order 2 above since any such proven conduct may constitute contempt of court.

6.	Danny Katie and Hon Miki Yaeok MP (the Leaders) are to obey all reasonable directions of either of the following Mediators, namely:

(1)	the Acting Provincial Police Commander or his nominee, and
	(2)	the Provincial Administrator or his nominee,

in relation to the preparation and finalisation of a Peace Agreement between the Yakuman and Yangukun tribes within seven (7) days (ie by 24th October 2025) or such later date as the Court may order in response to a written request from either of the Mediators.

7.	The Court expects both Leaders to negotiate in good faith and either of the Mediators may advise the Court in writing of any alleged failure to do so since any such proven conduct may constitute contempt of court.

Orders Accordingly.
__________________________________________________________________
Lawyer for the Member for Wapenamanda Open: Minok & Company Lawyers
Lawyer for the Provincial Administrator: Gibson Bon Lawyers