Anjo/Ramoi fail: Twivey stays.

By PNG Echo.

Noel Anjo Kolao and Sonja Barry Ramoi have been unsuccessful in their bid to have the PNG courts disqualify lawyer, Tiffany Twivey-Nonggorr and her law firm Twivey Lawyers from representing the Prime Minister in his defamation suit against the two self-styled activists with strong links to the Opposition Leader.

Justice Kandakasi handed down the decision last Monday in an on-the-spot decision at the National Court, Waigani that saw Anjo in attendance but Ramoi absent.

Anjo and Ramoi were ordered by the court to pay the Prime Minister’s costs in the amount of K1500.

Noel Anjo Kolao - (second from right) and other 'activists' showing solidarity with the Opposition Leader.
Noel Anjo Kolao – (second from right) and other ‘activists’ showing solidarity with the Opposition Leader.

Justice Kandakasi in handing down his decision found that what was being asked of the court was, in this case, not within its jurisdiction.

The case reads not unlike that of former Treasurer Don Polye whose lawyer asked the courts to reinstate Polye into his former political position – the courts declined in that instance too – citing the same reasons.

Lawyer for the Defence, Tony Waisi - submission incompetent.
Lawyer for the Defence, Tony Waisi – submission incompetent.

Furthermore the Judge found the submission of lawyer, Tony Waisi to be incompetent, as the motion did not comply with the national court rules – failing to state the jurisdiction or power of the court to make the orders sought and therefore the motion would be struck out.

These were two of the arguments presented by Ms Twivey-Nonggorr and accepted by the learned judge

Moreover, Justice Kandakasi did not deem it necessary to comment on specific allegations of Anjo and Ramoi who were accusing Twivey-Nonggorr of conduct unbecoming and conflict of interest under rule 3 and rule 10 of the professional conduct code.

He did however interrupt the defence submission to inquire as to the veracity of the alleged posting on social media by Ms Twivey-Nonggorr regarding the husband of Sonja Ramoi – one Gabriel Ramoi.

“Was Mr Ramoi convicted,” he asked?

As defence lawyer Waisi could not provide the answer, Ms Twivey-Nonggorr helped out by informing the court that Mr Ramoi was indeed convicted and sentenced to imprisonment on charges relating to corruption.  A copy of the said court decision was provided as an annex to her submissions.

WHAT NOW?

With interlocutory motions set aside (that Justice Kandakasi branded a “waste of time”) the case should have now been poised to proceed to trial. However, in yet another example of legal ineptitude, it was discovered that Anjo and Ramoi had defaulted in filing their defence within the 35 allotted days and were already 5 days out of time.

Tiffany Twivey-Nonggorr, Lawyer for the Prime Minister
Tiffany Twivey-Nonggorr, Lawyer for the Prime Minister

Ms. Twivey-Nonggorr informed the court that she was prepared to consent to an extension so that they could file their defence and the case could progress (this was in spite of the fact that the prosecution was entitled to file, under the circumstances, for a default judgement.)

The Judge so ordered and the new deadline for the filing of a defence by Anjo, Ramoi and their lawyers is this Friday 6 June with the plaintiff’s reply to be filed by 13 June.

The case of the Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea versus Noel Anjo Kolao and Sonja Barry Ramoi on charges of defamation will make its next appearance in the National Court of PNG on 23 July.

Share Button

8 thoughts on “Anjo/Ramoi fail: Twivey stays.

  1. Tiffany Twiffey would represent Satan himself if Satan paid her enough. No surprise that she’s representing Peter O’Neill. My question, however, is what corruption did Gabriel Ramoi engage in that he was found guilty of? Because he always creates the impression that he’s as honest as the day is blue. Askim chol.

    • Lawyers are paid to do a job. Do you think ANY lawyer in PNG wouldn’t give their right arm to represent the Prime Minister of the country? A lot of the flack Twivey-Nonggorr receives is, I’m sure, a result of some professional jealousies.
      As for Gabriel Ramoi. Here’s an extract from http://www.asiapac.org.fj/PJR/issues/back95/95sbs.html (1995):

      “Gabriel Ramoi works in the office of the Deputy Prime Minister. He has finished serving a two-year jail sentence for misappropriating his Electoral Development Fund. Several years ago, he was a young Minister for Communications and thought highly of as a prime ministerial hopeful. “

      • Well, it’s always been known that the legal profession is one of the least respected of all professions. Simply because of what you said. They’ll do anything for a price.

  2. Well done.Hope Ms Ramoi will learn from this and stop wasting the courts time when there are more pressing issues to be dealt with.

  3. The subject matter of defamation remains and this is a side issue and no party has won. Just getting through the process

  4. Dr. Merrell, you post has created confusion. If I can recall correctly, Lawyer Tiffany was not present in court as she was in another province attending to Landowner issues and Judge Kandakasi imposed a court penalty on Tiffany to pay to Lawyer Tony Waisi.

    Please can you be honest in your blogs?

    • First of all before you accuse me of dishonesty, I suggest you get your facts straight. You are definitely confused – but only by your own arrogant ignorance.
      The court case on which I’ve reported occurred many days after the one of which you are speaking.
      What’s more the “court penalty” of which you speak was in fact an offer by Twivey Lawyers to pay the court costs which was accepted by the courts.
      Conversely, there was no such offer when the order to pay the Prime Minister’s costs was imposed by Judge Kandakasi on Anjo/Ramoi.
      What I have written is what happened in the National Court, Waigani on Monday 2 June.
      And as this article is on the subject of defamation – you should know that what you erroneously accused me of is libelous. To suggest that this article is dishonest is defamation – this article is demonstrably a true and accurate account.
      If you want to cast aspersions on my honesty, you’d better have your ducks in a row, or I’ll have great pleasure in crucifying you.