REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

PUBLIC REPORT

ON THE

failure of some leaders
to file annual returns
to the
clerk of parliament

29.02.2000

9338/2000/02

-----------------------------------

PUBLIC REPORT ON THE
FAILURE OF SOME LEADERS
TO FILE ANNUAL RETURNS
TO THE CLERK OF PARLIAMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.	JURISDICTION
2.	PURPOSE, SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION AND METHODS USED
3.	RELEVANT LAWS AND REGULATIONS VANUATU
4.	OUTLINE OF EVENTS
5.	RESPONSES BY THOSE WITH FINDINGS AGAINST THEM
6.	FINDINGS
7.	RECOMMENDATIONS
8.	INDEX OF APPENDICES

-------------------------------------------------------------

1.	SUMMARY

Section 31 of the Leadership Code Act makes it an obligation for every leader named in S5 of that Act to complete an annual return each year by 1 March and submit it to the Clerk of Parliament.

Any leader who fails to complete an annual and file it with the Clerk by 1 March, may be issued with the warning letter to file his annual within a further 14 days.

The Clerk is given an obligation under s32 of the Act to compile the annual returns filed by the leaders and a list of leaders who fail to give the Clerk an annual return. The Clerk must publish that information in the national Gazette by 14 March in each year.

On 5 February 1999, the Clerk of Parliament sent notices to all leaders named in S 5 of the Act, requiring them to give to the Clerk their annual returns by Monday, 1 March 1999.

On March 4 1999, the Clerk sent warning letter, giving 14 days to those leaders who had failed to file an annual return to submit one by 11 March 1999.

By 12 March 1999, the Clerk confirmed that among those leaders whom he had warned, 86 had failed to file any annual returns within the required time frame specified by the Leadership Code Act.

On enquiry, the Ombudsman found that out of the 86 leaders whose names were published in the Gazette as having failed to files any annual returns:

*	43 leaders had submitted their annual returns to the Clerk after the dates required by the Act;
*	9 leaders had decided to resign from their position because they refused to disclose their assets and liabilities;
*	24 leaders failed to submitted any annual returns to the Clerk:
*	8 leaders were removed, terminated or resigned from their positions when their annual returns were due by 1 March 1999: and
*	2 leaders’ names were mistakenly listed as having failed to file their annual returns. However, both leaders have filed theirs to the Clerk within the required time.

The Ombudsman found that 43 leaders who submitted their annual returns late to the Clerk of Parliament might have breached the Leadership Code. The Code clearly specifies in s 31(2)(a) & s 33(b) that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March' or 'within further 14 days' and the Leadership Code’s provision does not make any concessions for leaders to submit annual returns after the further 14 days.

The Ombudsman also found that the 10 leaders who resigned from their positions because they refused to file any annual returns to the Clerk might have breached the Leadership Code. In section 5 (f) of the Code, it names those who are appointed as members of the boards and statutory authorities as leaders. These statutory authorities were established by legislation that was passed by parliament. The Leadership Code states that it is no defence that a leader is no long a leader, as long as the person was a leader at the time the leadership obligation arose. This suggests that the resignations of the 10 leaders could not relieve them of the responsibility to file their annual returns to the Clerk. Therefore, they may have breached Leadership Code.

The Ombudsman has also found that the 24 leaders who failed to have submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament may have breached the Code.

Therefore, the Ombudsman recommends that the Public Prosecutor consider the findings of this report and proceed with further enquiry and possible prosecution, pursuant to sections 34(2), 35, 37 and 38 of the Leadership Code Act.

2.	JURISDICTION

2.1	THE CONSTITUTION, THE LEADERSHIP CODE AND THE OMBUDSMAN ACT ALLOW THE OMBUDSMAN TO LOOK INTO THE CONDUCT OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND LEADERS. FOR THIS REPORT, THE LEADERSHIP CODE ACT EMPOWERS THE OMBUDSMAN TO INQUIRE INTO THE CONDUCT OF THOSE LEADERS WHO APPARENTLY FAILED TO FILE THEIR ANNUAL RETURNS AND/OR SUBMITTED THEIR ANNUAL RETURNS TO THE CLERK OF PARLIAMENT BY A GIVEN DATE. A LEADER’S FAILURE TO FILE AN ANNUAL RETURN IS A BREACH OF THE CODE.

3.	PURPOSE, SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION AND METHODS USED

3.1	The purpose of this investigation was to establish the circumstances surrounding the alleged failure of certain leaders to file required annual reports with the Clerk of Parliament, as required by s. 31 of the Leadership Code. The Ombudsman is required by s 34 of the Code to make enquiry on the allegations and report on the possible breaches of the Code.

3.2	The scope of this investigation is to establish the facts and reasons why some leaders seemingly omitted to submit their annual returns, as required by the Leadership Code and/or submitted their annual returns after 1 March 1999. This investigation was also to determine whether those leaders may have breached the Leadership Code and to explore what possible consequences and actions should follow from the findings.

3.3	This Office collects information and documents by informal request, summonses, letters, interviews and research.

4.	RELEVANT LAWS, REGULATIONS AND RULES

4.1	The constitutional and statutory provisions relevant to this report are reproduced in Appendix A at the end of the report.

4.2	Article 67 of the Constitution and s. 5 of the Leadership Code together list the positions whose holders are to be considered leaders for the purposes of the Leadership Code. Because of the definitions provided in s. 4 of the Leadership Code Act, the list of leaders includes any member of a body established by a law of Vanuatu.

4.3	The Leadership Code (in s. 28) states that any leaders who fails to comply with a duty imposed by law is in breach of the Leadership Code.

4.4	Section 31 of the Leadership Code requires each leader to complete and file with the Clerk of Parliament an annual return that provides details of the leaders’ assets and liabilities. The leader’s return should be delivered to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March each year.

4.5	The Leadership Code Act also requires the Clerk to publish in the official Gazette a list of leaders who do not file returns by 14 March in each year.

4.6	Section 33 of the Leadership Code Act specifies that any leader who fails to file a return as required or knowingly files a false return is guilty of breach of the Leadership Code.

4.7	The Leadership Code Act sets out the respective roles, duties and responsibilities of the Ombudsman, the Public Prosecutor and the Commissioner of Police in connection with breaches of the Leadership Code.

4.8	The Ombudsman must investigate allegations of Leadership Code breaches. If the Ombudsman believes that a leader might have breached the Leadership Code, the Ombudsman must report that to the Public Prosecutor. If the Ombudsman suspects criminal misconduct, the Ombudsman must also give a copy of the report to the Commissioner of Police.

4.9	The Public Prosecutor is required to consider the Ombudsman’s report and decide within 14 days whether further investigation is necessary. If that is the case, the Public Prosecutor is to refer the Ombudsman’s report to the Commissioner of Police for that investigation. After receiving the results of the police investigation, the Public Prosecutor must decide whether there are sufficient grounds to prosecute anybody.

4.10	The Leadership Code Act states that, if the Public Prosecutor refers the Ombudsman’s report to the Commissioner of Police, the Commissioner of Police must ensure that the Police force investigates the matter and forward the results of the investigation to the Public Prosecutor within 60 days.

4.11	Within 3 months of when the Ombudsman delivered the report, the Public Prosecutor must decide whether to prosecute. The Leadership Code Act states that the only reasons on which the Public Prosecutor can decide not to prosecute are either if there is insufficient evidence or if the complaint is trivial.

4.12	If the Public Prosecutor should decide not to prosecute, the Leadership Code Act states that the Public Prosecutor must notify the Prime Minister of that decision and give the reason for the decision. The Public Prosecutor must also publish the decision and the reasons in the official Gazette within 14 days.

4.13	The Leadership Code Act also provides that in order to require a person’s compliance with the leadership obligations, it is sufficient that the person was a leader at the time when the obligation arose. It is not a defence to a prosecution that the person is no longer a leader.

5.	OUTLINE OF EVENTS

5.1	On 5 February 1999, the Clerk of Parliament sent notices to all leaders who held positions specified under the Leadership Code, requiring them to give to the Clerk their Annual Returns by Monday, 1 March 1999. (This is a requirement under s 31 of the Leadership Code Act.)

5.2	On 4 March 1999, the Clerk sent warning letters, giving 14 days to those leaders who failed to file any Annual Returns to submit their returns by 11 March 1999. (This is a requirement under s 33(a) of the Act.)

5.3	By 12 March 1999, the Clerk confirmed that among those leaders who were warned, 86 had failed each year the annual returns with the Clerk within the required time frame specified by the Code.

5.4	Section 32 of the Leadership Code requires the Clerk to publish in the official Gazette by 14 March each year the annual returns filed by the leaders and a list of the leaders who have failed to give the Clerk an annual return.

5.5	On 26 April 1999, the official Gazette released by the State Law Office named 86 leaders who had failed to submit their annual returns (see Annex 'B' for list of leaders who failed to submit their annual returns).

5.6	On enquiry, the Clerk of Parliament confirmed the names of the 86 leaders whose names appeared in the Official Gazette for having failed to submit their annual returns within the time required by the Leadership Code. The specified datelines are 1 March and further 14 days. In this case, the Clerk mentioned 11 March 1999 as the final dateline for submission.

5.7	In July 1999, the Ombudsman commenced an enquiry into these allegations. The allegations may be divided into four main categories. They are:

(i)	leaders who submitted their annual returns late after the final dateline due to various reasons;
(ii)	leaders who decided to resign from their official position because they refuse to expose their assets by submitting their annual returns to the Clerk;
(iii)	leaders who have did not submit any annual returns at all to the Clerk; and
(iv)	leaders who were terminated from their official positions before, during or after they were required to submit their annual returns.

LEADERS WHO SUBMITTED ANNUAL RETURNS AFTER DEADLINE

5.8	On 3 August 1999, Mr Willie Reuben Abel, former Chairman of the Board of Directors for Vanair admitted not to have filed his annual report before 1 March 1999 as required by the Code. However, after he received a warning letter from the Clerk of Parliament he was able to file his annual returns within the further 14 days time frame that is specified by the Act. However, the Clerk confirmed that his office received Mr Reuben’s form late.

5.9	On 3 August 1999, Pastor Hosea Bani, Member of the Board of Directors for VBTC made a statement that, during the month of February 1999, he had been away from Port Vila touring the southern and northern parts of the country as the Chairman of the Vanuatu Christian Council. On his return to Port Vila on 15 March 1999, he received the warning letter from the Clerk of Parliament and was able to submit his annual return on 16 March 1999. The Clerk confirmed to have received Pastor Bani’s form late.

5.10	On 5 August 1999, Mr Shem Noukaut, Member of the Board of Directors for Vanair stated that he had not submitted his annual return before 1 March 1999. However after he received the warning letter from the Clerk of Parliament, he was able to file his annual returns within the further 14 days time frame that was specified by the Act. The Clerk confirmed that his office received Mr Nokout’s form late.

5.11	On 6 August 1999, Mr Saniel Popovi, Member of Board of Directors for Vanair stated that he has submitted his annual return form. However, the Clerk confirmed that he had received Mr Popovi’s form late.

5.12	On 9 August 1999, the Member of Parliament, Mr Barnabas Wilson confirmed receiving the notice sent by the Clerk of Parliament. He came to Port Vila from his Constituency (TORBA Province) to file his annual returns with the Clerk of Parliament. Whilst in Vila, he filed his annual returns through the secretaries of the Clerk of Parliament. The secretaries had already made him aware of the fact that he was late in submitting his annual return. The Clerk confirmed that he received MP Wilson’s form late.

5.13	On 9 August 1999, the Councillor of Luganville Municipality, Mr Ham Japheth informed us that he had already submitted his annual return to the Clerk even before the due date. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Japhet’s annual return form late.

5.14	On 9 August 1999, the Councillor of Luganville Municipality, Mr Sam Mailen stated that he had already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament. He said that he believed that he had made his submission before the deadline. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Mailen’s form late.

5.15	On 10 August 1999, Mr Wilson Tarimute, Youth Nominated Member of Penama Province stated that he had already submitted his annual return. He said that he had filled up the form and had given it to the Secretary of the Council to send to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Tarimure’s annual return form late.

5.16	On 11 August 1999, the Member of Parliament for Malekula Constituency, Mr Josiah Merifar informed the Ombudsman that bad weather had made it hard for him to promptly collect the forms for the Annual Return sent to him by the Clerk of Parliament. The bad weather in Malekula at that time had caused rivers to flood and had disturbed the road communication. He claimed that he never received the warning letter. He received his Annual Return Form only on 12 May 1999. The Clerk confirmed to have received Mr. Merifar’s form late.

5.17	On 12 August 1999, Mrs Dorosday D Kenneth, Member of the Electoral Commission stated that she had attended an official meeting in Rome, Italy from 13 February to 17 March 1999. Due to this overseas trip, she did not file any annual return with the Clerk of Parliament. However, the Clerk confirmed receiving a copy of an annual return form from Ms Kenneth after the dates specified by the Act.

5.18	On 13 August 1999, The Councillor of Luganville Municipality, Mr Sam Toa stated that he had submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament in June 1999. However, the Clerk confirmed that his office received Mr Toa’s form later after the dates required by the Act.

5.19	On 13 August 1999, Mrs Marisan Nalo, Member of the Police Service Commission stated that she had submitted her annual return on 19 March 1999 to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed receiving the forms after the dates specified in the Act.

5.20	On 18 August 1999, Mr Dickinson Vusi, Councillor, Penama Province and also Member of the Board of Directors for Vanair stated that, he had already submitted his annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. However, he claimed that after he submitted the document, he received a warning letter from the Clerk again for not submitted his annual returns. He then filled in another form and sent it to the Attorney General’s Chambers copied to the Clerk. The Clerk confirmed that his form arrived after the due dates.

5.21	On 19 August 1999, the Councillor of Shefa Province, Mr Valia Jenery stated that he had completed his annual return form as soon as he received it from the Clerk of Parliament and it was supposed to have been mailed by the Postman on Emae. However, the airport on Emae was then closed by the Civil Aviation Department. The mail was later sent on a ship. Mr Jenery said that this might be the reason his annual return was received late by the Clerk of Parliament.

5.22	On 23 August 1999, Me Kensi Obediah, President of Malampa Province stated that he had never received an Annual Return form from the Clerk of Parliament. Mr Obediah said that he had been made aware of his obligation only when he came to Port Vila in March 1999 and was advised by a Member of Parliament (whose name Mr. Obediah did not give) that, as a leader, he needed to file an Annual Return. He then filed the document by 14 March 1999. He pointed out that isolation of certain rural areas is the key factor in many of the leaders having received such important documents very late.

5.23	On 24 August 1999, Councillor of Penama Province, Mr Augustine Tabak, stated that he had already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament in March 1999 after he received the notice. However, the Clerk confirmed that he had received the form after the due dates specified by the Act.

5.24	On 24 August 1999, Councillor of Penama Province, Mr Lino Watas stated that he had submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament in March 1999 after receiving a warning letter from him. The Clerk confirmed receiving the annual return form late.

5.25	On 27 August 1999, the Councillor of Tafea Province, Mr Pierre Kaka stated that he received his annual return form late. Due to this, he had filed his annual return late. The Clerk confirmed this to the Ombudsman.

5.26	On 2 September 1999, Mr Martin Maltock, Councillor of Malampa Province stated that he had received his form from the Clerk late. Due to this, he submitted his annual returns late. He suggested that such forms should be sent 2 or 3 months in advance for leaders to receive them in time. The Clerk confirmed this to the Ombudsman.

5.27	On 2 September 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr William Sarisets said he had received his form late. This then had caused him to submit his annual return very late to the Clerk of Parliament.

5.28	On 3 September 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr John Steven stated that he had filed his annual return with the Clerk of Parliament late. The Clerk confirmed this to the Ombudsman.

5.29	On September 1999, Mr Edgar Howard, Chief & Youth-nominated Member of Torba Province, made a phone call to the Ombudsman to ask for advice on Annual Returns, after he had received our letter notifying him of his obligation under the law to file his annual returns. He then filed his annual returns but it was late. The Clerk confirmed to have received this annual return late.

5.30	On 9 September 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr Douglas Fatdal responded that he had received his annual return form late. Mr Fatdal said that due to this he had been late to file his annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. Mr Fatdal did not indicate the date he had received the notice from the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk confirmed that his office had received Mr. Fatdal’s form late.

5.31	On 14 September 1999, Mr Shadrach Sali, Church-nominated Member of Penama Province stated that he had received his annual return form late from the Clerk. Mr Sali said that this was the reason his submission of the annual return had been late. The Clerk confirmed receiving Mr. Sali’s annual return late.

5.32	On 6 October 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr Vurvur Andrew stated that he had never received his annual return form from the Clerk of Parliament, nor had he received any warning letter from him. Because of these reasons, he had not filed any annual return to the Clerk of Parliament. However, the Clerk confirmed to have received an annual form late from Mr Andrew.

5.33	On 10 September 1999, Mr Stevens Bong Kakae, Chief-nominated Member of Malampa Province confirmed receiving the forms very late. He also confirmed that he filed his annual returns very late to the Clerk. The Clerk confirmed receiving Mr Kakae’s form late Mr Kakae claimed that mailing system to North Ambrym is very hard due to transport problems.

5.34	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Klesen Remkonkon, a Councillor of Malampa Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Remkonkon’s annual return form late.

5.35	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Kerby Norman, a Councillor of Malampa Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Norman’s annual return form late.

5.36	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Sikias Simeon, a Councillor of Malampa Province. The Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Simeon’s annual return form late.

5.37	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Peter Isno, a Councillor of Malampa Province. The Clerk confirmed that Mr Isno had submitted his annual return form late to his office. The form did not arrive by the due dates specified by the Act.

5.38	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Kalsi Kalowon, a Councillor of Malampa Province. The Clerk confirmed to have received his annual return form after the dates specified in the Act.

5.39	We received no response to our enquiry from Daniel Bue, a Councillor of Malampa Province. However, we received information from the Clerk that Mr Bue had filed his annual return form late to his Office.

5.40	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Selwyn Ron Leo, a Councillor of Penama Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that Mr Leo had submitted his annual returns late.

5.41	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Remy Tevigogon, a Councillor of Penama Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that his office received Mr Tevigogon’s annual return form late.

5.42	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr John Terry, a Councillor of Penama Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Terry’s form after the required dates specified by the Act.

5.43	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Gaetano Bulewak, a Councillor of Penama Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that Mr Bulewak submitted his annual return forms late.

5.44	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Philip Shing, a Councillor of Tafea Province. However, the Clerk confirmed that he had received Mr Shing’s form after the required dates specified by the Act.

5.45	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Roy Bongelan, a Councillor & Mayor of Luganville Municipality. However, the Clerk confirmed that the Lord Mayor, Mr Bongelan had submitted his form late.

5.46	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Pechou Meltetamat, former First Political Adviser in the Ministry of Lands. However, the Clerk confirmed his receipt of Mr Meltetamat’s form late.

5.47	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Alfred Wilson, a former Member of the board of Directors for Vanair. However, the Clerk confirmed his receipt of Mr Wilson’s form late.

5.48	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr John H Dickinson, a former Member of the Board of Directors for Vanair. However, the Clerk confirmed his receipt of 
Mr Dickinson’s form late.

5.49	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Charlie Pakoa, a former Member of the Board of Directors for Vanair. However, the Clerk confirmed his receipt of 
Mr Pakoa’s form late.

5.50	We did not receive a response to our enquiry from Mr Holi Simon, Deputy Commissioner of Police. However, the Clerk confirmed his receipt of Mr Simon’s form late.

LEADERS WHO RESIGNED FROM THEIR OFFICIAL POSITIONS BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO FILE ANY ANNUAL RETURNS

5.51	On 27 July 1999, Bishop Michel Visi, Member of the Board of Directors for Vanuatu Broadcasting & Television Corporation stated that he had resigned from the Board after he received a Notice from the Clerk to submit his annual returns. His resignation was accepted by the General Manager of VBTC, Mr Jonas Cullwick on 07/05/99. He stated that his resignation had made him not obliged to file any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament.

5.52	Mr John Atkin Aruhuri was the Chairman of the Board of Directors for the National Bank of Vanuatu (NBV) and a member of the Chamber of Commerce (representing NBV). On 27 July 1999, we received information from the Managing Director of NBV, Mr K R McArthur, that Mr Aruhuri had resigned from the NBV with effect when he resigned from the Chamber of Commerce. Neither Mr Aruhuri nor Mr McArthur provided proof of the Mr Aruhuri’s resignation or the date on which it purportedly took effect. However, we received information that when all the Board Members of the Chambers of Commerce received Notices from the Clerk of Parliament to file their annual returns, they all resigned on 1 March 1999 in order to avoid having to expose their personal assets. Mr Aruhuri was included.

5.3	On 2 August 1999, Mr Ken Harris, Member of the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce made a statement that he is not a member of the Board of Chamber of Commerce. He was in fact supposed to have inherited the position from his predecessor, Mr Bill Vincent, but he never had, due to other commitments. He claimed that he never signed any document to have been appointed as a member of the Board of Chamber of Commerce. If however, he was deemed to be a Board Member, he resigned as a member of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce in February 1999 along with the other members.

5.54	On 4 August 1999, Mr Joseph Jacobe, Chairman of the Board of Directors for Chamber of Commerce stated that all members of this Board have resigned in February because they had refused to submit their annual returns. Their resignation letters were sent to the Clerk of Parliament.

5.55	On 4 August 1999, Mr Harold Qualao, Member of the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce stated that he along with the other Board members had to resign after they were asked to file their annual returns. He advised that their resignations had been recorded in the minutes of the Board meeting.

5.56	On 4 August 1999, Mr Henry Ouchida Member of the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce stated that he had resigned from the Board along with the other members on 28 February 1999 when they were asked to file their annual return. He said that the Chairman of the Board had written on their behalf to the Clerk of Parliament to inform him that they were resigning from the Board.

5.57	On 9 August 1999, Mr Marc Paris, Member of Board of Directors for Chamber of Commerce stated that he had been overseas from 31 January to 11 March 1999 and he had left all responsibility with his colleagues in the Board. During this time, they were asked to file their annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament and he along with his other colleagues resigned from the Board because they refuse to do so.

5.58	On 10 August 1999, Mr Bill Bani, Member of the Board of Directors for Asset Management Unit stated that he had resigned from the Board on 19 February 1999. After he received the warning letter from the Clerk of Parliament, he wrote to the Clerk on 26 February 1999 to inform him that he was no longer a member of the Board.

5.59	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Jimmy Moli, a Member of the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce. All Board Members of the Chambers of Commerce resigned from their positions on February 1999 because they had refused to submit their annual returns. Their resignation letters were sent to the Clerk of Parliament. Mr Moli was included.

5.60	We received no response to our enquiry from Mr Rene Ah Pow, Member of the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce & Air Vanuatu. All Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce resigned from their positions in February 199 because they had refused to submit their annual returns. Their resignation letters were sent to the Clerk of Parliament. Mr Ah Pow was included.

LEADERS WHO FAILED TO SUBMIT ANY ANNUAL RETURNS

5.61	On 29 July 1999, the Councillor of Port Vila Municipality, Mr Allan Tugen confirmed that he had not submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament after he received the Notice. He gave his reasons that he ahs no assets or liabilities to declare. He said that he only receives his income from his salary each month as a Councillor of Port Vila Municipality.

5.62	On 2 August 1999, the Councillor of Tafea Province, Mr Tom Niavia stated that he had already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament, but he could not remember the date on which he submitted his annual return.

5.63	On 6 August 1999, the Councillor of Shefa Province, Mr Willie Kalo stated that he had received his annual return form late, therefore he submitted it late. It had never been his intention to submit his annual return late. However, Mr Kalo was not included in on the Clerk’s list of the leaders who have made their submission late.

5.64	On 12 August 1999, Mr John Ridgway, Member of Vanuatu Financial Services Commission stated that he had written to the Clerk of Parliament, on 1 March 1999 and 11 March 1999, concerning the matter. Mr Ridgway said that he had not yet received nay response from the Clerk. He did not indicated if the two documents he had sent to the Clerk. He did not indicated if the two documents he had sent to the Clerk were annual return forms. There is no record that showed that he has filed his annual returns with the Clerk.

5.65	On 11 August 1999, Mr Dudley Aru, Member of Law Council stated that, in his view, he is not a leader by being a member of the Law Council. The Council’s main role is to control and supervise legal practitioners and it does not have the powers to sue or to be sued as other statutory Boards. Due to the above reason, he does not consider himself a leader who has to submit any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament.

5.66	On 13 August 1999, the Councillor of Tafea Province, Mr Willy Iakauto stated that he had not received any annual return form or any warning letter from the Clerk of Parliament. This is the reason why he has not submitted his annual return.

5.67	On 19 August 1999, Mrs Naomi Malau, women-nominated Member of Malampa Province, stated that after receiving her annual return form late from the Clerk of Parliament, she submitted it on 9 March 1999. However, Mrs Malau’s name was not included in the Clerk’s list of leaders who had made their submissions late.

5.68	On 26 August 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr Pierre Rory stated that he had never received his annual return form from the Clerk of Parliament. However, Mr Rory’s name was not included in the Clerk’s list of the leaders who had made their submissions late.

5.69	On 20 September 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr Atis Sewere stated that he had never received an annual return from the Clerk of Parliament. However, Mr Sewere’s name was not included in the Clerk’s list of the leasers who had made their submissions late.

5.70	On 20 September 1999, Councillor of Malampa Province, Mr Jean Pierre Etienne stated that he had been late in submitting his annual return because he did not receive his annual return form until it was very late. The Councillor also requested that any such important mail or document sent to leaders in the rural areas should be sent 3 months in advance to give them enough time to be prompt in their response. However, Mr Etiene’s name was not included in the Clerk’s list of the leaders who had made their submissions late.

5.71	On 13 October 1999, Mr Roy Morsen, Chief-nominated Member of Malampa Province stated that he never received an annual return form from the Clerk of Parliament. It was not clear to him which document he had to submit to the Clerk. This may be the reason why he never submitted any annual returns.

5.72	Mr Alick Massing, a Councillor of Malampa Province, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Masing.

5.73	Mr August Donald, a Councillor of Malampa Province, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Donald.

5.74	Mr Jean Claude Tambe, a Councillor of Malampa Province, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Tambe.

5.75	Mr Tenkon Vincent, a Councillor of Malampa Province, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Vincent.

5.76	Mrs Alexandra Mermer, a Women Nominated Member of the Malampa Provincial Council, did not confirm whether she had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether she had ever received the document from Mrs Mermer.

5.77	Mrs Rossie Patterson, a Women-nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Council did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mrs Patterson.

5.78	Mr Vaty Frederick, a Youth-nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Council, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Frederick.

5.79	Mr Jeremy Batick, a Church-nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Council, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Donald.

5.80	Mr Kalo Nial, former Managing Director of South Pacific Fishing Company and the former First Political Adviser in the Ministry of Agriculture, made no confirmation to our inquiry whether he had ever submitted his annual returns to the Clerk. The Clerk also did not confirm if he had ever received the document from Mr Nial.

5.81	Mr Bob Kuao, Second Political Adviser in the Ministry of Health, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Kuao.

5.82	Mr Toco Mara, a Member of the Board of Directors for Reserve Bank of Vanuatu, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had received the document from Mr Mara.

5.83	Mr François Theuil, former Managing Director of Vanuatu Livestock Development Limited, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Theuil.

5.84	Mr Charley Nango, a Member of the Police Service Commission, did not confirm whether he had submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk also did not confirm whether he had ever received the document from Mr Nango.

LEADERS WHO NO LONGER HELD LEADERSHIP POSITIONS WHEN ANNUAL RETURNS WERE DUE FOR SUBMISSION

5.85	On 29 July 1999, Mr Gilles Bourdet, former Member of the Board of Directors for National Tourism Office (NTO) stated that he had ceased to be a member of the Board since November 1998. The present General Manager of Vanair has replaced him as Vanair’s representative on the Board. Mr Bourdet said that he had not received any notice or warning letter from the Clerk so he had not been aware of any obligation to file his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament. As he is no longer a member of the Board, he does not consider himself a leader. This was confirmed by the NTO Office.

5.86	On 4 August 1999, we received information from the secretary of the Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board (VCMB), that Mr Aisen William, Mr Sei Iercet, Mr Misael Tari and Mr Staki John were no longer members of the Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board. They were terminated on 22 January 1999.

5.87	On 9 August 1999, Mr Russon Seth, Clerk for Luganville Municipality stated that he had been terminated from the Council in late February 1999. Due to this reason, he believed that he was no longer a leader required to file an annual return.

5.88	On 6 September 1999, Mrs Estell Gihiala, Women-nominated member of Penama Province stated that when she received her annual return form from the Clerk of Parliament, she had already been terminated as Women Representative in the Penama Provincial Council. She is no longer a leader.

6.	RESPONSES BY THOSE WITH COMPLAINTS AGAINST THEM

6.1	A preliminary report on this matter was issued on 30 November 1999 in accordance with Article 62 (4) of the Constitution and section 116 (4) of the Ombudsman Act, which require that the person or body complained of be given an opportunity to response to the complaints made against them.

6.2	RESPONSE FROM MR VALIA JENERY

Mr. Valia Jenery, Councillor of Shefa Province Government, claimed that he had not received his notice from the Clerk until he came to Port Vila for the Council’s seating in May 1999. He also emphasised that he had submitted his annual return form by mail but the Area Secretary on Emae, responsible for all in coming and out going mail, had failed to send it to the Clerk of Parliament within the specified period. He also claimed that due to the communication problems to Emae, important documents like this cannot always reach them on time (Emae Airport was closed when Mr Jenery wad due to send his document to the Clerk).

6.3	RESPONSE FROM HONOURABLE WILSON BARNABAS

Hon. Barnabas, MP for Banks Torres, claimed that he had received his annual returns form late after 1 March 1999. This is the reason he submitted his annual return after the deadline. When he handed the form to the Clerk’s secretary, he was made aware that he was late in submitting his annual returns. He stated that it was not his intention to breach of the Leadership Code as alleged. Certain circumstances had prevented him from complying with the provisions of the Code.

6.4	RESPONSE FROM MR CHARLEY NANGO

Mr Nango, Member of the Police Service Commission, advised that he had never received any Notice from the Clerk of Parliament to file his annual returns. This is the reason why he never submitted any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament.

6.5	RESPONSE FROM MR CHARLES BICE

Mr Bice, Chairman of the Electoral Services Commission, advised that he is not of the opinion that Mrs Dorosday Kenneth, Member of the Electoral Commission, has breached the Leadership Code, for submitting her annual returns late. Mr Bice advised when the Clerk issued Notices to Mrs Kenneth, she was absent from the country representing this country in an official meeting. Due to her absence, she was unable to submit any annual return by the specified dates.

6.6	RESPONSE FROM ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE VINCENT LUNABEK

Acting Chief Justice Lunabek, Chairman of the Law Council, wanted to advise that as the member of the Law Council, Mr Dudley Aru would be in a better position to answer to the allegation made against him. Mr Aru has an obligation to comply with the law and Acting Chief Justice Lubabek said that does not know why Mr Aru had not submitted an annual return.

6.7	RESPONSE FROM MR JOE NIRUA

The Secretary General for the Tafea Provincial Government advised that Councillor 
Mr Tom Niavia, was one of the first people to submit his annual return. They submitted their forms at the same time. He questioned why the Office of the Clerk of Parliament had received his form and not Mr Niavia’s form. He advised that Councillors Pierre Kaka, Philip Shing and Willy Iaukato were late in submitting their annual return. They had received notices to submit their annual returns late. Mr Nirua also advised that the documents for the above persons were sent through the Provincial Headquarters to the Clerk of Parliament.

6.8	RESPONSE FROM MR PIERRE KAKA

Mr Kaka, Councillor of Tafea Provincial Government, advised that he lives far away from the Provincial Headquarters on Tanna Island. He received the notice from the Clerk of Parliament late. However, he was still able to submit his annual return even though it was late.

6.9	RESPONSE FROM MR JEAN CLAUDE TAMBE

Mr Tambe, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he is a francophone but he received his annual return form in English. Because it was in English, he did not understand how to fill in the document. He advised that next time, all relevant documents that are sent should be in a language that the person understands and speaks. Since annual return is a new thing to the Councillors, the Clerk of Parliament should issue appropriate information about the annual returns. This information should be made available to the Secretary General of the Province so that he could advise the Councillors.

6.10	RESPONSE FROM MR MARTIN MALTOCK

Mr Maltock, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he had submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament but it was late. He had received the Notice sent by the Clerk late. He lives far away from the Provincial Headquarters where the notices for annual return forms had been sent. He advised that it would be proper if the notices are sent two or three months in advance.

6.11	RESPONSE FROM MR ALFRED WILSON

Mr Wilson, Member of Vanair Board of Directors, advised that his annual return had been submitted by the Chairman of the Vanair Board, Mr Willie Reuben Abel on his behalf to the Attorney General’s Chambers. Mr Wilson lives far away in Vanualave. The Chairman of the Board had written a letter to explain why the member was late in submitting his annual return.

6.12	RESPONSE FROM MR WILLIAM SARISETS

Mr Sarisets, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he had already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament.

6.13	RESPONSE FROM MR TENKONE VINCENT

Mr Tenkone, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he had already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament.

6.14	RESPONSE FROM MR DUDLEY ARU

Mr Aru further advised that as a Partner in the Motis Pacific Lawyers, he cannot provide information on his the annual return. He stated that information about shares held in companies and directorship in the legal firm are protected by confidentially accorded to certain companies who are protected by the provisions of the Companies Act [CAP 191] and the International Companies Act No. 32 of 1992.

6.15	RESPONSE FROM MR KENSI OBEDIAH

Mr Obediah, President and Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he had never received a Notice that was supposedly sent by the Clerk of Parliament to him. When he was called to Vila for official duties, he was advised by the MP for Malekula Honourable Simon Esom that he had to file his annual return. Mr Obediah was able to fill in an annual return form and submit it in to the Clerk. However, the Clerk’s Secretary had advised that the submission was late.

6.16	RESPONSE FROM JOHN STEVEN

Mr Steven, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he had files his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament but the confirmed that it was late. He has also advised that the Clerk of Parliament should sent the annual return forms two or three months in advance. A service message should also be sent to inform the Councillors that the document has been sent so they can go and collect it from the Provincial Headquarters.

6.17	RESPONSE FROM MR JEAN PIERRE ETIENNE

Mr Etienne, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he has submitted his annual returns and he confirmed that his submission was late because he had received his Notice late from the Clerk of Parliament.

6.18	RESPONSE FROM MR ROY BONGELAN

Mr Bongelan, Councillor and Lord Mayor of the Municipality of Luganville, advised that he had filled in an annual return form. The Town Clerk of the Municipality should have sent the documents to the Clerk of Parliament.

6.19	RESPONSE FROM MR RORY PIERRE

Mr Pierre, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that the Notice sent by the Clerk of Parliament was received late. He was still able to submit his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament even though it was late.

6.20	RESPONSE FROM DOROSDAY D. KENNETH

Mrs Kenneth, Member of Electoral Services Commission, advised that she was overseas at the time that the Clerk of Parliament sent out the Notices of annual returns. She did not return to the country until after the deadline that was given by the Clerk for the submission of the document. On her return to the country in mid-March, she went to see the Clerk to discuss the matter. The Clerk had advised her to fill in the form and submit it. She was able to do this even though it was late.

6.21	RESPONSE FROM MR ALLAN TUNGON

Mr Tungon, Councillor of the Municipality of Port Vila, advised that his annual return form was filled in for him by someone at the Municipal offices with him supplying the appropriate information. The annual return form sent to him was in English and he is a francophone. He did not understand it. He was able to sign the document and it was delivered to the Clerk of Parliament by the Secretary of the Municipal with all the other Councillors’ return forms.

6.22	RESPONSE FROM THE MUNICIPALITY OF PORT VILA

The Port Vila Municipality’s lawyer, advised on behalf of all the Municipal Councillors that all Councillors, including Mr Tungon had submitted their annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament Secretariat. The Clerk himself and another officer, Madeline Tom, received the documents at that time. The Municipal Secretary who was responsible for delivering the returns to the Clerk has confirmed that Mr Allan Toungen’s annual return was also filed at that time.

6.23	RESPONSE FROM PASTOR HOSEA BANI

Pastor Hosea Bani advised that he was already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament but it was late. He was able to provide us a copy of his annual return form, which was filled in and filed on 16 March 1999. He advised that the copy of this form had been obtained from a file at the Parliament Chambers where annual returns that were submitted late are kept.

6.24	RESPONSE FROM BISHOP MICHEL VISI

Bishop Visi advised that is membership on the Board of the VBTC does not mean that he is a leader. He had always been a leader within the Catholic Church. Being a member of the BVTC Board was a contribution that he made as a leader of the Catholic Church and he does not consider himself a leader by being a member of the Board. Prior to this, he had not been receiving any salary or any kind of payment from the Vanuatu Government therefore he does not feel obliged to declare any of his assets or liabilities.

6.25	RESPONSE FROM MR SIKIAS SIMEON

Mr Simeon, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, advised that he had received his Notice late from the Clerk of Parliament. However, he was still able to submit his annual return even though it was late. He lives very far from the Provincial Headquarters where all his documents had been sent.

6.26	RESPONSE FROM MR VUREVUR ANDREW

Mr Andrew, Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government advised that he has already submitted his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament. However, his submission was late because he had received the Notice that the Clerk sent late.

6.27	RESPONSE FROM MR WILLIE IAUKATO

Mr Iaukato, Councillor of Tanna Provincial Government, advised that he had received his Notice late from the Clerk of Parliament. Due to this reason, his submission of annual return was also late.

6.28	RESPONSE FROM MR ALICK MASSING

Mr Massing, Councillor of Tafea Provincial Government, advised that he had received his annual return from the Clerk of Parliament sometimes in June 1999. His submission of the annual return was therefore late because he lives on Toman island in Southwest Malekula, which is very far from the Provincial Headquarters. He only goes to the Headquarters, where the annual return form had been sent when there is a Council meeting, which is usually in May and November of each year. His annual return form should be sent directly to the Vanair Headquarters in Wintua, Malekula so he can be prompt with his response.

7.	FINDINGS

FINDINGS AGAINST THE LEADERS WHO FILED THEIR ANNUAL RETURNS LATE TO THE CLERK

Finding 1:	MR WILLIE REUBEN ABEL MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.1	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Willie Reuben Abel, as former Chairman of the Board of Directors of Vanair was then a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s28 of the Code to file his annual return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 and/or further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates or in the period specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He may therefore have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Abel may claim to have received the Notice after 1 March and filed the document within the further 14 days warning period. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Mr Abel’s annual return after the prescribed period. The Code clearly specified that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Abel has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 2:	PASTOR HOSEA BANI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.2	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Pastor Hosea Bani, as former member of the Board of Directors of VBTC, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his returns to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Pastor Bani may have breached the Leadership Code.

Pastor Bani’s claim to have been away from his usual place of residence and address where the Notice was sent would be held as a defence against this allegation. However, the Clerk confirmed that he received Pastor Bani’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his annual return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Pastor Bani has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 3:	MR SHEM NOUKAUT MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.3	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Shem Noukaut, as former member of the Board of Directors of Vanair, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his returns to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) and s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Noukaut may therefore have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Noukaut may claim to have received the Notice after 1 March and filed in the document within the further 14 days warning period. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. However, the Clerk confirmed that he had received Mr Noukaut’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code had no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Noukaut has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 4:	MR SANIEL POPOVI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.4	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Saniel Popovi, as former member of Board of Directors of Vanair, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Popovi may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Popovi may claim to have received the Notice after 1 March and filed in the document within the further 14 days warning period. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. However, the Clerk, confirmed that he received Mr Popovi’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Popovi has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 5:	MR BARNABAS WILSON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.5	Article 67 of the Constitution established Mr Barnabas Wilson, Member of Parliament for Banks & Torres Constituency, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Leadership Code to file his return to the Clerk of parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Wilson may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Wilson may claim that he was not at the place of his address when the Notice was sent to him. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk however, confirmed that he had received Mr Wilson’s annual return after the above date and/or period. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code had no provision to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Wilson has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 6:	MR HAM JAPHETH MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.6	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Ham Japheth, as a Councillor of Luganville Municipality, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates and/or period hereby specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Therefore Mr Japheth may have breached the Code.

Mr Japheth may claim that he had submitted his annual returns before the due date. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received MR Japheth’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code had no provision for a leader to submit his annual after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Japheth has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 7:	MR SAM MAILEN MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.7	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Sam Mailen, as a Councillor of Luganville Municipality, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Therefore, Mr Mailen may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Mailen may claim that he had submitted his annual returns before the due date 
Mr Mailen may have to justify his claim. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Mailen’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Mailen has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 8:	MR WILSON TARIMURE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.8	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Tarimure, as a Youth Nominated Member for Penama Province, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Tarimure may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Tarimure may claim that he had submitted his annual returns before the due dates. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Tarimure’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Tarimure has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 9:	NR JOSIAH MERIFAR MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.9	Article 67 of the Constitution established Mr Josiah Merifar, Member of Parliament for Malekula Constituency, as a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 march 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Merifar may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Merifar may claim that he had submitted his annual returns late because he received it late due to natural disaster that prevented him during that exact period to reach the Post Office to collect his form. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Merifar’s annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Merifar has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 10:	MS DOROSDAY KENNETH MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.10	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Ms Dorosday Kenneth, as a Member of the Electoral Commission is a leader. As such, she had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file her return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. She failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file her annual return by the required dates by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Therefore Ms Kenneth may have breached the Leadership Code.

Ms Kenneth’s claim to have been away from her usual place of residence and address where the Notice was sent would be a defence against this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Ms Kenneth’s annual returns after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Ms Kenneth has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 11:	MR SAM TOA MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.11	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Sam Toa, as a Councillor of Luganville Municipality, is a leader. As such, he had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Toa may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Toa may claim that he had submitted his annual returns late because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Toa’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Toa has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 12:	MRS MARISAN NALO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.12	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mrs Marisan Nalo, as a member of the Police Service Commission is a leader. She had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file her return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. She failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file her annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mrs Nalo may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mrs Nalo may claim that she submitted her annual returns late because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mrs Nalo’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mrs Nalo has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 13:	MR DICKINSON VUSI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.13	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Dickinson Vusi, as a former member of the Board of Directors of Vanair and Councillor of Penama Provincial Government was and is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Vusi may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Vusi may claim that he submitted his annual returns late because he received the document late, and/or he submitted it within the further 14 days period. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Vusi’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Vusi has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 14:	MR VALIA JENERY MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.14	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Valia Jenery, as a member of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Jenery may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Jenery may claim that he submitted his annual returns late because he received the document late, and/or he submitted it within the further 14 days period. Also, he may claim that due to transport problems to his island, his form arrived late. Such opinion may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Jenery’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Jenery has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 15:	MR KENSI OBEDIAH MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.15	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Kensi Obediah, as a member and President of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Obediah may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Obediah may claim that he submitted his annual returns late because he received the document late, or that he was not been made aware of this responsibility. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Obediah’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Obediah has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 16:	MR AUGUSTINE TABAK MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.16	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Augustine Tabak, as a councillor of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the requested dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Tabak may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Tabak may claim that he submitted his annual returns late because he received the document late. Also he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used in a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Tabak’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Tabak has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 17:	MR LINO WATAS MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.17	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Lino Watas, as a councillor of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Watas may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Watas may claim that he submitted his annual returns late because he received the document late and/or he files his annual returns within the required period. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Wata’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Watas has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 18:	MR PIERRE KAKA MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.18	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Pierre Kaka, as a councillor of Tafea Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Kaka may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Kaka may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such opinion may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Kaka’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Watas has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 19:	MR MARTIN MALTOK MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP

7.19	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Martin Maltok, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Maltok may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Maltok may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such opinion may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Maltok’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Maltok has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 20:	MR WILLIAM SARISETS MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP

5.20	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr William Sarisets, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Sarisets may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Sarisets may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such opinion may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Sariset’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Sarisets has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 21:	MR JOHN STEVEN MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.21	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr John Steven, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Steven may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Steven may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such opinion may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Steven’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Steven has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 22:	MR EDGAR HOWARD MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.22	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Edgar Howard, as a chief and youth-nominated member of Torba Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Howard may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Howard may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his village, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Howard’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Howard has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 23:	MR DOUGLAS FATDAL MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.23	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Douglas Fatdal, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Fatdal may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Fatdal may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Fatdal’s annual return after the specified dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Fatdal has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 24:	MR SHADRACH SALI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.24	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Shadrac Sali, as a church nominated member of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Sali may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Sali may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Sali’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Sali has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 25:	MR ANDREW VURVUR MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.25	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Andrew Vurvur, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Vurvur may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Vurvur may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Vurvur’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Vurvur has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 26:	MR STEVEN BONG KAKAE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.26	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Steven Bong Kakae, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Kakae may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Kakae may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Kakae’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Kakae has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 27:	MR KLESEN REMKONKON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.27	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Klesen Remkonkon, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Klesen may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Remkonkon may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received 
Mr Remkonkon’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Remkonkon has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 28:	MR KERBY NORMAN MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.28	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Kerby Norman, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Norman may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Norman may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Norman’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Norman has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 29:	MR SIKIAS SIMEON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.29	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Sikias Simeon, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Simeon may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Simeon may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Simeon’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Simeon has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 30:	MR PETER ISNO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.30	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Peter Isno, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Isno may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Isno may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Isno’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Isno has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 31:	MR KALSI KALOWAN MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.31	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Kalsi Kalowan, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Kalowan may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Kalowan may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Kalowan’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Kalowan has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 32:	MR DANIEL BUE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.32	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Daniel Bue, as a councillor of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Bue may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Bue may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Kalowan’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Kalowan has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 33:	MR SELWYN RON LEO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.33	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Selwyn Ron Leo, as a councillor of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Leo may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Leo may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Leo’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Leo has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 34:	MR REMY TEVIGOGON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.34	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Remy Tevigogon, as a councillor of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Tevigogon may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Tevigogon may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received 
Mr Tevigogon’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Tevigogon has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 35:	MR JOHN TERRY MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.35	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr John Terry, as a councillor of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Tevigogon may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Terry may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Terry’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Terry has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 36:	MR GAETANO BULEWAK MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.36	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Gaetano Bulewak, as a councillor of Penama Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Bulewak may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Belewak may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Bulewak’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Bulewak has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 37:	MR PHILIP SHING MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.37	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Philip Shing, as a councillor of Tafea Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Shing may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Shing may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that due to rural isolation of his community, transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Shing’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Shing has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 38:	MR ROY BONGELAN MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.38	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Roy Bongelan, as a Lord Mayor of Luganville Municipality is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Bongelan may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Bongelan may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Also, he may claim that transport and communication problems had made it hard for him to receive his form and submit it to the Clerk in time. Such claims may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Bongelan’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Bongelan has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 39:	MR PECHOU MELTETAMAT MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.39	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Pechou Meltetamat, as a former political advisor in the Ministry of Lands is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Meltetamat may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Meltetamat may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Meltetamat’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Meltetamat has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 40:	MR ALFRED WILSON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.40	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Alfred Wilson, as a former member of the Board of Directors of Vanair is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Wilson may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Wilson may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Wilson’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Wilson has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 41:	MR JOHN DICKINSON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.41	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr John Dickinson, as a former member of the Board of Directors of Vanair is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Dickinson may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Dickinson may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Dickinson’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Dickinson has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 42:	MR CHARLIE PAKOA MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.42	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Charlie Pakoa, as a former member of the Board of Directors of Vanair is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Pakoa may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Pakoa may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Pakoa’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Pakoa has breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 43:	MR HOLI SIMON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.43	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Holi Simon, Deputy Police Commissioner is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual return by the required dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s. 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Simon may have breached the Leadership Code.

Mr Simon may claim that he filed his annual returns after the required period because he received the document late. Such a claim may be used as a defence to this allegation. The Clerk, however, confirmed that he received Mr Simon’s annual return after the above dates. The Code clearly specifies that the annual returns must 'be given to the Clerk by 1 March or within a further 14 days'. The Code has no provision for a leader to submit his return after the further 14 days. It is therefore the opinion of the Ombudsman that Mr Simon has breached the Leadership Code.

LEADERS WHO RESIGNED FROM THEIR POSITIONS BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO FILE ANY ANNUAL RETURNS

Finding 44:	BISHOP MICHEL VISI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.44	Section 5(f) of the Leadership Code establishes that Bishop Visi was a leader because he was a member of the Board of VBTC at that time of the allegation. Section 50 of the Act specifies that in order for a leader to be bound to an obligation of the Leadership Code, it is sufficient to show that a person was a leader when the leadership obligation arose. Section 28 of the Act gave Bishop Visi a duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code to file his annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999. It therefore appears that Bishop Visi’s resignation on or before 07/05/99 would have no effect on his obligation as a leader on 1 March 1999. He failed to comply with s 31 of the Leadership Code at a time when it imposed an obligation on him. Therefore he may have breached the Code.

Finding 45:	MR JOHN ATKIN ARUHURI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE OR HE MAY HAVE RESIGNED HIS POSITION AS A LEADER IN ORDER TO AVOID HAVING TO FILE AN ANNUAL RETURN

7.45	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Aruhuri was f a leader when he was the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National Bank of Vanuatu (NBV) and a member of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu. According to the Managing Director of the NBV, Mr Aruhuri intended to resign as Chairman of NBV Board when he resigned as a member of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce. We obtained no proof of Mr Aruhuri’s resignation from the Board of the NBV.

However, the President of the Chamber of Commerce provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. The members of the Chamber of Commerce disputed the Clerk’s opinion that they had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they described as leaders.

The members of the Chambers of Commerce asked the Clerk for clarification by 1 March 1999 and stated their intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999, citing sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointing out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No. 4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, the President of the Chamber of Commerce continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. The President then informed the Clerk that the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28 February 1999.

Legally, the President’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. The earliest that the President’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, the President’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Aruhuri had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Aruhuri intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

Finding 46:	MR KEN HARRIS MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE 

7.46	Mr Harris acknowledged that he had become a member of the Chamber of Commerce as the hotel representative, because of his predecessor’s involvement with the Chamber of Commerce. Section 5 of the Leadership Code defines a person who holds that position as a leader. From the evidence available, it appears that Mr Harris did not carry out any of the duties associated with his membership in the Chamber of Commerce. Mr Harris explained that he had been unable to participate because of his other commitments. However, there is no evidence that Mr Harris took any steps to resign from the Chamber of Commerce until 1 March 1999. In his response to this Office, Mr Harris stated that, 'I was unable to carry out these duties due to certain commitments, and have accordingly submitted an explanatory letter on the 2 March 1999, with my resignation'.

Section 31 of the Leadership Code imposed an obligation on all leaders to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. That obligation had already arisen before Mr Harris resigned on 1 March 2 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on Mr Harris the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s.31. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 47:	MR JOSEPH JACOBE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE 

7.47	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Jacobe, as President of the Board of Directors of Chamber of Commerce, was a leader. In response to our inquiry, Mr Jacobe provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. In a letter to the Clerk of Parliament, Mr Jacobe disputed the Clerk’s opinion that the members of the Chamber of Commerce had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they were described as leaders.

Mr Jacobe asked the Clerk to respond by 1 March 1999 and stated the members’ intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999, citing sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointing out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No.4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, Mr Jacobe continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. Mr Jacobe then informed the Clerk that 'the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28th February 1999'.

Legally, Mr Jacobe’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. Mr Jacobe could not give legally effective notice of an event that supposedly occurred before the date of his notice. The earliest that Mr Jacobe’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, Mr Jacobe’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members of the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Jacobe had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 march 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Jacobe intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

Finding 48:	MR HAROLD QUALAO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.48	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Qualao, as a member of the Board of Directors of Chamber of Commerce, was a leader. The President of the Chamber of Commerce provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. The members of the Chamber of Commerce disputed the Clerk’s opinion that they had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they were described as leaders.

The members of the Chamber of Commerce asked the Clerk for clarification by 1 March 1999 and stated their intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999. He cited sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No.4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, the President of the Chamber of Commerce continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. The President then informed the Clerk that 'the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28 February 1999'.

Legally, the President’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. The President could not give legally effective notice of an event that supposedly occurred before the date of his notice. The earliest that the President’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, the President’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members of the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Qualao had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Qualao intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

Finding 49:	MR HENRY OUCHIDA MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.49	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Ouchida, as a member of the Board of Directors of Chambers of Commerce, was a leader. The President of the Chamber of Commerce provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. The members of the Chamber of Commerce disputed the Clerk’s opinion that they had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they were described as leaders.

The members of the Chamber of Commerce asked the Clerk for clarification by 1 March 1999 and stated their intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999. He cited sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No. 4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, the President of the Chamber of Commerce continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. The President then informed the Clerk that 'the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28 February 1999'.

Legally, the President’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. The President could not give legally effective notice of an event that supposedly occurred before the date of his notice. The earliest that the President’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, the President’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members of the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Ouchida had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Ouchida intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

Finding 50:	MR JIMMY MOLI MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.50	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Moli, as a member of the Board of Directors of Chamber of Commerce, was a leader. The President of the Chamber of Commerce provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. The members of the Chamber of Commerce disputed the Clerk’s opinion that they had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they were described as leaders.

The members of the Chamber of Commerce asked the Clerk for clarification by 1 March 1999 and stated their intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999. He cited sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No.4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, the President of the Chamber of Commerce continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. The President then informed the Clerk that 'the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28 February 1999'.

Legally, the President’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. The President could not give legally effective notice of an event that supposedly occurred before the date of his notice. The earliest that the President’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, the President’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members of the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Moli had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Moli intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

Finding 51:	MR RENE HA POW MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.51	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Ah Pow, as a member of the Board of Directors of Chamber of Commerce & Air Vanuatu, was a leader. The President of the Chamber of Commerce provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. The members of the Chamber of Commerce disputed the Clerk’s opinion that they had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they were described as leaders.

The members of the Chamber of Commerce asked the Clerk for clarification by 1 March 1999 and stated their intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999. He cited sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No.4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, the President of the Chamber of Commerce continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. The President then informed the Clerk that 'the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28 February 1999'.

Legally, the President’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. The President could not give legally effective notice of an event that supposedly occurred before the date of his notice. The earliest that the President’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, the President’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Ah Pow had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Ah Pow intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

Finding 52:	MR MARC PARIS MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.52	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Marc Paris, as a member of the Board of Directors of Chamber of Commerce, was a leader. Mr Paris was on an overseas tour when his annual returns were due. He indicated that he had left all responsibility with his colleagues in the Board. The President of the Chamber of Commerce provided information that indicated that the members of the Chamber of Commerce discussed the notices that they had received from the Clerk of Parliament. The members of the Chamber of Commerce disputed the Clerk’s opinion that they had to file annual returns and challenged the Clerk to show where they were described as leaders.

The members of the Chamber of Commerce asked the Clerk for clarification by 1 March 1999 and stated their intention to resign if it was confirmed that they had to file annual returns. The Clerk responded on 1 March 1999. He cited sections 4(1) and 5(f) of the Leadership Code and pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce had been established under the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Vanuatu Act, No.4 of 1995.

In a letter dated 1 March 1999, the President of the Chamber of Commerce continued to dispute the Clerk’s opinion. The President then informed the Clerk that 'the Members of the Council of the Port Vila Chamber of Commerce and Industry have accordingly resigned their positions effective from 28 February 1999'.

Legally, the President’s notice of the members’ resignation has no retroactive effect. The President could not give legally effective notice of an event that supposedly occurred before the date of his notice. The earliest that the President’s notice could have had legal effect is the date on which he gave the notice, which was 1 March 1999. No evidence has been produced to show that the members of the Chamber of Commerce actually resigned on 28 February 1999 or at any other time before 1 March 1999. Without such evidence, the President’s notice of the resignations could have legal effect only as of 1 March 1999, by which date the obligation on the members the Chamber of Commerce would already have arisen.

From the evidence that is available, it appears that Mr Paris had the obligation to file an annual return on 1 March 1999. Section 28 of the Code imposed on him the duty, responsibility and obligation to abide by and comply with the provisions of s 31 of the Code. He failed to do so and, therefore, may have breached the Leadership Code. The evidence suggests that Mr Paris intended to resign his position as a leader merely to avoid having to file an annual report.

LEADERS WHO FAILED TO FILE ANY ANNUAL RETURNS TO THE CLERK OF PARLIAMENT

Finding 53:	MR TOM NIAVIA MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.53	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Tom Niavia, as a Councillor of Tafea Provincial Government is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He claimed to have filed the document after he received the warning from the Clerk of Parliament. However, the Office of the Clerk confirmed that it has not received any such document from Mr Niavia. Therefore, Mr Niavia might have breached the Code.

Finding 54:	MR WILLIE KALO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.54	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Willie Kalo, as a Councillor of Shefa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates hereby specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He claimed to have filed the document after he received the warning from the Clerk of Parliament, but the Office of the Clerk confirmed that it has not received any such document from Mr Kalo. Therefore, Mr Kalo might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 55:	MR JOHN RIDGWAY MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.55	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr John Ridgway, as a Member of Vanuatu Financial Services Commission was a leader. As such, he had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim that the Clerk had not responded to his letters cannot be regarded as a defence to the allegation. Even if Mr Ridgway’s claim were true, it would not relieve him of the statutory obligation to file his annual return. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that his office has not received any such document from Mr Ridgway. Therefore, Mr Ridgway might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 56:	MR DUDLEY ARU MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.56	Section 4(1) of the Leadership Code appear to establish that Mr Dudley Aru, as a Member of Law Council is a leader. As such, he had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim that as a member of the Law Council, he is not a leader appears not to relieve him of the obligation to file an annual return. The law council was established by the Legal Practitioners Act, and is therefore a statutory body whose members are required by s 5(f) to file annual returns. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that his office has not received any such document from Mr Aru. Therefore, Mr Aru might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 57:	MR WILLY IAKAUTO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.57	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Willy Iakauto, as a Councillor of Tafea Provincial Government, is a leader. As such, he had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim that he had not received the notice from the Clerk cannot be used as a defence to the allegation of his not complying with a statutory obligation to file an annual return. The Clerk confirmed that his Office had not received any such document from Mr Iakauto. Therefore Mr Iakauto might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 58:	MRS NAOMI MALAU MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.58	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mrs Naomi Nalau, as a as a women-nominated member of Malampa Provincial Government is a leader. She had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. She failed to abide by and comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Her claim that she had submitted the document was denied by the Clerk of Parliament. The Clerk confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his Office had not received any such document from Mrs Malau. Therefore, Mrs Malau might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 59:	MR PIERRE RORY MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.59	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Pierre Rory, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim that he had filed the document after he received the warning notice was denied by the Clerk. The Office of the Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 it had not received any such document from 
Mr Rory. Therefore Mr Rory might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 60:	MR ATIS SEWERE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.60	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Atis Sewere, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim for not receiving the notice sent out by the Clerk to him cannot be held as a defence to the allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office has not received any such document from Mr Sewere. Therefore, Mr Sewere might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 61:	MR JEAN PIERRE ETIENNE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.61	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Jean Pierre Etienne, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim that he had filed the document after he received the notice late was denied by the Clerk. The Office of the Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 it had not received any such document from 
Mr Etienne. He, therefore, might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 62:	MR ROY MORSEN MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.62	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Roy Morsen, as a Chief Nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provision of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. His claim not to have received the notice sent out by the Clerk to him cannot be held as a defence to the allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office has not received any such document from Mr Morsen. Therefore, Mr Morsen might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 63:	MR ALICK MASING MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.63	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Alick Massing, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received any such document from Mr Massing. Therefore Mr Massing might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 64:	MR AUGUST DONALD MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.64	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr August Donald, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received any such document from Mr Donald. Therefore Mr Donald might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 65:	MR JEAN CLAUDE TAMBE MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.65	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Jean Claude Tambe, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received any such document from Mr Tambe. Therefore Mr Tambe might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 66:	MR TENKON VINCENT MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.66	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Tenkon Vincent, as a Councillor of Malampa Provincial Government, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Vincent. Therefore Mr Vincent might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 67:	MRS ALEXANDRA MERMER MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.67	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mrs Alexandra Mermer, as a Women Nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. She had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. She failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. She never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mrs Mermer. Therefore Mrs Mermer might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 68:	MRS ROSSIE PATTERSON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.68	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mrs Rossie Patterson, as a Women Nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Government, was a leader. She had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s. 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. She failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. She never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mrs Patterson. Therefore Mrs Patterson might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 69:	MR VATY FREDERICK MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.69	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Vaty Frederick, as a Youth Nominated Member of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file her return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Frederick. Therefore Mr Frederick might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 70:	MR JEREMY BATICK MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.70	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Jeremy Batick, as a Church Nominated member of Malampa Provincial Government, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Batick. Therefore Mr Batick might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 71:	MR KALO NIAL MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.70	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that MR Kalo Nial, as a former First Political Adviser in the Ministry of Agriculture & former Managing Director of South Pacific Fishing Company, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Nial. Therefore Mr Nial might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 72:	MR BOD KUAO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.70	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Bob Kuao, as Second Political Adviser in the Ministry of Health, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Kuao. Therefore Mr Kuao might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 73:	MR TOCO MARA MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.70	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Toco Mara, as a Member of the Board of Directors for Reserve Bank of Vanuatu, is a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Mara. Therefore Mr Mara might breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 74:	MR FRANÇOIS THEUIL MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.74	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr François Theuil, as former Managing Director of Vanuatu Livestock Development Limited, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Theuil. Therefore Mr Theuil might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 75:	MR CHARLEY NANGO MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.75	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Charley Nango, as a Member of the Police Service Commission, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. He never made a response to our enquiry to this allegation. The Clerk of Parliament confirmed that as of 12 July 1999 his office had not received an annual return from Mr Nango. Therefore Mr Nango might have breached the Leadership Code.

Finding 76:	MR ALLAN TUNGON MAY HAVE BREACHED THE LEADERSHIP CODE

7.76	Section 5 of the Leadership Code establishes that Mr Allan Tungon, as a Councillor of Port Vila Municipality, was a leader. He had a duty, responsibility and obligation under s 28 of the Act to file his return to the Clerk of Parliament by 1 March 1999 or in a further 14 days thereafter. He failed to comply with the provisions of the Code to file his annual returns by the dates specified by s 31(2)(b) & s 33(a) of the Leadership Code. Mr Tungon’s position that he had no assets or liabilities to declare other than his salary as a councillor did not relieve him of his statutory obligation to give to the Clerk of Parliament his annual return with that information. The Clerk confirmed that, as of 12 July 1999, his office had not received an annual return from Mr Tungon. Therefore Mr Tungon might have breached the Leadership Code.

LEADERS WHO WERE NO LONGER HELD THE OFFICIAL POSITIONS WHEN THEIR ANNUAL RETURNS WERE DUE TO BE SUBMITTED

Finding 77:	THESE LEADERS WERE NOT OBLIGED TO FILE ANY ANNUAL RETURNS

7.77	The following leaders were found by the Ombudsman to have vacated the official positions they held and were not obliged to file any annual returns to the Clerk of Parliament when the notices for the annual returns were sent to them by the Clerk. They vacated their positions before 1 March 1999 when their obligation was due. Therefore, the Ombudsman made no findings of the breaches of the Leadership Code against them. They are:

(a)	Mr Gilles Bourdet	Former Member of the Board of Directors of National Tourism Office of the Ombudsman
(b)	Mr Aisen William	Former member of the Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board
(c)	Mr Sei Iercet	Former member of the Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board
(d)	Mr Misael Tari	Former member of the Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board
(e)	Mr Staki John	Former member of the Vanuatu Commodities Marketing Board
(f)	Mr Bill Bani	Former member of the Board of Directors of Asset Management Unit

8.	RECOMMENDATIONS

In accordance with s 34(2) of the Leadership Code, a copy of this report will be sent to the Public Prosecutor for further investigations. A copy of this report will also be forwarded to the Prime Minister in accordance with Article 63(2) of the Constitution. The Ombudsman has made the following recommendations concerning those leaders who were alleged to have filed their annual returns after the 'further 14 days period given after 1 March 1999, and the leaders who 'have not filed an annual returns as required by s 31 of the Code, after having been warned by the Clerk in writing of his failure to do so'.

Recommendation1:	THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHOULD INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE LEADERS WHO FAILED TO FILE THEIR ANNUAL RETURNS TO THE CLERK OF PARLIAMENT

8.1	In accordance with s. 35 of the Leadership Code Act, the Public Prosecutor should proceed with further inquiry and/or prosecution of these leaders who have failed to file any annual return with the Clerk of Parliament. The Public Prosecutor proceeds with further inquiry and/or prosecution of these leaders who have failed to file their annual returns to the Clerk. This would be a breach under s 33(a) of the Code. These leaders are:

(1)	Mr Tom Niavia	Councillor, Tafea Provincial Government
(2)	Mr Willie Kalo	Councillor, Shefa Provincial Government
(3)	John Ridgway	Member, Vanuatu Financial Services Commission
(4)	Dudley Aru	member of the Law Council
(5)	Willie Iakauto	Councillor, Tafea Provincial Government
(6)	Mrs Naomi Nalau	Women Representative, Malampa Provincial Government
(7)	Mr Pierre Rory	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(8)	Mr Atis Sewere	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(9)	Mr Jean Pierre Etienne	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(10)	Mr Roy Morsen	Chief Representative, Malampa Provincial Government
(11)	Mr Alick Masing	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(12)	Mr August Donald	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(13)	Mr Jean Claude Tambe	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(14)	Mr Tenkon Vincent	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(15)	Mrs Alexandra Mermer	Women Representative, Malampa Provincial Government
(16)	Mrs Rosie Patterson	Women Representative, Malampa Provincial Government
(17)	Mr Vaty Frederick	Youth Representative, Malampa, Provincial Government
(18)	Mr Jeremy Batick	Church Representative, Malampa, Provincial Government
(19)	Mr Kalo Nial	Former Political Adviser, Ministry of Agriculture & former managing Director of SPFC
(20)	Mr Bob Kuao	Political Advisor, Ministry of Health
(21)	Mr Toco Mara	Board Member of the Reserve Bank
(22)	Francois Theuil	Former Managing Director of VLD
(23)	Mr Charley Nango	Member of Police Service Commission
(24)	Mr Allan Tungon	Councillor, Port Vila Municipal Council

Recommendation2:	THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHOULD INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THOSE LEADERS WHO RESIGNED FROM THEIR POSITIONS AS LEADERS IN AN ATTEMPT TO AVOID HAVING TO FILE ANNUAL RETURNS

8.2	Section 50 of the Code specifies that in order to indicate a breach of the Code, it is sufficient to show that a person was a leader at the time that the leadership obligation arose. In accordance with s. 35 of the Leadership Code Act, the Public Prosecutor should proceed with further inquiry and/or prosecution of these leaders who have attempted to avoid their leadership obligations by resigning their leadership positions. These leaders are:

(1)	Bishop Michel Visi	Member, Board of Directors of VBTC
(2)	John Atkin Aruhuri	Chairman, Board of Directors of NBV & Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce
(3)	Mr Ken Harris	Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce
(4)	Mr Joseph Jacobe	President & Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce
(5)	Mr Harold Qualao	Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce
(6)	Mr Henry Ouchida	Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce
(7)	Mr Jimmy Moli	Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce
(8)	Mr Rene Ah Pow	Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce & Air Vanuatu
(9)	Mr Marc Paris	Board Member of the Chamber of Commerce

Recommendation2:	THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF AND PROSECUTE LEADERS WHO FILED THEIR ANNUAL RETURNS AFTER THE PRESCRIBED DEADLINE.

8.3	In accordance with s. 35 of the Leadership Code Act, the Public Prosecutor should proceed with further inquiry and/or prosecution of these leaders who have filed their annual returns after 1 March 1999 and/or after a further 14 days period thereafter. This may be a breach under s 33(a) of the Code. These leaders are:

(1)	Mr Willie Reuben Abel	Former Chairman, Vanair Board of Directors
(2)	Pastor Hosea Bani	Former VBTC Board of Directors
(3)	Mr Shem Noukaut	former Member, Vanair Board of Directors
(4)	MR Barnabas Wilson	Member of Parliament
(5)	Mr Saniel Popovi	Former Member, Vanair Board of Directors
(6)	Mr Ham Japhet	Councillor, Luganville Municipality
(7)	Mr Sam Mailen	Councillor, Luganville Municipality
(8)	Mr Wilson Tarimure	Nominated Member, Penama Provincial Government
(9)	Mr Josiah Merifar	Member of Parliament
(10)	Ms Dorosday Kenneth	Member of Electoral Commission
(11)	Mr Sam Toa	Councillor, Luganville Municipality
(12)	Mrs Marisan Nalo	Member of Police Service Commission
(13)	Mr Dickinson Vusi	Member, Vanair Board of Directors & Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(14)	Mr Valia Jenery	Councillor, Shefa Provincial Government
(15)	Mr Kensi Obediah	President/Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(16)	Mr Augustine Tabak	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(17)	Mr Lino Watas	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(18)	Mr Pierre Kaka	Councillor, Tafea Provincial Government
(19)	Martin Maltok	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(20)	Mr William Sarisets	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(21)	Mr John Steven	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(22)	Mr Edgar Howard	Youth & Chief Representative, Torba Provincial Government
(23)	Mr Douglas Fatdal	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(24)	Mr Shadrach Sali	Church Representative, Penama Provincial Government
(25)	Mr Andrew Vurvur	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(26)	Mr Steven Bong Kakae	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(27)	Mr Klesen Remkonkon	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(28)	Mr Kerby Norman	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(29)	Mr Sikias Simeon	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(30)	Mr Peter Isno	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(31)	Mr Kalsi Kalowan	Councillor, Malampa Provincial Government
(32)	Mr Daniel Bue	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(33)	Mr Selwyn Ron Leo	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(34)	Mr Remy Tevigogon	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(35)	Mr John Terry	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(36)	Mr Gaetanao Bulewak	Councillor, Penama Provincial Government
(37)	Mr Philip Shing	Councillor, Tafea Provincial Government
(38)	Mr Roy Bongelan	Lord Mayor, Luganville Municipality
(39)	Mr Pechou Meltetamat	Former Political Advisor, Ministry of Lands
(40)	Mr Alfred Wilson	Member, Vanair Board of Directors
(41)	Mr John Dickinson	Member, Vanair Board of Directors
(42)	Mr Charlie Pakoa	Member, Vanair Board of Directors
(43)	Mr Holi Simon	Deputy Police Commissioner

8.4	The Ombudsman expects that the Public Prosecutor will consider this report as required by s35 of the Leadership Code and refer matters for further investigations. If necessary to support prosecutions, as specified by s 37(1) of the Code and publish the decision and reasons

Dated the 29th day of February 2000.

Hannington G ALATOA
OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

9.	INDEX OF APPENDICES

A	The constitutional and statutory provisions relevant to the issues of this report:

- Constitution, Article 67
- Leadership code Act ss. 4(1), 5, 28, 31 – 37 and 50

B	Leaders who failed to submit their annual returns and their names were listed in the Official Gazette.

APPENDIX A:

RELEVANT LAWS, REGULATIONS AND RULES

CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

DEFINITION OF A LEADER

67.	For the purposes of this Chapter, a leader means the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister and other Ministers, members of Parliament, and such public servants, officers of Government agencies and other officers as may be prescribed by law.

4.2	LEADERSHIP CODE ACT NO 2 OF 1998

LEADERS

5	In addition to the leaders referred to in Article 67 of the Constitution, the following are declared to be leaders:
…
elected and nominated members of local government councils;
elected and nominated members of municipal councils;
political advisors to a Minister;
…
(f) members and the chief executive officers (however described) of the board and statutory authorities;

INTERPRETATION

4(1)	In this Code, unless the context otherwise requires:
…
'statutory body' means a body established by or under a law of Vanuatu.

OBEYING THE LAW

28.	A leader acting in his or her capacity as a leader who fails to abide by an enactment that imposes on the leader a duty, obligation, or responsibility is in breach of this Code

ANNUAL RETURNS

31.	(1)	Every leader must complete an annual return for the preceding year setting out details of the leader’s assets and liabilities in accordance with the form in the Schedule.

(2)	The annual return must be given to the clerk of Parliament:

(a)	within 2 months of becoming a leader; and
(b)	by 1 March in each year.

(3)	The annual return must set out details, listed in subsection (4), of the assets and liabilities of:

(a)	the leaders; and

(b)	the leader’s spouse and children were feasible;

(c)	any trust of which the leader or the leader’s spouse or children are a beneficiary where feasible.

(4)	The details to be set out in the annual return are:

(a)	all land and other property (except one family home);

(b)	all vehicles (except one family vehicle);

(c)	all shares in public or private companies;

(d)	all income;

(e)	all liabilities:

(f)	directorships in corporations;

(g)	all directorships or other office held in unincorporated bodies

(h)	any assets acquired or disposed of during the period covered by the return;

(i)	any liabilities acquired or discharged during the period covered by the return.

(5)	The details must include assets within and outside Vanuatu.

(6)	The leader is not required to include:

(a)	any liabilities in respect of the family home; or

(b)	the personal effects of the leader and his or her spouse and children

PUBLICATION OF ANNUAL RETURNS

32.	(1)	The Clerk must ensure that:

(a)	annual returns filed by the leaders; and

(b)	a list of leaders who have failed to give the Clerk an annual return;

are published in the Gazette, by 14 March in each year.

(2)	The list must set out the leader’s name, and the position he or she holds.

FAILURE TO FILE ANNUAL RETURN

33.	A leader who:

(a)	does not file an annual returns as required by section 31, and after having been warned by the Clerk of his failure to do so, fails to file the return within a further 14 days: or

(b)	files a return knowing that it is false in a material particular;

is guilty of a breach of this Code

PART 5 – INVESTIGATION AND
PROSECUTION OF LEADERS

ROLE OF OMBUDSMAN

34.	(1)	The Ombudsman must investigate and report on the conduct of a leader (other than the President):

(a)	if the Ombudsman receives a complaint from a person that a leader has breached this Code; or

(b)	if the Ombudsman has formed the view on reasonable grounds that a leader may have breached this Code.

(2)	The Ombudsman must give a copy of the report to the Public Prosecutor and where, in the opinion of the Ombudsman, the complaint involved criminal misconduct, to the Commissioner of Police within 14 days after forwarding his or her findings to the Prime Minister under Article 63(2) of the Constitution.

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO CONSIDER OMBUDSMAN’S REPORT

35.	(1)	The Public Prosecutor must;

(a)	consider the report; and

(b)	if within 14 days of receiving the report, is of the opinion that further investigation is required, refer the report to the Commissioner of Police for that purpose; and

(c)	after receiving the results of the investigation, decide whether there are sufficient grounds to prosecute the leader or any other person.

(2)	If, after considering the report under subsection 1(a), or after considering the results of the investigation under subsection 1(c), the Public Prosecutor decides the complaint is vexatious, frivolous or trivial the Public Prosecutor may determine not to prosecute a leader. If the Public Prosecutor does decide not to prosecute on those grounds he or she must follow the procedure set out in section 37(3).

INVESTIGATION BY POLICE AFTER A COMPLAINT

36.	(1)	Where the Commissioner of Police receives a report under section 34(2), the Commission must:

ensure that the police force investigates the complaint; and

(a)	within 60 days of the complaint being made:

(i)	forward the results of the investigation to the Public Prosecutor, if the Commissioner is of the view that there is sufficient evidence to support a prosecution;
or
(ii)	if the Commissioner is not satisfied of this, inform the complainant in writing of this decision and the reasons for that decision and provide a copy of the decision and reasons to the Public Prosecutor.

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO DECIDE ON PROSECUTION

31.	(1)	The Public Prosecutor must decide, within 3 months of receiving the report, whether there are sufficient grounds or evidence to support a prosecution under this Code or under any other Act.

(2)	The Public Prosecutor may decide not to prosecute only on the basis that is insufficient grounds or evidence to support a prosecution, or that the complaint is vexatious, frivolous or trivial.

(3)	If the Public Prosecutor decides not to prosecute, he or she must:

(a)	notify the Prime Minister of the decision within 7 days of making the decision; and

(b)	publish a notice in the Gazette within 14 days of the decision, station that he or she has decided not to prosecute, and setting out the reasons for the decision.

DEFENCE TO PROSECUTION

50.	It shall not be a defence to a prosecution under this Act that the accused was not at the time of an investigation or is not in the course of prosecution under this Act or in the event of a conviction at time of sentencing a leader, and for the purposes of establishing jurisdiction it shall be sufficient for the prosecution to establish that at the time of the offence the accused was a leader.

-------------------------------------------