From PNGexposed blog

SABL Commission of Inquiry Report 1: Pages 51-67

“The SABL was invalid and improper.” [p62]

“The DLPP file contains three different versions of the Land Investigation report (LIR) by two different investigators, all of them incomplete and defective.” [p54]

The LIR “fraudulently contrived and concocted to legitimize a prohibited activity, was deceptive and dangerous…” [p62]

“The title over over Portion 2541C was unlawfully created and was then unlawfully issued as an SABL to Roselaw Limited.” [p55]

“The SABL was issued in a hasty manner… a process that normally takes up months and years was completed in just two days” [p58]

“This SABL is invalid and is totally voidable because it was unlawfully created and issued” [p57]

Mr Kila-Pat’s explanation for both the ‘fast-work’ and not executing a Lesae-leaseback Instrument is critically faulty and arguably deceptive. His explanation is untenable under any circumstances and it is possible that his story masks a fraudulent activity”. [p58]

“The SABL.. is voidable and may have been fraudulently granted” [p62]

This Case Study covers the Special Agriculture and Business Lease over Portion 2541C in the National Capital District

Acting Secretary Romilly Kila Pat unlawfully granted the SABL to Rimbunan Hijau

Portion 2541C containing 25 ha of land at Idumava point in the National Capital District was granted directly to Roselaw Limited for 99 years in 2005 under the hand of then acting DLPP Secretary Romily Kila-Pat as Ministerial Delegate.

Roselaw is a company with a single shareholder, Rose Haraka, and two Directors – Rose Haraka and her husband, Andrew Law, a 73-year old Malaysian. Roselaw is not a landowner company. Roselaw “is a non-functional ‘paper-company’ [p55].

Andrew Law is employed by Rimbunan Hijau. His evidence left ‘a lot to be desired’ [p61]

Roselaw sub-leased the land to Dynasty Estates Limited in August 2010 for a period of 94 years. Apparently Dynasty plans to develop a wharf and storage facility as part of ‘multi-purpose marine facility’ on the land. Dynasty Estates is owned by Rimbunan Hijau, the largest logging company operating in PNG

Both Roselaw and Dynasty share the same registered address.

Rimbunan Hijau choose not to give evidence to the Commission of Inquiry.

Continuing ownership disputes over the land have existed since1983 but these disputes are not mentioned in the Land Investigation Report – which “brings the entire land investigation report into question. The integrity of the Land Investigation Report itself and its accuracy is also questionable.” [p53]

“The DLPP file contains three different versions of the Land Investigation report (LIR) by two different investigators, all of them incomplete and defective.” [p54]

The Certificate of Alienability was signed off by the same person as the LIR. “He had no right to sign off on the Certificate”. “that was improper” [p54]

“.. the so-called LIR in this matter was defective and unreliable.” [p55].

There was an “obvious lack of landowner consent and non-compliance with the DLPP processes…”  [p56]

“.. since no Lease-leaseback Instrument was executed … the [State] never obtained the right to create or issue a title … Hence the grant of the SABL is defective and unlawful” [p55]

Department of Environment files do not contain an Environmental Inception Report or an Environmental Impact Statement but an advert advising of an application for a Waste Permit has been published.

“.. the landowners were not consulted for the purposes of the LIR and consequently they never rendered their ‘informed consent’” [p57]

The land investigation itself, the LIR and Certificate of Alienability were all executed by the same man on the same day and the gazettal notice was prepared the next day. Mr Kila-Pat “appeared unfazed by the fact that a process that normally takes up months and years was completed in just two days” [p58]

Mr Kila-Pat’s explanation for both the ‘fast-work’ and not executing a Lesae-leaseback Instrument is critically faulty and arguably deceptive. His explanation is untenable under any circumstances and it is possible that his story masks a fraudulent activity”. [p58]

Mr Kila-Pat “unlawfully caused a SABL to be created, which he further unlawfully granted to an entity that was not even agreed upon by the landowners” [p 59]

“Mr Kila-Pat… played an active role in fast-tracking the approval and granting of the SABL to Roselaw Limited in record time” [p62]

We recommend that the title be REVOKED