Bougainvilleans queue to vote in their independence referendum, Buka, November 2019. Photo: RNZ / Johnny Blades
The Bougainville Minister for Independence Implementation, Ezekiel Massatt, has launched an attack this week on Australia, calling it a "coward when it comes to the Bougainville independence issue".
Bougainville's anger over 'non-binding' referendum 'irrelevant' - Ted Wolfers
Bougainville is seeking independence from Papua New Guinea, based on the overwhelming result of the referendum on independence held four years ago.
Almost all - 97.7 percent - of Bougainville voters chose independence.
Massatt was reacting to a statement from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese after he had been asked whether or not PNG should respect this vote and allow Bougainville its independence.
"I'll say very clearly…I respect PNG's sovereignty and those issues are a matter for Papua New Guinea," Albanese said.
But for Massatt, Australia is not fulfilling its responsibilities under the 2001 Bougainville Peace Agreement.
In a Bougainville government statement, he said "the Australian Foreign Affairs Minister, during the Peace Negotiations, conned Bougainville Leaders on the Ratification issue, telling them if PNG doesn't ratify, Australia will lead the International Condemnation of PNG."
Massatt's anger is partly driven by the failure to table the referendum in the PNG Parliament in 2023, which he said contravened the Era Kone Covenant signed by both governments in April 2022.
Under this agreement, PNG and Bougainville agreed that the referendum would be tabled this year and that a final resolution would be reached no earlier than 2025 or later than 2027.
Upe voter in Bougainville Referendum Photo: Bougainville Referendum Commission
Non-binding
Last month, PNG's Minister for Bougainville Affairs Manasseh Makiba told parliament the referendum results were non-binding, and it is only the national parliament that has the authority to determine the fate of the referendum results.
He told parliament it meant the referendum result would not take immediate legal effect until the national parliament approves or ratifies it.
This was a red rag to Massatt.
He said there is nothing in the Peace Agreement or the Constitution that said the referendum is non-binding.
That's correct but it is also the case that the word binding is not used in either document.
As well, discussion on the matter during the writing of the Bougainville Peace Agreement (BPA) nearly 25 years ago led to a compromise that the referendum would go ahead on the condition it was non-binding, even if this is not spelled out.
But for University of Wollongong emeritus professor of politics Ted Wolfers, who has had a lot of involvement with the PNG Government on Bougainville, this matter is irrelevant.
Professor Wolfers said it was very clear in the Peace Agreement that the outcome of the referendum will be subject to ratification, which is defined as the decision making role of the national parliament.
"Right from the very beginning there was a recognition that ratification, so called, means final decision making authority. It doesn't necessarily mean approval. So, I am a bit surprised by the argument that's going on at the moment," he said.
"There's never been any question in my view about that legal position but of course there is a very sensitive set of political issues that need to be addressed in the process."
University of Woollongong Emeritus Professor Ted Wolfers Photo: University of Woollongong
This includes the type of independence chosen and, for instance, he wonders what might happen with the maritime boundaries.
"I don't think the maps have ever been drawn," he said.
"It might not be part of an archipelagic state anymore, and so, it's maritime boundaries might not be as broad as they are now. There is a whole range of those sorts of issues.
"I mean the maritime ones are particularly obvious under the Law of the Sea, but they also come up in quite different connections of how people view the utility of having land rights and all sorts of things," he said.
Bureaucrats express differing views
A little over a year ago, Bougainville Chief Secretary Shadrach Himata told a forum run by the Department of Pacific Affairs at the Australian National University of the view the Bougainville government had on the matter.
"In the spirit of the BPA, the word 'ratification' should be given its ordinary meaning," he said.
"It was not used in the BPA in its technical meaning under the PNG constitution and/or international law. It just involves endorsement by the PNG parliament.
"The ABG position is that because the referendum result showed overwhelming support by Bougainvilleans for independence, the two governments are under a clear constitutional duty to conclude the process in accordance with s.342 of the PNG constitution and under international law principles, by agreement to Bougainville becoming independent."
Chief Secretary in the Office of the PNG Prime Minister, Ivan Pomaleu, told the same forum, "read together, the constitution and the BPA require the referendum results and the outcomes of consultations to be tabled in the parliament."
"Once that occurs, it is for the parliament to debate the matter and determine a motion. And for any motion to be carried, the parliament must exercise its sole authority in accordance with s.114 of the national constitution by way of vote on that motion.
"Of course, parliament could elect not to take a vote."