This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 CANBERRA 000865 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/19/2015 
TAGS: PREL PGOV EAID AS PP
SUBJECT: AUSTRALIA PULLS POLICE FROM PNG: ECP IN DANGER 
 
REF: A. PORT MORESBY 217 
 
     ¶B. PORT MORESBY 219 
     ¶C. PORT MORESBY 167 
     ¶D. USDAO CANBERRA 190042Z MAY 05 
 
Classified By: Political Counselor Woo Lee for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1.  (C) SUMMARY:  On May 16 the GOA decided to withdraw 
Australian Federal Police (AFP) forces deployed in Papua New 
Guinea (PNG) as a result of the May 13 ruling by PNG's 
Supreme Court which overruled the legal immunity given to 
Australian police and bureaucrats under the Enhanced 
Cooperation Program (ECP) (ref A).  Australia remains 
committed to finding a resolution to the impasse but will not 
return the AFP to PNG without legal immunity assurances.  The 
process of resolving these legal issues, which could require 
the GPNG to enact legislation or change the constitution, is 
likely to be a lengthy one.  End Summary. 
 
¶2.  (C) According to Australian Department of Foreign Affairs 
and Trade (DFAT) officials, who briefed us on May 18, the PNG 
Supreme Court ruling basically meant that the AFP had no 
legal right to exercise police authority in PNG.  The court 
had decreed that the ECP command structure making AFP forces 
ultimately responsible to the Australian AFP Commissioner in 
Canberra contravened the PNG Police Commissioner's powers, 
and was thus unconstitutional.  The ruling also stated that 
it was unconstitutional for the AFP to be outside the PNG 
Government's jurisdiction, and thus AFP legal immunity was 
overruled.  All but ten of the AFP were withdrawn on May 17; 
the ten remaining on the ground in Port Moresby were handling 
final arrangements.  The GOA had deployed 154 of the 210 
planned police to PNG under the five-year, A$1.1 billion 
(US$880 million) ECP.  Forty-three of the 64 planned 
Australian civilian bureaucrats serving in PNG government 
departments will remain in place despite their new exposure 
to PNG's legal jurisdiction, said DFAT officials (ref B). 
The GOA instructed those bureaucrats in decision-making 
positions to change their actions to reflect an advisory 
rather than a functional role in order to protect themselves 
from criminal prosecution. 
 
¶3.  (U) In a May 16 interview with the press, Foreign 
Minister Downer stated, "The risks involved for (the AFP), 
being on the ground without the appropriate legal cover, are 
such that we'd rather have them back in Australia, and there 
be no risks."  Downer had said previously in another 
interview on May 13, the day of the ruling, that the GOA had 
to stand down the AFP contingent in PNG and that the ruling 
was a setback for the ECP, although Australia would remain 
committed to the program. 
 
¶4.  (C) The PNG Cabinet was to meet May 18 to discuss the 
ruling and how to proceed.  FM Downer has invited the PNG FM 
to Australia to discuss a resolution but no date has been 
set.  DFAT officials added that the GOA will not back down on 
the immunity issue and will only reengage when such 
assurances are offered.  Otherwise, the level of exposure to 
criminal prosecution in PNG would be too great.  Remaining 
Australian bureaucrats are subject to such prosecution 
currently and retroactively, based on the Court ruling.  DFAT 
officials told us that PNG wanted the AFP to remain in 
Bougainville to help with the upcoming election.  However, 
only three AFP officers remain in Bougainville in an advisory 
role as part of a separate community policing program. 
Australian press reports indicate that PNG may ask New 
Zealand to send some of its police forces to assist with the 
election. 
 
A Bad Season for Australian-PNG Ties 
------------------------------------ 
¶5.  (U) The court decision stating that the ECP command 
structure and jurisdiction arrangements violated the PNG's 
constitution comes on the tail of other setbacks in the 
Australian-PNG bilateral relationship.  According to 
Australian press reports, in Port Moresby at a May 4 police 
union meeting, 300 PNG police demanded that the AFP return to 
Australia.  The police claimed that crime had risen since 
Australian forces arrived, but Commander Barry Turner, head 
of the Australian police contingent in PNG, told the press 
that crime figures had only gone up because more offenses had 
been reported by members of the public who now had greater 
confidence that action would be taken.  There was also a 
diplomatic storm in March involving Australian Customs 
officers in Brisbane airport who infuriated PNG PM Michael 
Somare when they asked him to remove his shoes as part of a 
routine security inspection (ref C).  The PNG PM demanded an 
apology and suggested that the future of the ECP was 
threatened if he did not receive one.  (NOTE:  We are not 
aware of any allegations that Somare influenced the Supreme 
Court ruling.  End Note.) 
 
¶6.  (C) DFAT officials did not want to speculate about the 
long-term effects of the ruling, but Australian Defence 
officials were pessimistic about the survival of the ECP (ref 
D).  Both departments, however, emphasized that the GOA has 
too much of a stake in PNG to let the ECP fail completely. 
First Assistant Secretary for the South Pacific David Ritchie 
told visiting EAP Assistant Secretary Hill on May 17 that 
Australia had no choice but to continue to engage with Port 
Moresby and could not let the country "go down the gurgler" 
given PNG's proximity and 5.5 million population (septel). 
 
¶7.  (C) COMMENT:  The withdrawal of AFP forces from PNG marks 
a dramatic downturn in the bilateral relationship and is a 
potentially fatal setback for the ECP, especially if new 
legal assurances cannot be negotiated quickly.  The GOA has 
stated their police will not return unless legal immunity is 
restored.  The constitutional and legal changes required of 
the PNG government to achieve that end could take a year or 
more to come to fruition.  If an agreement cannot be reached 
and the ECP erodes further, it could have far-ranging effects 
for Australia's other aid programs in the region, such as the 
Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands (RAMSI). 
Australian press speculation indicated that unsavory 
political elements in some Pacific nations, who are hampered 
by the accountability Australian aid mandates, might follow 
the lead of PNG and rebel in their own way against 
Australia's presence in their respective countries.  End 
Comment. 
 
STANTON