Deecee+Diego+on+Tribal+Rights

The issue regarding the tribal rights lies in the conflict between law and tradition. The compensation would require the amount of **15 000 US Dollars, 25 pigs and a female clan member**. In analyzing the situation I would like to know the current law of Papua New Guinea and specifically if there is such a law that states this compensation. If there is such a law in Papua New Guinea, I would agree with Susan Balen that it is okay to challenge the law if the act violates it. The complexity of the law lies within its integration with the tribal practices and culture, which brings back to our main issue.

Selected parts of Papua New Guinea's Constitution states:

PREAMBLE:

> Basic Social Obligations. > **(f) to respect the rights and freedoms of others, and to co-operate fully with others in the interests of interdependence and solidarity; and** > (i) in the case of the children, to respect their parents. > > Subdivision B >> **36.** FREEDOM FROM INHUMAN TREATMENT. **(1) No person shall be submitted to torture (whether physical or mental), or to treatment or punishment that is cruel or otherwise inhuman, or is inconsistent with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.**
 * Basic Rights. WE HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE that, subject to any restrictions imposed by law on non-citizens, all persons in our country are entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, that is to say, the right, whatever their race, tribe, places of origin, political opinion, colour, creed or sex, but subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the legitimate public interest, to each of the following:– ||
 * >> (a) life, liberty, security of the person and the protection of the law; and ||
 * >> (b) the right to take part in political activities; and ||
 * >> **(c) freedom from inhuman treatment and forced labour; and** ||
 * >> (d) freedom of conscience, of expression, of information and of assembly and association; and ||
 * >> (e) freedom of employment and freedom of movement; and ||
 * >> (f) protection for the privacy of their homes and other property and from unjust deprivation of property,

>> **45.** FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE, THOUGHT AND RELIGION. (1) Every person has the right to freedom of conscience, thought and religion and the practice of his religion and beliefs, including freedom to manifest and propagate his religion and beliefs in such a way as not to interfere with the freedom of others, except to the extent that the exercise of that right is regulated or restricted by a law that complies with Section 38 ( general qualifications on qualified rights ). **(2) No person shall be compelled to receive religious instruction or to take part in a religious ceremony or observance, but this does not apply to the giving of religious instruction to a child with the consent of his parent or guardian or to the inclusion in a course of study of secular instruction concerning any religion or belief.** **(3) No person is entitled to intervene unsolicited into the religious affairs of a person of a different belief, or to attempt to force his or any religion (or irreligion) on another, by harassment or otherwise.** (4) No person may be compelled to take an oath that is contrary to his religion or belief, or to take an oath in a manner or form that is contrary to his religion or belief. **<span class="Sub_Section_No" style="color: black;">(5) A reference in this section to religion includes a reference to the traditional religious beliefs and customs of the peoples of Papua New Guinea.** > Complete Reference to the constitution of Papua New Guinea can be accessed here: [] > Since I could not reference a specific law that talks about the customs of the tribes in relation to the law of the state, I would reference my judgement to the constitution of Papua New Guinea. The parts that are highlighted in bold letters would be used in reference to the topic. The constitution itself sided with Maria Wingal's plea to refuse the customs of the tribe. The constitution states that one should be free of any acts that disregard the integrity of human beings, that a person is entitled to intervene to the beliefs and customs of the people of Papa New Guinea. > Since the constitution provides the framework of all the laws of the country, I would assume that a law of Papa New Guinea would not approve of such actions. Since the constitution affects all the citizens of Papa New Guinea, the tribal members who are registered citizens of the country should follow the belief in the constitution, however; the problem is that we're not sure if the tribal members are registered citizens of the country since the constitution states that: >> <span class="Section_No" style="color: black;">**66.** CITIZENSHIP BY DESCENT. <span style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; border-collapse: separate; margin-bottom: 6pt; text-indent: 36pt;"><span class="Sub_Section_No" style="color: black; font-weight: normal;">(1) A person who– >>> <span class="Paragraph_No" style="color: black;">(a) is born in the country on or after Independence Day; and >>> <span class="Paragraph_No" style="color: black;">(b) had one parent who was a citizen or who, if he had survived to Independence Day, would have been or would have been entitled to become, such a citizen, <span style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; border-collapse: separate; margin-bottom: 6pt;">is a citizen. <span style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; border-collapse: separate; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span class="Sub_Section_No" style="color: black; font-weight: normal;">(2) A person– >>> <span class="Paragraph_No" style="color: black;">(a) who is born outside the country on or after Independence Day; and >>> <span class="Paragraph_No" style="color: black;">(b) who had one parent who was a citizen or who, if he had survived to Independence Day, would have been, or would have been entitled to become, such a citizen; and >>> <span class="Paragraph_No" style="color: black;">(c) whose birth is registered as prescribed by or under an Act of the Parliament made for the purposes of this subsection,is a citizen. ||

I think there is no way to make a decision objectively. The Judge's decision would rely on his ideology, being a liberal or conservative. I would like to side with Maria Wingal in this situation.I believe that there would always be someone who would retaliate in such injustices to traditions and cultures and was evident in the History through Ghandi and Martin Luther King. One should not deprive of one's liberty to life.