THE President of the Solomon Islands Law Association (SIBA), Eran Soma, has been asked to “step aside” from representing Pamela Kimberly, the Respondent in cc417 of 2006 or “expose himself to serious consequences”, it was warned, Friday.
The warning was contained in an email sent to Mr. Soma by an Australian couple, Fred and Gloria Olsson, who have been seeking justice in Solomon Islands for the last 14 years.
The Olssons last week filed a formal complaint in a form of a written submission against lawyer, John Sullivan QC. The submission is comprehensive and carries a plethora of issues, including accusations of lies, breaches of court rules and many others, as grounds for striking off the Queen’s Counsel from practising in Solomon Islands.
Attorney General, John Muria Jnr, this week acknowledged having received a copy of the submission, which was sent to him in his capacity as the Chairman of SIBA’s Disciplinary Committee.
The Attorney General’s acknowledgment suggests that the formal complaints against Mr. Sullivan would be dealt with in the due process involving the Chief Justice and the Association’s Disciplinary Committee.
The Olssons said they had been given a run-around for 14 years in their quest for justice in Solomon Islands. They are seeking compensation for breach of employment contracts which had been allowed by the Court of Appeal in 2018.
In their follow-up action with the Solomon Islands Bar Association President this week, the Olssons said:
“We seek your cooperation as legal counsel for the Respondent [Pamela Kimberly] to assist the court. There is an urgent need for parties to accept the validity of the Enforcement Order allowed by the Court of Appeal. This will ensure that the current acts to interfere with and pervert the course of justice do not continue any longer,” they said in the email.
“All parties have a duty to the court, to be honest and comply with the order made by the Court of Appeal to set aside the refusal of the 2016 enforcement order. It does not assist the court when the Respondent submission ignores the Enforcement Creditors’ questions.
”Furthermore, it does not assist the court when the Respondent embellishes and misrepresents the Court of Appeal decision and omits the material facts of the Court of Appeal decision,” the Olssons said.
“The 8 October 2018 Respondent application obstructs the legal civil process of enforcement by the Sheriff. This application is an abuse of process as the seize and sell order included in the Court of Appeal decision is clear, unambiguous, and capable of compliance.
“You will have had time to consider your position in view of the overwhelming number of false statements made to the court in the Respondent submission. These false, inaccurate and misleading statements have been knowingly contrived and constructed to improperly influence the decision of the judge,” they said.
“You also need to give due consideration to your role as lawyer and President of SIBA in perpetuating these false and misleading statements to the court.
“These untruths and falsehoods aim to seek to obtain a benefit for your client. These actions show contempt for compliance with term 2(b) of the enforcement order granted by the High Court and allowed by the Court of Appeal,” the Olssons said.
“A formal complaint against John Sullivan QC has been lodged with the SI Bar Association. It will be in your best interests to evaluate whether you will continue to be a mere mouthpiece and puppet for John Sullivan QC; this will implicate your complicity in the actions complained of and you expose yourself to serious consequences.
“This is neither a pleasant nor a trivial matter, it must be dealt with in the interests of justice.”
“Once again, we offer you the opportunity to step aside, withdraw from representation of the Respondent, and/or withdraw the 8 October 2018 application which is a clear abuse of process. This concession is offered to you to protect your interests and the interests of Sol-Law.”
By ALFRED SASAKO
Newsroom, Honiara
