Hi Blackskinpla, thanks for the update. It seems BCL are...

Hi Blackskinpla, thanks for the update.

It seems BCL are determined to try every trick in the book to muddy the waters.
As I understand it, the 'customary heads' came about as nominated representatives of the actual landowners who could not speak English & had no legal representation. These 'customery heads' were nominated by BCL, & naturally supported the BCL line.

So now one of the 'positions' BCL is taking is that, although the indigenous landowners rightful property & title was originally acquired without their agreement, or the full understanding of the impacts it would have on their livelihood, , their lands & their family, any future goverment cannot redress this unconscionable action, expunge that law & nulify the agreement.

Regardless of the basis of their claim it is a complete admission that BCL are incapable of getting landowner support & permission to enter so they are trying to wind back the clock 40 years to colonial times.

And their supporters keep telling us they had no responsibility in the war .....

What a joke.

Seems BCL are determined to spend their $50m war chest on greedy, incompetent lawyers & court action denying the 'victims' of the war any of it for rebuiding the damage caused & left behind.

Hopefully the PNG court brings them to account.