Papua New Guinea is under a close watch for money laundering, running a risk of being abandoned by global investors.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has placed PNG on its “grey list” due to “strategic deficiencies” in government oversight.

The grey-list means that watchdog officials are monitoring closely, and that the government is time-bound to address their blind spots.

• READ MORE: It’s official, the FATF has added Papua New Guinea to its ‘grey list’

PNG is now one step away from the far more precarious “black list”, where other countries are compelled to stay away in order to protect the international financial system.

There are only three countries on the black list: North Korea, Iran, and Myanmar.

Prime Minister James Marape told local media outlet NBC that he accepted the conclusions of the FATF and welcomed their support.

“There is no point blaming the past. What has been identified, we will fix,” Marape said.

Need secure economy
“It is in our country’s interest to have a secure economy, not one with gaps that can be exploited.”

Marape said that investors could be assured the PNG government was doing all that is can ahead of elections in 2027.

“Our investors will not run away . . .  Papua New Guinea will work its way out of the grey-list and towards a trusted, credible financial standing,”

But as many as 30 banks have publicly ruled out the possibility of investing in Papua LNG, an Exxon-backed project in the Gulf of Papua, as reported by AAP.

The project owners, seeking to produce six million tonnes of LNG per annum for a predominantly Asian market, have yet to make a final decision on whether to move forward.

Far-reaching consequences
A note from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in November 2025 called PNG “a fragile state” noting an “unstable social and political environment”.

It’s a judgment of PNG’s institutions, weakened by conflict and poor governance, thus creating ideal conditions for money laundering and corruption to thrive.

Michael Kabuni, an anti-money laundering researcher at Australian National University, told RNZ Pacific the grey-listing sends a signal to overseas banks and investors that business in PNG is rife with danger.

“We were saying all along that PNG was going to be added to the grey list. The evidence points to it.”

PNG’s greatest vulnerability is the exposure of each MP, bureaucrat and public servant to bribes and corruption, Kabuni said.

The more powerful an individual, the more likely they are to be targeted by criminals, and the greater those incentives to bend the rules would be.

“There was the anti-corruption body that was set up in 2014 called the task force suite,” he noted.

“It did an impressive job in confiscating proceeds of crime, arresting, prosecuting and jailing those involved. But eventually they went after the Prime Minister, and that task force was disbanded.”

Kabuni noted that MPs are given 10 million kina (NZ$3.9 million) each year in the course of their work, but rarely is it all accounted for.

He said it was also common for less money to be allocated to “integrity agencies”, such as watchdogs and enforcement bodies, than they are actually budgeted.

“It’s a combination of factors, from political interference, whether it’s appointments or interference into the investigations, to capacity and resources,” he said.

In the case of Papua LNG, Kabuni said he “would think” that the bank boycott was motivated in large part by the grey-listing.

“Investors use the mutual evaluation reports as a risk matrix to determine whether this country is safe.”

“It’s going to be difficult to draw investors finances . . .  we’ve never actually had an investor come in during the grey-list period.”

Risks for New Zealand
The Reserve Bank of New Zealand said banks were required to assess the associated risks with the countries that they dealt with.

“This may mean that transactions to or from Papua New Guinea may be subject to greater scrutiny,” it said.

Meanwhile, the Department of Internal Affairs said all customers from PNG are considered “high risk” under the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009.

“This could be a PNG company operating in New Zealand or a non-resident individual (such as a person on a temporary work visa),” a spokesperson said.

“As a result, an enhanced level of customer due diligence must always be applied.”

Anti-money laundering expert Kerry Grass told RNZ Pacific that businesses dealings with PNG were inherently risky.

“Trade-based money laundering (trading value for value) is not captured as an activity under the AML/CFT Act for international reporting obligations of trade,” Grass said.

Escaping obligations
“Hence I can trade you a shipping container of car parts for 1kg of Cocaine hidden in a container of coconuts. That type of international trading is escaping obligations of reporting under the AML/CFT Act if no wire transfer is relied on.”

In an ideal world, Grass said, customs officials would be able to manage risk based on knowledge of the source, but this could be disguised.

Efforts to stop ill-gotten gains from PNG to NZ would depend on their ability to decipher this information.

“I don’t think New Zealand is actually operating at a jurisdiction level where these controls or knowledge are actually down to that level,” she said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Papua New Guinea has deported controversial Australian businessman Jamie Pang.

Surrounded by Immigration and Citizenship Authority officials and police, Pang was taken to Jackson’s International Airport yesterday at 3am and deported.

Chief Migration Officer Stanis Hulahau said that the movement of Pang came about after his acquittal on rape charges on Wednesday afternoon.

• READ MORE: Australian Jamie Pang caught up in drug bust, after alleged meth lab, illegal firearms discovered in his PNG hotel
• Nineteen journalists suspended from Papua New Guinea news station in coverage row
• Other Jamie Pang reports
• Other PNG crime reports

“Pang has no legal right to remain in PNG, his visa and work permit have been cancelled, his visa was made void and he is now blacklisted for life,” he said.

“We don’t need people who disregard our laws.”

Pang, 45, was handed over to Australian authorities at about 10am because they have an interest in him for other incidents which they will be interviewing him about under Australian law.

When contacted by the PNG Post-Courier, Hulahau said that the deportation of Pang was a warning to all foreigners who wished to do business in the country to abide by and respect the law, and to also not get involved in illegal activities.

Breached visa conditions
In 2022, Pang was charged for breaching his visa conditions and was ordered by the Waigani Grade-Five District Court to pay a fine of K4000 (NZ$1800).

That year, he was charged under the Migration Act when he was found in a hotel with drugs and firearms.

At the time, Hulahau said that the conditions of his work permit and visa included not getting into any criminal activities.

“Once that was breached he was charged and he paid a fine, from there his visa was marked as void,” Hulahau said.

“This is a warning, there is zero tolerance on such incidents.”

Police Commissioner David Manning said that all foreigners should be aware of Papua New Guinea’s laws and respect the rule of law.

“As guests of this country they are expected to abide by all our laws,” he said.

“If found guilty of breaching our laws and that has been determined under a court of competent jurisdiction they are required to be deported back to their country of origin upon completion of their sentence.”

Caught by surprise
According to sources, Pang was caught by surprise after being acquitted of the rape charge and was on his way out of the Bomana Correctional Services prison when he was served detention orders by Immigration officials at the gate of the Bomana prison.

It is alleged he refused to go with the officials. However, he finally got into a waiting vehicle and was taken to the Bomana Immigration Centre (BIC).

At BIC he was taken early yesterday morning to Jackson International Airport.

He was quickly taken in with Post-Courier on hand to witness Pang walking up the stairs into the boarding lounge at about 5.30am.

The flight he was on left the country at 6am.

“You cannot disrespect our laws and our country and expect to continue to stay here,” Commissioner Manning said.

“This also applies to those expatriates who meddle in matters of national security and sovereignty.

Deemed ‘unfriendly’
“Do not for once think under some preconceived notions that you will not be held accountable.

“You will deemed as acting unfriendly towards our country.”

“I say this because there has been an increase of reports and cases of expatriates who continue to deliberately hold our way of life in contempt, including undermining systems and the authorities, often putting those authorities on a collision course with each other.

“No country in the world would tolerate this behaviour. PNG is no exception.”

Hulahau said that the laws of the country was in place to ensure people followed the laws.

Miriam Zarriga is a senior PNG Post-Courier journalist. Republished with permission. Read the original story here.

By John Pulu, Tagata Pasifika presenter/reporter/director

It’s been a busy start for the newly elected leader of Fiji, Sitiveni Rabuka.

And while he’s only held the role for a little over a month, walking into the Prime Minister’s office felt familiar for the leader of the People’s Alliance (PA) party.

“The office dynamics are still the same,” he says.

• WATCH ON TAGATA PASIFIKA PLUS: Fiji FM Rabuka on the country’s future
• READ MORE: Fiji police suspend questioning of former AG Aiyaz in ‘hatred’ case
• Who broke the law in Fiji? – Naidu responds to Sayed-Khaiyum
• ‘Claims a serious matter’, says lawyer Richard Naidu
• Other Fiji politics reports

“It was just like going back to an old car or an old bicycle that you have driven before or ridden before.

“The people are new…[there’s] possible generational difficulties and views but I have not encountered any since the month I came into the office.”

However, his journey into office was not an easy one. After the initial tally of votes at last years’ December election, neither Rabuka nor his predecessor Voreqe Bainimarama had gained a comfortable majority to take Parliament.

Sodelpa (Social Democratic Liberal Party) became the kingmakers, voting to form a coalition with the PA, and they were joined by the National Federation Party (NFP).

Bainimarama out of office
For the first time since 2014, Bainimarama was out of office. Rabuka says they have not spoken since the election.

“There has been no communication since the outcome,” he says.

“It was something I tried to encourage when I was in the opposition and opposition leader, for across-the-floor discussions on matters that affect the nation.

“We grew up in the same profession…we are friends,” Rabuka insists.

However, there’s plenty else to keep Rabuka busy at this time.

The coalition trinity means more cooks in the kitchen, but Rabuka is confident that they can work together to lead Fiji.

“I worked with the National Federation Party in 1999. Sodelpa was the party I helped to register,” he recalls.

‘Differences in past’
“There might have been differences in the past but we are still family and it’s only natural for us to come together and work together again.”

They’ve already enacted a number of changes including lifting a ban on a number of Fijians who were exiled by the previous government.

“It’s interesting that many of those returning thought they were on a blacklist,” Rabuka muses.

“When we asked Immigration, Immigration [said] ‘there is no such thing as a blacklist, or anyone being prohibited from coming back’.

“They all came back and they were very happy. But it also reflected the freedom in the atmosphere.”

And speaking of freedom, investigations into former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum have reportedly been suspended.

Under investigation
According to FBC News, Sayed-Khaiyum was under investigation for allegedly inciting communal antagonism.

Rabuka says Sayed-Khaiyum is a person of interest, but isn’t yet subjected to any prosecution processes at this time.

“But if it develops from there, there might be restrictions on his movement – particularly out of Fiji.”

Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air. Republished from Tagata Pasifika with permission.

Russia’s foreign ministry has slapped New Zealand journalists, officials and an academic with sanctions for supporting what it called the country’s “Russophobic agenda”.

The political move was announced Saturday.

The list includes New Zealand’s Military Secretary to the Minister of Defence, Shane Arndell, and other leading figures in the country’s defence force as well as the mayors of Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Nelson.

• READ MORE: Russia bans Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern from entering country

Journalists named include Whena Owen, Matthew Hooton and James Hollings.

The sole academic named was Stephen Hoadley, an associate professor in the Faculty of Politics and International Relations at the University of Auckland.

The sanctions bar the targeted individuals from entering Russia indefinitely, the Russian ministry said.

“Taking into account that Wellington does not intend to abandon its anti-Russian course and continues to produce new restrictions (against Moscow), work on updating the ‘black list’ will continue,” the ministry added.

In April, Russia announced an earlier blacklist of politicians from New Zealand, including Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

I regret to inform you that I appear to have been banned from Russia

There goes that Trans Siberian Railway fantasy.https://t.co/2bgNYYTjeE

— Aaron Hawkins For Mayor (@A_G_Hawkins) July 30, 2022

Nelson mayoral candidate ‘proud’
Nelson councillor and mayoral hopeful Matt Lawrey was among those named, and said he was flattered to be banned from Russia, and had been getting congratulated for it all day.

He understood that he was included for organising two public rallies in Nelson that were held in support of Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s invasion.

He said he was pleased the Russian embassy had been taking note of the positive things being done in Nelson to support the people of Ukraine.

“I have to say it all makes the Russian government look a little bit desperate … it does kind of reek of desperation,” Lawrey said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. This incorporates news agency reporting.

Since the coup in Myanmar on February 1, the international community has struggled to agree on coherent action against the military (also known as the Tatmadaw).

Tough action by the UN Security Council has been stymied by China, Russia, India and Vietnam, who see the Myanmar crisis as an internal affair.

Outside the UN, a strong, coordinated response by Myanmar’s neighbours in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has also been lacking due to their reluctance to interfere in each other’s affairs. Thai political expert Thitinan Pongsudhirak called it an “existential crisis” for the bloc

• READ MORE: As killings, beatings and disappearances escalate, what’s the end game in Myanmar?
  
• Ethical minefields: the dirty business of doing deals with Myanmar’s military
  
• Resistance to military regime in Myanmar mounts as nurses, bankers join protests – despite bloody crackdown

This reluctance, which has now cost the lives of over 500 civilians, rules out the use of military force to stop the violence, peacekeeping operations or even a humanitarian intervention.

It has left the international community with one remaining option for a coordinated response that could change the military’s behaviour: the imposition of economic sanctions. But even this action has been subject to much debate.

Follow the money
General sanctions that try to change the behaviour of authoritarian regimes by damaging their economies have proven problematic in the past.

Many leaders have invariably found ways around the sanctions, meaning civilians have disproportionately borne the costs of isolation.

In contrast, targeted sanctions against the specific financial interests that sustain authoritarian regimes have been more effective. These can impose pressure on regimes without affecting the broader population.

This is where the international community has the greatest potential to punish the Tatmadaw.

Since the US and other countries pursued more general sanctions on Myanmar in the 1990s and 2000s — with mixed results — the international community has gained a greater understanding of the Tatmadaw’s transnational revenue streams.

In particular, in 2019, the UN Fact-Finding Mission (UNFFM) on Myanmar released a report detailing the diverse Tatmadaw-linked enterprises that funnel revenue from foreign business transactions to the military’s leaders and units.

More recently, this list of potential targets has been expanded by non-government organisations and investigative journalists.

Researchers have also outlined the Tatmadaw’s dealings in illegal trade in drugs, gemstones, timber, wildlife and human trafficking.

The extent of information on the Tatmadaw’s financial flows shows just how vulnerable the military’s leaders are to international pressure.

Tracking the military’s legal and illegal business dealings makes it possible to identify its business partners in other countries. Governments in those countries can then take legal action against these business partners and shut off the flow of money keeping the junta afloat.

To some degree, this is starting to happen with Myanmar. The US and UK recently decided, for instance, to freeze assets and halt corporate trading with two Tatmadaw conglomerates — Myanmar Economic Corporation and Myanma Economic Holdings Limited. Both of these oversee a range of holdings in businesses that divert revenues directly to the Tatmadaw.

Myanmar’s trading partners can do more
This is only a starting point, though. To tighten the pressure on the junta, targeted sanctions need to be imposed against the full suite of entities identified by the UNFFM. These include groups like Justice for Myanmar and journalists.

The sanctions need to be accompanied by broader investigations into the Tatmadaw’s revenues from illicit trade. To counter this, Human Rights Watch has urged governments to enforce anti-money laundering and anti-corruption measures, including the freezing of assets.

Singapore’s central bank has reportedly told financial institutions to be on the look-out for suspicious transactions or money flows between the city-state and Myanmar. Singapore is the largest foreign investor in the country.

Moreover, for maximum impact, targeted sanctions need to be imposed not just by the West, but by Myanmar’s largest trading partners in the region. This includes Singapore, along with China, India, Indonesia, Japan and Thailand.

Business leaders in these countries have historically had the closest ties with Myanmar’s military and business elites. But their participation in a multi-national targeted sanctions strategy is not out of the question. For one, this would not require direct intervention within Myanmar, something they are loath to do. Imposing targeted sanctions would merely entail enforcing their domestic laws regarding appropriate business practices.

International action is becoming more urgent. Beyond the concerns about the killings of unarmed civilians, there is a larger issue of the violence extending beyond Myanmar’s borders. There are growing fears the crisis could turn Myanmar into a failed state, driving refugee flows capable of destabilising the entire region.

In short, this is no longer an “internal” matter for Myanmar — it is becoming a transnational problem that will affect regional peace and security. The tools are there to stop the financial flows to the Tatmadaw and curtail their operations. It is critical to act before the Myanmar crisis grows into an international disaster.

Dr Jonathan Liljeblad is a senior lecturer at the Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Speaking during the banquet to welcome New Zealand Prime Minister John Key at Suva’s Grand Pacific Hotel last night, Bainimarama said according to the New Zealand media, what had happened in Fiji somehow lacked legitimacy.

“That somehow, I lack legitimacy and my government lacks legitimacy,” Bainimarama said.

He said this was simply not borne out by the facts.

“We have moved on, but it would appear that the New Zealand media has not. Prime Minister [John Key], let me also confront head on the issue of media freedom and more particularly, the right of access to Fiji by certain of your journalists.

“No one who reports on events in Fiji fairly and in a balanced manner is excluded. Any journalist is free to criticise my government or me in an opinion piece or report criticism made by others in their news stories.”

He said Fiji could not allow the wilful propagation of false information that damaged the national interest and “undermined our vulnerable economy”.

‘No other journalist banned’
“And that is what has happened in the case of certain New Zealand journalists and others from Australia. Incidentally, no journalist from any other country has been banned from Fiji,” Bainimarama said.

“New Zealand television ran footage of tanks in the streets of Suva when our military does not own any tanks. They had been interposed from other sources. A claim was made that Fijian children were starving and were eating grass.

“These are egregious examples of wilful bias and misreporting. Yet, certain journalists in New Zealand and Australia — along with certain journalists in Fiji — think nothing of dispensing with the facts if they get in the way of the politically-weighted narrative they want to tell.”

Bainimarama and Key have assured each other of their willingness to redefine the relationship between the two countries after a decade.

On his arrival in the country yesterday, Key assured Bainimarama that his trip was to foster a greater working relationship and ensure that Fijians were treated with respect by New Zealand.

“Ten years is a long time between kava bowls. The purpose of coming is to say that this relationship with New Zealand is a very important one and you [Mr Bainimarama] made that point that you want our relationship to be one of equals,” said Key at the banquet.

Barbara Dreaver on the Fiji blacklist ‘disgrace’

Fiji and New Zealand ‘friends again’

According to Prime Minister John Key, the 2006 Fiji coup is ancient history and the time is right for his official visit this week.

But it still isn’t right for everyone.