Vanuatu’s Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Jay Ngwele, has raised concerns following the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that declared the closure of Parliament on November 14, 2025, unconstitutional. This decision is projected to cost the nation approximately VT16,625,000 (about US$136,011.19) in sitting allowances for Members of Parliament (MPs) due to the reinstatement of Parliament sessions until December 16, 2025.
Ngwele criticized the government for what he described as unnecessary expenditures, especially while issues concerning striking members of the Vanuatu Teachers Union remain unresolved, and nurses are also standing down from their duties. He emphasized that the government had already allocated millions of vatu for its tour in Tanna, further compounding budgetary concerns.
Notably, under Parliament’s Standing Orders, recess is scheduled for December 15, 2025, but Justice Oliver Saksak stipulated that Parliament must reconvene on December 16 to allow MPs who are currently with their constituencies adequate time to return to Port Vila.
The backdrop for these developments comes from the Supreme Court’s ruling, which confirmed that a constitutional application made by nine Opposition MPs targeting Prime Minister Jotham Napat was valid. Justice Saksak’s verdict included a scathing assessment of Speaker Stephen Felix’s competence, indicating that his actions led to unnecessary financial burdens on the citizens of Vanuatu.
Justice Saksak stated that the closure of Parliament was unconstitutional, violating Article 43(2) of the Constitution. The Speaker was specifically ordered to summon Parliament for a debate and vote on Motion No. 9 of 2025, which was confirmed to be in order.
The court ruled that the Speaker was aware of the motion on the day in question, pointing out that relevant communications and acknowledgements confirmed the motion’s registration. Despite claims from the Speaker’s counsel, Mr. Garry Blake, that the motion did not follow proper procedures, the court found no evidence to support this position.
As a result of these proceedings, the reinstatement of Parliament marks a significant step forward for Vanuatu’s legislative processes while highlighting ongoing governance challenges in the nation. This judicial intervention not only strives to uphold constitutional authority but also aims to restore fiscal responsibility in governance. The scenario illustrates the ongoing complexities within Vanuatu’s political landscape but offers hope that accountability and proper legislative procedures can be reinforced for the betterment of its citizens.