The State House says the pardons granted by President Moli Nikenike Vurobaravu on 23 July 2026 were not made randomly, as public concerns continue over the transparency and process behind the exercise of the President’s constitutional power of mercy.

The State House says applications for mercy are considered based on information and supporting documentation concerning each inmate, while Prime Minister Jotham Napat has raised concerns with the President over the recent pardons, including the inclusion of two people convicted of rape.

State House says pardons followed consideration process

In a statement released this afternoon, the State House said the President exercised his power of mercy under Article 38 of the Constitution of the Republic of Vanuatu.

Article 38 gives the President the power to pardon a person convicted of an offence, or to commute or reduce a sentence imposed on that person.

The State House said this is a constitutional prerogative vested directly in the Office of the President and is separate from the ordinary judicial process, parole process and administration of correctional services.

It rejected suggestions that the pardons granted on 23 July were made arbitrarily or without consideration of the circumstances of the people concerned.

The State House said applications for mercy may be supported by a range of information and documentation, including formal applications or petitions from inmates, reference and support letters from chiefs and traditional leaders, and letters or representations from church leaders.

Representations from family members and people responsible for the welfare of inmates may also be considered.

The State House said information concerning an individual’s conduct, circumstances and rehabilitation can also form part of the material considered, together with medical reports and professional assessments from qualified medical practitioners in cases involving serious medical conditions.

It said this information allows the President to consider the individual circumstances of each case when exercising the constitutional power of mercy.

No advisory committee currently exists

The State House also clarified that Parliament has not established or constituted an advisory committee on pardons under Article 38.

As a result, it said there is currently no such committee in existence and the President is not required to await or obtain a recommendation from a body that Parliament has not established before exercising the constitutional power vested in him.

The State House said it has nevertheless sought to ensure that applications are supported by relevant information and evidence, including representations from traditional leaders, churches, families and medical professionals where appropriate.

Pardon is a discretionary act of mercy

The State House said a pardon is an act of mercy and not an automatic right available to a convicted person.

Article 38 gives the President discretion to consider whether mercy should be extended in an individual case.

The State House said the Constitution does not prescribe a minimum period of imprisonment that must first be served before an application can be considered, and Article 38 does not establish a detailed statutory eligibility test for the exercise of the power.

It also referred to previous Supreme Court consideration of the scope of the President’s power under Article 38, including the President’s discretion to exercise the power in circumstances where Parliament has not established an advisory committee.

The State House said courts have also recognised that decisions concerning the exercise of the prerogative of mercy are, in almost every instance, not amenable to judicial review.

Rehabilitation forms part of correctional approach

The State House also placed the presidential power of mercy within the broader development of Vanuatu’s justice and correctional system.

It said Vanuatu has moved from an approach in which imprisonment was primarily viewed as punishment and confinement towards a correctional system that also recognises human dignity, rehabilitation, reform and reintegration into society.

This is reflected in the correctional services framework and the Correctional Services Act, under which prisons became correctional centres and people serving custodial sentences are referred to as inmates.

The State House said the change reflects a shift in the purpose and philosophy of the correctional system.

It said inmates remain members of the community and retain their inherent dignity, while incarceration is intended, where practicable, to provide opportunities for rehabilitation, education, practical skills, counselling and preparation for responsible reintegration into society.

The State House said the correctional system therefore serves a purpose beyond confinement, with the broader objective of helping offenders reform their conduct and return to their families and communities as responsible and productive members of society.

Humanitarian circumstances may be considered

The State House said humanitarian circumstances may also be relevant when the President considers an application for mercy.

Serious medical conditions supported by medical reports from qualified practitioners may be considered, as may circumstances involving rehabilitation, reconciliation, family responsibilities and reintegration into the community.

It stressed that this does not diminish the seriousness of offences for which people have been convicted or interfere with the role of the courts in determining criminal responsibility and imposing sentences.

The State House said the power of mercy does not disregard the law or overturn a lawful judgment of the courts.

Instead, it said the constitutional power allows the Head of State to consider appropriate circumstances involving mercy, humanity, rehabilitation, reform and the wider public interest.

State House acknowledges calls for greater guidance

The State House acknowledged that presidential pardons are a matter of significant public interest and that members of the public may have questions about individual decisions.

It said public discussion should be based on the constitutional framework governing the power and the actual process followed in considering applications.

The State House said President Vurobaravu takes the constitutional responsibility entrusted to him under Article 38 seriously and exercises the power with regard to the information available and the individual circumstances presented in each application.

It also acknowledged that greater institutional guidance on the exercise of the prerogative of mercy could assist future Presidents and provide greater public understanding and confidence in the process.

The State House said any such changes would ultimately be matters for the appropriate constitutional and legislative authorities to consider.

It reaffirmed its commitment to transparency, constitutional compliance and the responsible exercise of the powers entrusted to the Office of the President.

Prime Minister raises concerns with Head of State

Prime Minister Jotham Napat met with Head of State President Moli Nikenike Vurobaravu on Monday this week to discuss concerns surrounding the recent pardons.

In a statement released this week, Napat raised concerns over the pardoning decisions, including the fact that two people convicted of rape were among those granted pardons.

The Prime Minister also stated that he will ask the Head of State to revoke the decision.

VBTC News understands that the Government has now left the matter in the hands of the President to determine the way forward.

Opposition questions transparency of pardoning process

Speaking in an interview yesterday, Mr Kalsakau said he shares public concerns about the transparency of the presidential pardoning process and questioned the basis on which individuals are selected for consideration.

“We should look at the process that leads towards the exercise of the President’s power, and if the people involved need to be questioned, then they should be. If some process needs to start to examine whether they made proper decisions and proper evaluations, then something like that needs to happen.”