4 Mins Read
ADNews-Monrovia: The Supreme Court of Liberia, in a tense hearing on Wednesday, March 26, has emphasized the importance of procedural integrity in the ongoing political crisis at the House of Representatives (HOR), cautioning members of the self-styled Majority Bloc who have been attempting to unseat Speaker J. Fonati Koffa.
Benjamin Quaye Johnson benjaminqjohnson@gmail.com
The Court underscored that any move to remove the Speaker must strictly adhere to established legislative processes, including securing 49 votes in a legitimate sitting of the House.
Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Gyapay Yuoh and her colleagues highlighted the potential risks posed by actions that bypass constitutional procedures.
“Where he is still sitting and you open a parallel session, it can create chaos,” Chief Justice Yuoh noted, referring to the actions of the Majority Bloc, which has conducted separate sessions without the Speaker’s presiding authority.
The remarks came during a Bill of Information hearing filed by Cllr. Arthur Johnson on behalf of Speaker Koffa and other members of the House, seeking the enforcement of a Supreme Court ruling issued in December 2024.
This ruling declared the Majority Bloc’s attempt to remove Speaker Koffa unconstitutional, citing that legislative actions must meet quorum requirements and follow the Constitution.
Despite this December ruling, the Majority Bloc, led by Representative Richard N. Koon, continued its efforts to unseat Koffa, prompting the legal action. The petitioners argued that these actions, in violation of the Court’s decision, should be declared null and void, and that the Majority Bloc members’ defiant behavior undermines the Constitution.
The Court, in its latest hearing, cautioned that legislative actions must follow due process, including proper coordination between the Speaker’s office and the Deputy Speaker, especially in the absence of the Speaker. Chief Justice Yuoh stressed that the Court would not determine the legitimacy of either Speaker Koffa’s or Representative Koon’s leadership but would offer guidance on constitutional procedures, leaving the decision to the legislature.
Justice Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay added that the Court’s role is not to compel the Legislature to act in any specific way but rather to ensure that actions conform with constitutional principles. This sentiment was echoed by Associate Justice Yussif D. Kaba, who questioned whether the Bill of Information provided enough substantial legal argument to justify further Court intervention.
Cllr. Varney Sherman, representing the Majority Bloc, countered the petitioners’ claims, asserting that it is the majority that ultimately decides who presides over legislative sessions. He argued that there is no requirement for the Speaker to be present to convene the session and that the Deputy Speaker can preside if necessary.
However, the Court remained firm in its interpretation of Article 33 of the Constitution, which it said requires that legislative proceedings take place under the authority of a constitutionally elected Speaker. Both Chief Justice Yuoh and Justice Jamesetta H. Wolokollie emphasized that bypassing this process could set a dangerous precedent for future legislative practices.
The atmosphere in the Courtroom was charged as both legal teams presented their cases. While Cllr. Sherman pushed for a broader interpretation of legislative authority, the Court highlighted that the current impasse could only be resolved by adhering to established rules and procedures.
Justice Wolokollie specifically pointed out that there must be a clear procedure to remove a Speaker, requiring 49 votes and a legitimate session. Any attempt to do so outside of these parameters could lead to chaos and further destabilization.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Chief Justice Yuoh reiterated that while the Court would not take sides, it had provided a critical interpretation of the law to guide the HOR in resolving the matter constitutionally.
She warned that if procedures continue to be ignored, it could lead to wider political instability.
The case continues to unfold as tensions within the HOR remain high, with the potential for further legal battles and constitutional challenges.
As the Supreme Court deliberates, the question remains: will the Majority Bloc adhere to the legal framework, or will Liberia’s political crisis deepen further?
Comments are closed.