The House Representatives continues to witness a long running political stalemate over attempts to oust House SPEAKER Cllr. Fonati Koffa.
For a period now, the Lower House of the National Legislature has held two separate sessions in main chambers, while another by the self styled Majority bloc in the Joint Chambers after they put up a resolution containing counts against the SPEAKER.
The latest development has claimed the attention of many stakeholders and the ordinary citizens has dragged on a crucial time when the draft budget should be submitted by the Executive to the National Legislature.
In the wake of this, a member of the Liberian Senate Cllr .Augustine Chea of Sinoe county has urged the Executive and the Judicial Branches and the Senate must not do business with them, but with the Speaker.
“The President should submit the budget to the Speaker as required by law, to be acted upon when the Speaker has a quorum to hold sessions, Chea noted”.
Senator Chea call comes after the Executive branch announced a postponement for the submission of draft budget.
Chea at the time went on to question the innocence of the Executive branch of government and throwned out a question, Why the budget is not submitted to the Speaker?
It can be recall that a communication on last Friday from the Acting Minister of State was addressed to the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives instead of the Speaker, on the “postponement of submission of the national budget for Fiscal Year 2025.
According to Senator Chea, the decision by the Executive is a replication of Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf era’s constitutional breaches in previous House Speakers’ removal an apparent reference to former Speakers Edwin Snowe and Alex Tyler.
He spoke Sunday evening in a live interview on SPOON TALK on SPOON Network.
“Not submitting the budget to Speaker Koffa, and further disregarding the Speaker’s constitutional authority by writing the Chief Clerk, has drawn the Presidency directly into the conflict, the Sinoe Senator pointed out, this also under resolution of the conflict among members of that august body”.
Commiting also on the writ of Prohibition, Chea continued, what is in Justice Gbeisay’s ruling on Speaker Koffa’s petition for a writ of prohibition that the President is relying on or is not clear about?
“Let me say at the outset that the Speaker was in error for filing the writ, beacuse the Supreme Court could not do what he asked or prayed for; that is, to prohibit the so-called majority bloc from ‘conducting sessions’ in the Joint Chamber instead of the main Chamber, because this is a political, and not a legal, issue and falls squarely within the political question doctrine, according to him”.
He said what the Justice did by refusing to grant the writ of prohibition is telling the parties that the matter is not appropriate for judicial review as it is more suitable for resolution by that political branch of the government (the Legislature.
The doctrine is rooted in the separation of powers, as it aims to respect the distinct roles of each branch and avoid judicial overreach.
The dispute between the Speaker and those seeking to oust him, as it is now, is political, rather than legal.
According to him, the Justice’s refusal to grant the writ was simply to tell the parties that this is a political matter; don’t get the court involved; go and settle it by yourselves.
The lawmaker echoed also that the refusal to grant the writ is not a win for the ‘majority bloc’ either. So, there is nothing to celebrate in the giving instance.
He maintained Speaker Koffa is still the legitimate Speaker until removed by the “two-thirds majority” mandated by the constitution.
“The only thing the Speaker cannot do legally is to hold sessions, as he does not have the constitutional quorum to do so, similarly, the ‘majority bloc’ cannot hold sessions without the Speaker, because he has the authority to convene and preside over sessions, he said “.
Chea intoned, the Deputy Speaker is without any authority to preside if not authorized by the Speaker, except the Speaker is incapacitated by illness, death, or if he is absent from the country or absent from a session.
Referencing Article 49: “The House of Representatives shall elect once every six years a Speaker who shall be the presiding officer of that body, a Deputy Speaker, and such other officers as shall ensure the proper functioning of the House”
Chea added that the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker and other officers so elected may be removed from office for cause by resolution of a two-thirds majority of the members of the House.
“What the constitution recognizes and requires is that there must be a majority (37 Reps) to hold sessions under the authority of the Speaker; that there must be a two-thirds majority (49 Reps) to remove the Speaker; and that the removal must adhere to fundamental due process (Article 20 (a) of the constitution), the lawyer noted”.
Senator Chea explained furthermore, it is a regular session, i.e., a session convened by the Speaker himself or by his authority, that can, without a quorum, adjourn from time to time or session to session and compel the attendance of the absent members.
“The ‘majority bloc’ has no legal authority to hold sessions and, therefore, cannot compel others to attend or to receive and act upon legislative instruments, adding as they are not sitting or conducting legislative business legally, they cannot execute their legislative functions, including oversight, Chea said”.
As it stands, House SPEAKER Fonati Koffa and his bloc members, the “Integrity 30 have vowed he will not resign until the self styled Majority bloc of 43 can solicit 49 signatures and follow the due process to unseat him.
Visited 2 times, 2 visit(s) today
