Monrovia-An uneasy calm has saturated the ruling Unity Party (UP) and its supporters as well as the Majority Bloc since the Supreme Court of Liberia delivered its ruling in the Bill of Information which did not favor the Majority Bloc the government has recognized and doing business with in the six-month-old leadership crisis that largely crippled legislative operations as well as the entire government functions.
Since the ruling of Wednesday, April 23, 2025, UP elements in and outside the government have ignited a recalcitrance posture, including labelling the ruling as waste of time and atrocious.
The action of vilifying the Supreme Court and questioning its ruling that does not align with their whims and caprices is seen as a form of slapping justice in the face for raw power, and a sharp illogicality to the government’s avowals to the principles of justice and adherence to the rule of law.
President Joseph Nyuma Boakai’s ARREST Agenda which thrust him to power contains “Rule of Law” as one principal pillar to repositioning the country, as he stated.
Supporters of the ruling party took to social media to vouch uncompromising posture, saying ruling or no ruling “Koffa will not be speaker.”
In a rather quizzical post, one UP loyalist wondered who would sit under him as Speaker, tacitly referring to members of the Majority Bloc who have already reaffirmed their commitment to Richard Koon as speaker.
Others classified Speaker Koffa’s victory as one killing a cow and eating dry rice; a parlance that unravels the contrast of someone not having access to or enjoying something that is duly awarded to one.
The House of Representatives has since been divided into two factions: the Majority Bloc which comprises members opposed to the speakership to the leadership of duly elected Speaker Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa, and the Minority Bloc comprises of lawmakers supporting speaker Koffa.
Illegally elected Speaker Richard N. Koon of the Majority Bloc wasted no time is expressing stern opposition to the Supreme Court Monrovia, an action seen as fight to maintain power in an irrational way.
Koon characterized the Court’s judgment as a “flagrant violation” of the separation of powers doctrine and vowed that the House will not comply with the Court’s mandate, insisting that Cllr. Koffa was lawfully removed in accordance with Article 49 of the Constitution and Rule 9(a) of the House’s internal rules.
Representative Koon characterized the Court’s ruling as an “audacious intrusion” into the internal affairs of the First Branch of Government.
In a formal statement issued following the ruling, Koon insisted: “The Leadership of the House of Representatives, acting by and between me, the undersigned… rejects in the strongest term the Judgment of the Supreme Court.”
In an effort to justify his fight for power, to remain in the position as Speaker, he further stated that the “Supreme Court has today deviated from its own age-old standard not to delve into the internal affairs of the Legislature unless there is a clear and unequivocal violation of the Constitution.”
Koon argued that the Legislature had acted within its rights when it removed Koffa for “corruption, conflict of interest and mismanagement”—violations allegedly prohibited under Article 90 of the Constitution and the House’s own Rules 44 and 45.
“No member who signed the Resolution for the removal of Hon. Koffa ever filed a motion for reconsideration,” Koon said, referencing Rule 17.4(q), and arguing that the decision to remove Koffa was therefore final and binding. He asserted that the Supreme Court has no authority to erase the legislative record.
Koon asserted that plenary “shall continue to conduct the business of the House of Representatives without any deference or regard to the Supreme Court’s Opinion and Judgment.”
The Court judgment invalidated Koon’s election as Speaker and also nullified all legislative acts carried out under his leadership.
The ruling indicated that the so-called “majority bloc” had operated without constitutional legitimacy and in violation of the Court’s December 6, 2024 opinion.
Premising Articles 33 and 49 of the 1986 Constitution, the Court ruled that plenary sessions can only be presided over by the Speaker or, in his absence, the Deputy Speaker, adding Since Koffa was neither absent nor incapacitated, any sessions or legislative actions conducted under Koon’s authority were unconstitutional and “without the appeal of the law.”
“This Court emphatically declares that it is within the power and authority of the Supreme Court of Liberia to say what the law is without fear or favor,” the ruling stated.
Support for the ruling
Apart from the remonstrance being displayed by Rep. Koon and other UP elements, the Supreme Court ruling is being hailed and welcomed by other organizations and permanent citizens.
In a statement released yesterday, a group calling itself ‘Independent People of Electoral District 11 Montserrado County, praised the court for the judgment that nullified what it termed “illegal possession of Speaker position by Representative Richard Koon.”
The group expressed collective relief and satisfaction with the judgment, insisting that the “actions of Richard Koon have brought disgrace not only to himself but also to the reputable citizens of Electoral District 11.”
According to them, every elected official has a responsibility to uphold the dignity of their role and to serve the people with diligence and integrity, and urged “purported Speaker Koon” to immediately adhere to the Supreme Court’s ruling and to respect the democratic principles that are foundational to our great nation.
It further stated “It is imperative that he acts in accordance with the law and the expectations of the constituents who entrusted him with the privilege of public service.”
Alternative National Congress
Also, the Alternative National Congress (ANC), one of the many opposition parties in the country, has added its voice to legal wrangling that followed the ruling of the Supreme Court.
The party, in a statement, rebuked Rep. Richard Koon and members of the self-proclaimed “Majority Bloc” in the House of Representatives, accusing them of flouting the authority of the Supreme Court and endangering Liberia’s fragile democratic order.
ANC lauded the Supreme Court’s ruling that it provides “much-needed clarity” amid a deepening constitutional standoff over the leadership and internal proceedings of the House.
“The Court’s decision reportedly addressed what the party described as “unlawful power struggle” among lawmakers vying for control of the lower chamber of the Legislature,” ANC’s statement read.
Headed by political Alexander B. Cummings as political leader, ANC minced no words in condemning the actions of Rep. Koon and his allies, labeling their ongoing defiance of the Supreme Court as “a brazen assault on the very foundations of our democracy.”
“No individual or group is above the law,” the party emphasized, warning that the refusal by lawmakers to honor the Supreme Court’s decision could plunge the nation into “a constitutional crisis” that risks eroding recent gains in democratic governance.
ANC urged President Joseph Boakai to ensure that the Constitution is adhered to. “As Head of State and custodian of the Constitution, the President has a solemn duty to ensure that the laws of Liberia, including the judgments of our highest court, are enforced,” the statement read. “Anything short of this is a dereliction of duty and a betrayal of the oath he swore to uphold.”
Cllr. Charlyne M. Brumskine
Another prominent citizen, Cllr. Charlyne Brumskine, condemned presidential appointees in the Executive Branch for publicly attacking the Supreme Court of Liberia.
She warned that their conduct not only undermines the judiciary but also damages President Joseph Boakai’s image across the region.
Cllr. Brumskine, managing partner at the CMB Law Group, denounced presidential appointees who, in her words, “attacked” the integrity of the Judiciary simply because they disagreed with the outcome of the case.
According to her, such behavior erodes public trust in constitutional institutions and sends the wrong message about Liberia’s governance to the international community.
“At some point, we have to let the young people know that this is wrong,” she wrote. “No one—especially elected or appointed officials—should disrespect or denigrate another branch of government.”
While reaffirming citizens’ right to free speech, Brumskine emphasized that officials serving in the Executive Branch must use that right responsibly.
“Freedom of speech is important, but if you are in the Executive, you reflect the president. The President of Liberia is your boss—you speak on his behalf,” she said. “How can an appointed official speak so harshly about the Supreme Court? You’re making the president look bad to other leaders in the region. Stop it.”
She the youth of Liberia not to support or amplify public officials who make inflammatory comments online, adding that many of these officials live privileged lives that the average citizen cannot relate to.
“Some of these people live lives you can’t relate to. While you’re wondering how to pay your tuition or which clinic to take your sick child to, they’re enjoying perks funded by taxpayers,” she said, referencing high salaries, government vehicles and fuel coupons often afforded to public officials.
Former President Weah
Addressing himself to the ruling, former President George Weah said the ruling is not merely a legal decision; but a crucial affirmation of the rule of law and the constitutional order that underpins our democracy.
Weah said any attempt to undermine, ignore or dismiss this ruling threatens the very foundation of the nation, and also risks plunging it into a constitutional crisis, a crisis that our fragile peace and hard-won stability and democratic progress cannot withstand.
He called on his successor, President Joseph Boakai and his administration to respect this ruling and uphold constitutional order.
“Ignoring or rejecting the authority of our judiciary undermines the sovereignty of our Constitution and endangers our collective peace with dire consequences,” ex-President Weah noted.
He also urge international partners and all supporters of Liberia to encourage the Boakai administration to uphold the rule of law and comply with the Supreme Court’s decision, stating “You are our allies, and your investments have been vital to Liberia’s stability and progress in democracy.”
For his part, Dr. Clarence Moniba and his Liberian National Union (LINU) have commended the Supreme Court for what it called its decisive, timely, and principled ruling regarding the ongoing leadership dispute in the House of Representatives.
It said the ruling, rooted firmly in constitutional authority and legal precedent, brings clarity and guidance at a moment when the rule of law is under visible strain.
LINU affirms that democracy in Liberia must remain anchored in the Constitution and governed by laws—not swayed by political expediency or shifting alliances. The Court’s opinion reasserts that no individual or group is above the Constitution, which remains, as stated in Article 2, “the supreme and fundamental law of Liberia.”
LINU strongly advises Representative Richard Koon and the so-called “Majority Bloc” to ensure that any efforts to alter the leadership of the House comply fully with Article 49 of the Liberian Constitution and other relevant provisions guiding legislative procedure. Disregard for due process not only undermines institutional legitimacy but risks plunging the nation into constitutional chaos.
Dr. Moniba emphasized: “This is not just about procedure it’s about principle. Liberia’s institutions must be protected from actions that threaten the foundation of our democracy. We cannot allow the rule of law to be circumvented in favor of political power plays. We must demonstrate that the judiciary is not only the final arbiter of disputes but a cornerstone of peace and national integrity.”
