CAPITOL HILL, Monrovia – President Joseph Nyuma Boakai has reportedly asked the Supreme Court to hold off on delivering a ruling in the ongoing House leadership dispute to allow him to continue negotiations between rival blocs in the House of Representatives.
By Gerald C. Koinyeneh, [email protected]
FrontPageAfrica has been reliably informed that President Boakai has reportedly prevailed on the Supreme Court of Liberia to delay its ruling on the controversial House leadership saga. This comes amid an on-and-off negotiations lingering between the minority and majority blocs in the Lower House.
Prior to the president’s reported intervention, it was widely expected that the nation’s highest court would rule on the bill of information filed by embattled Speaker J. Fonati Koffa and his allies today.
Senator Darius Dillon, a staunch supporter of the Unity Party backed government, posted on his Facebook, urging the court to be clear in its ruling.
He said: “Looking forward for an unambiguous, clearer and firmer “Information/Ruling” from the Supreme Court of Liberia that should bring some legal sense and sanity to the unfortunate and prolonged leadership controversy in the House of Representatives!”
He added: “No more AMBIGUITY!! WHAT the Law SAYS and IS; not WHO the Law KNOWS or SEES!!! When this is done, everyone (I mean EVERYONE) should be expected and encouraged to respect as well as abide and act accordingly, in the interest of good governance and respect for the rule of law. Politics not guided by respect for the rule of law anywhere becomes CHAOTIC and UNGOVERNABLE!”
The bill seeks clarity from the Court on the legitimacy of moves by the majority bloc to unseat Speaker Koffa—moves he has consistently described as unconstitutional.
While the President’s reported intervention is being viewed by some as an attempt to restore calm and foster legislative unity, critics argue it may signal undue executive interference in judicial proceedings.
“This raises serious constitutional questions. Any attempt by the Executive to influence the timing or outcome of a judicial ruling—even under the pretense of promoting dialogue—risks undermining the independence of the judiciary,” said a renowned Liberian Lawyer seeking anonymity.
How did we get here?
The leadership crisis in the House of Representatives erupted following the formation of a majority bloc that claims to have the numbers to remove Koffa. The Speaker and his supporters, however, maintain that proper procedures have not been followed and that any attempt to oust him must be guided strictly by House rules and the Constitution, hence they launched a legal battle.
In the first case, the Supreme Court declared that any legislative action not in conformity with Articles 33 and 49 of the Constitution is “ultra vires.” The Court emphasized that Article 33 requires a quorum of a simple majority for legislative sessions and that the Speaker must preside over all sessions, as stipulated in Article 49. They added that the Deputy Speaker presides when the Speaker is unavailable. Without a mechanism to compel absentee lawmakers to attend, the Court ruled that it cannot intervene in legislative matters beyond its constitutional mandate.
The Court then warned that legislative disagreements must be resolved within the bounds of the Constitution and that it would not encroach on the separation of powers by creating rules to address procedural gaps within the Legislature, and so the Legislature should return to session and act accordingly.
Following the ruling, both parties declared victory. The majority bloc, emboldened by their numbers and support from the executive and the Liberian Senate, took siege of the House leadership, and under the gavel of Deputy Speaker Thomas Fallah, passed on a resolution removing the Speaker and declaring all committees established by him null and void.
Again, Speaker Koffa and colleagues returned to the Supreme Court with a Bill of Information, asking for enforcement of the previous ruling.
They argued that the Majority Bloc’s actions undermine the Constitution, calling for their actions to be declared null and void.
The petitioners emphasized that the Majority Bloc was intentionally disregarding the Court’s order and continuing to conduct illegitimate proceedings.
Throughout the hearing on March 26, the Supreme Court made it clear that the Majority Bloc’s disregard for procedure was a serious concern. In a sharp rebuke, the Court strongly criticized the Majority Bloc for failing to follow proper legislative procedures in their ongoing efforts to unseat Speaker Koffa.
At one-point, Associate Justice Jamesetta Howard Wolokollie stressed the importance of abiding by the Constitution and proper legislative procedure to avoid chaos.
Cllr. Varney Sherman argued that his group had passed a vote of no confidence in Speaker Koffa and had effectively removed him through a majority vote. He said the decision was made by majority members of the House.
However, Chief Justice Youh dismissed this argument, explaining that Liberia’s jurisprudence does not recognize a vote of no confidence or the formation of a majority bloc for such purposes. She said even if they were one thousand, without a two-third majority, they could not remove the Speaker.
She stressed that, according to Article 33 of the Constitution, a simple majority forms a quorum, but regardless of numbers, the designated Speaker remains in office, while Article 49 states the Speaker is elected every six years and can only be removed for cause by a two-thirds majority of the House.
Justice Yussif D. Kaba also criticized the Majority Bloc’s actions, emphasizing that although lawmakers may have the authority to remove a Speaker, they must strictly adhere to the proper constitutional procedures. The justices clarified that, in interpreting Articles 33 and 49, the legislature cannot override the established process for the removal of a presiding officer.
Before adjoining, Justice Youh raised concern about the security of the justices of the Supreme Court since the court’s ruling in 2024. She termed the lingering impasse at the House of Representatives as chaotic and called on the Ministry of Justice to increase the security of each of the justices.
“We take judicial notice of the fact that all Liberians woke up in the early hours and they saw that portion of the Capitol Building was on fire,” she said in a counter reaction to Cllr. Sherman who had earlier stated there was no chaos in the House. “Counselor, this court of last resort takes judicial notice that the news was everywhere, on foreign news that people were fighting over a space for the speaker and videotaping it, I term it as chaos.”
The Executive Mansion is yet to comment, but FrontPage Africa has learned that the President was briefed that the ruling would not be in the interest of the Majority Bloc, and as such, has demanded the court to grant him two weeks to negotiate between the rival groups.
The president’s previous intervention has yielded no results as both sides maintained their grounds. Efforts by the Liberia Council of Churches and other religious groups have yielded no fruitful results. The regional bloc, ECOWAS’ two mediation missions also failed to resolve the crisis.
So far, the Supreme Court has not officially commented on the reported request or the timing of its ruling. The delay has only fueled further speculation about behind-the-scenes maneuvering and deepening rifts within Liberia’s political establishment.
Many legal scholars, ordinary Liberians and foreign partners have expressed concern that the president’s interference in the decision of the court, will be a complete violation of the constitutional provision of separation of power.
Analysts say, as president, Mr. Boakai took an oath to uphold the Constitution of Liberia.
As the nation awaits clarity, political observers warn that the standoff, if not resolved by the court, could paralyze legislative business and distract from key national priorities, including the implementation of President Boakai’s much-anticipated “ARREST” agenda.
