Fahnbulleh’s comments, made in the wake of Justice Gbeisay’s statement during the February Term of Court opening in Nimba County, have thrown the political climate into turmoil.
Gbarnga – The political landscape in Liberia is witnessing growing tensions over a critical interpretation of the Supreme Court ruling, with Bong County Representative Foday Fahnbulleh standing firm in rejecting Associate Justice Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay’s statement.
By Selma Lomax | [email protected]
The lawmaker has dismissed Gbeisay’s remarks as “liquor talk” in the latest twist of the ongoing saga in the House of Representatives.
Fahnbulleh’s comments, made in the wake of Justice Gbeisay’s statement during the February Term of Court opening in Nimba County, have thrown the political climate into turmoil.
Justice Gbeisay, speaking at the court session on Monday, raised questions about the legitimacy of the majority bloc’s decisions in the House. His assertion that the bloc’s actions were unconstitutional and invalid — stemming from their failure to elect a recognized Speaker — has added fuel to the already intense debate.
Justice Gbeisay went further, declaring, “Whatever you do is ultra vires,” meaning that any legislation passed by the majority bloc was effectively null and void.
In response, Nimba County Representative Musa Bility filed a motion on Thursday, seeking to amend the House agenda and introduce a discussion on the clarification issued by Justice Gbeisay.
However, Rep. Fahnbulleh, ever vocal in his defense of the majority bloc, quickly dismissed the Justice’s statement, asserting that it did not represent the official stance of the Supreme Court and should not be given any weight.
The reaction to Rep. Fahnbulleh’s comments has been swift and divided, with voices from both sides of the political spectrum weighing in on the matter.
On one side, critics have been vocal in their disapproval. Simah Williams, in a Facebook post, expressed her disagreement with Rep. Fahnbulleh, but added nuance to her view, stating, “Rep. Fahnbulleh is wrong, but in another sense, the Supreme Court failed to interpret the law properly at first and should have called the Justice Minister to clarify the matter.”
This sentiment highlights the frustrations of many who believe that the legal system should have intervened sooner in the unfolding crisis.
Solomon Blamo, a political observer, did not hold back his criticism. He accused Rep. Fahnbulleh of undermining the authority of the Supreme Court, calling his remarks an “insult to Liberia’s democratic principles.”
Blamo argued that Rep. Fahnbulleh’s defiance sets a dangerous precedence, warning, “If lawmakers like Fahnbulleh believe they can pick and choose which Supreme Court rulings to respect, what is left of the rule of law?”
On the other side of the debate, supporters of Rep. Fahnbulleh are standing by his position. Bonah Sackie, a vocal supporter, took to social media to defend the Representative, asserting that the court was becoming overly political and questioning its involvement in what he perceived to be matters better left to the legislature.
“The court wants to be a political party instead of standing for what it’s supposed to,” Sackie said, echoing a broader sentiment of disillusionment with the judiciary’s perceived overreach.
Boima Passawe, another supporter, agreed with Rep. Fahnbulleh’s stance, emphasizing that when an institution fails to do its job, its actions become open to interpretation. “When you fail to do what you should, your failure can be interpreted in any way by anyone,” Passawe remarked.
Abel Wah also came to the defense of Rep. Fahnbulleh, suggesting that the Supreme Court and Justice Gbeisay should have acted sooner in addressing the issue, as Gbeisay did in Nimba.
