— Courts Deputy Speaker Fallah to preside over unconstitutional session
In a bid to legitimize their efforts to unseat Speaker J. Fonati Koffa, the majority bloc of the House of Representatives has made a desperate appeal to Deputy Speaker Thomas P. Fallah, the representative of Lofa County Electoral District #1, to preside over a separate session convened by the bloc. The letters exchanged between the majority bloc and Fallah reveal the frantic efforts of the bloc to establish legitimacy in their campaign to remove Speaker Koffa, despite clear constitutional directives regarding the role of the Speaker in presiding over the House.
On October 22, 2024, the majority bloc sent a letter to Deputy Speaker Fallah, invoking Article 33 of the Liberian Constitution and House Rules 8 and 12 to compel him to attend their session in the Joint Chamber. The letter, signed by Acting Chief Clerk James Toubie, asserted that the majority of lawmakers had lost confidence in Speaker Koffa and called on Fallah to preside over the bloc’s sessions. The letter further stated that a resolution had been signed by a majority of members affirming this loss of trust.
Two days later, on October 24, 2024, a second letter was issued to Fallah by the same bloc, giving a directive for him to appear in the Joint Chamber on October 29, 2024, to commence his legislative duties. The letter included a thinly veiled threat, warning that if Fallah failed to attend the session, the majority would declare his position as Deputy Speaker vacant.
In response, Deputy Speaker Fallah sent a formal letter on October 28, 2024, acknowledging receipt of the bloc’s communications but excusing himself from their session. In his letter, Fallah explained that he required time to consult with his legal team before making a decision that could violate the Liberian Constitution or other relevant statutes. He diplomatically thanked his colleagues for their invitation but declined to preside over the session, indicating his desire to approach the matter cautiously and within the boundaries of the law.
Constitutional Implications
The crux of the matter lies in the Constitution of Liberia, which provides clear guidelines on who should preside over legislative sessions. Article 33 of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia explicitly states that “a simple majority of each House shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business,” but also clarifies that the presiding officer of the House must be present for any legislative session to be conducted. The presiding officer, as per Article 49, is the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who is elected to that position for a six-year term.
The majority bloc’s attempt to convene a separate session and invite Deputy Speaker Fallah to preside over it directly contravenes Article 33, which stipulates that the Speaker is the constitutional leader of the House and must preside over all official sessions. Article 49 says in no uncertain terms that “… the Speaker… shall be the presiding officer of that body…”.The role of the Deputy Speaker is to support the Speaker in ensuring the proper functioning of the House, but the Constitution does not grant the Deputy Speaker authority to preside over sessions in the absence of the Speaker unless otherwise directed by the Speaker or in accordance with the Constitution.
By attempting to convene sessions without the Speaker and seeking to involve the Deputy Speaker as a substitute, the majority bloc is violating the Constitution’s clear mandate. The Constitution envisions a structure where the Speaker holds a central and irreplaceable role in maintaining order and legitimacy within the legislative body. The absence of the Speaker in these proceedings delegitimizes the actions of the majority bloc and renders their session unconstitutional.
Desperation for Legitimacy
The letters between the majority bloc and Deputy Speaker Fallah reveal a sense of desperation on the part of the bloc. Without a presiding officer, their efforts to unseat Speaker Koffa lack the constitutional authority required to make their actions valid. Fallah’s measured response, in which he defers to legal counsel, indicates his recognition of the legal complexities surrounding the situation. Fallah’s reluctance to engage with the bloc’s session suggests that he is aware of the constitutional boundaries he must respect.
The majority bloc, by contrast, seems to be seeking any avenue to legitimize its proceedings, even if that means misinterpreting the Constitution and attempting to draw in the Deputy Speaker to serve as a figurehead. Their approach underscores a fundamental misunderstanding of the constitutional process for removing a Speaker. Article 49 of the Constitution outlines that the Speaker, along with other elected officers of the House, may only be removed for cause by a resolution of two-thirds of the members of the House. The majority bloc has not yet secured this two-thirds majority, and their tactics indicate an attempt to bypass constitutional requirements in favor of political expediency.
A Clear Violation of Article 33
The Constitution provides mechanisms for resolving disputes within the Legislature, but these mechanisms are being ignored. The majority bloc’s attempt to convene without the constitutional leadership violates both the letter and the spirit of Article 33. In the absence of Speaker Koffa, the majority has no legitimate authority to conduct business, and their invitation to Deputy Speaker Fallah to preside is an unconstitutional overreach.
The majority bloc’s attempt to unseat Speaker Koffa has descended into unconstitutional actions, as evidenced by their invitation to Deputy Speaker Fallah to preside over an illegitimate session. The Constitution is clear about who should preside over legislative business, and the role of the Speaker is central to the legitimacy of any session. The desperate tactics employed by the majority bloc highlight their lack of constitutional authority and their failure to secure the necessary two-thirds majority to remove Speaker Koffa. In the end, Deputy Speaker Fallah’s careful and legally minded response underscores the importance of adhering to the Constitution in navigating this political crisis.
