Rebel lawmakers fighting to remove embattled Speaker Koffa have bowed to the Supreme Court’s order to revert to due process.
By Lincoln G. Peters
Monrovia, Liberia, November 5, 2024 – Majority bloc lawmakers in the House of Representatives have bowed to the Supreme Court decision ordering them to follow the law if they want to remove Speaker Johnathan Koffa.
On Monday, November 4, 2024, during a conference with both parties at the Temple of Justice Chamber, Justice Yarmie Quiqui Gbeisay instructed the lawmakers to return to the main chamber of the House and conduct their affairs within the bounds of law and due process.
Over the last few weeks, legislative sessions at the House of Representatives have been disrupted by the majority bloc of Representatives opposing Speaker Koffa’s leadership.
The opposing lawmakers have succeeded mainly in crippling legislative functions through their conduct of separate meetings, while those backing Koffa’s leadership lack a quorum to proceed.
However, on Monday, the opposing lawmakers were told to follow the due process of law in their attempt to remove Speaker Koffa.
In their response, the lawmakers noted they would begin the due process as recommended by the Supreme Court Justice in Chambers today, Tuesday, November 5.
According to the majority bloc, their legal proceeding is in line with Supreme Court Chamber Justice Yarmie Q. Gbeisay’s mandate to the House. They added that they have already drafted a communication to conduct a session today to be presided over by Deputy Speaker Thomas Fallah.
Rep. Fallah crossed over to the bloc last week after pressure from his colleagues fighting to oust the Speaker.
During the conference with the Chamber Justice, Grand Cape County former senator Cllr. H. Varney Sherman provided legal representation for the majority bloc while sanctioning ex-Solicitor General of Liberia Cllr. Syrenius Cephas and former Associate Justice Kabineh Ja’neh represented Speaker Koffa.
However, both parties concede that due process for the Speaker’s removal has not yet been initiated, as he was not granted such opportunity.
Meanwhile, speaking in an interview with reporters at the Temple of Justice, Bong County District #7 Representative and front-liner for the majority bloc Foday Fahnbulleh said today, Tuesday, November 5, 2024, they will initiate due process for the removal of the Speaker in the joint chamber of the Legislature.
Recapitulating the Chamber Justice’s mandate, he said Justice Gbeisay told them to engage in due process. He added that they had presented an official compliance communication to the deputy chief clerk, which has been forwarded to the Justice-in-chamber to initiate the process.
“Now, we are going to session on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, where the Deputy Speaker will preside, where the complaint will be read, and we will begin the process of due process. We will be in the joint chamber. The law provides that where a quorum is, is there where traction business is? However, as I speak to you, the Deputy Speaker is presiding over the session, and we will remove speaker Koffa,” he noted.
Representative Fahnbulleh said that Speaker Koffa’s prohibition against them was not because of their absence from session but rather because of their plot to remove him. Therefore, the Chamber Justice told them that their actions were legal and did not place any stay order on them going to session but on proceeding to remove the speaker.
“There is no law that provides that you are restricted to a given chamber. The law says that there should be a session with a quorum of not less than 37, and that session should have a presiding officer and should be held in Monrovia, where the senate is. We will proceed with the activities and it will be presided by the Deputy Speaker’’, he explained.
“We can’t say anything to the press now until the judge comes out with the finding. I have no jurisdiction to speak on any matter that is in court. We will be in session tomorrow.” He continues.
Montserrado County District #4 Representative Marcus Thomas says that matters before the court, especially before the justice in the chamber, can’t be discussed outside of court. However, he notes that Speaker Koffa has used Article 26 of the Constitution to seek legal redress because he felt his rights were violated.
Atty. Thomas indicates that, having listened to both parties today, if the Justice-in-Chamber issues the alternative writ, it means that they will have an opportunity to respond and go into full argument.
“What you saw that was being served on the majority members of the House as a writ of prohibition for the conference is not the original writ. It’s a whole process. If someone goes to the court to seek remedies, the judge will cite the parties to a conference before issuing the alternative writ. In this case, he is praying for the writ of prohibition. So, whether or not the justice presiding in the chamber will issue that writ, that will be the alternative writ. However, in the absence of the writ, it means that we will continue our proceeding,” he added. Editing by Jonathan Browne
