Liberia’s Chief Justice of the Supreme Courts sounds caveat to magistrates nationwide to operate within their limits.
By Lincoln G. Peters
Ganta, Liberia, December 3, 2024 – The Supreme Court of Liberia issues a caveat here, mandating all magistrates across the country to properly dispose of persistent non-support cases within two days while terming an unjustifiable travesty of justice and ultra-virus magistrates who exceed their magisterial jurisdiction and time limit in the determinant of cases.
Making a special remark over the weekend in Nimba County at the Liberian National Bar Association 2024 Convention, Liberia’s Chief Justice, Her Honor Sie-A-Nyene G. Yuoh, said the Supreme Court finds it unacceptable for cases to linger before magisterial courts for a period longer than prescribed by law.
According to her, Rule 9 of the Rules and Regulations for Governance of Magisterial and Circuit Courts states: “No civil case shall be postponed and continue for more than two weeks, except for good reason in the discretion of the magistrate; neither shall a civil case be continued from month to month without speedy determination.”
Chief Justice Yuoh explains that the rules provide that no criminal case in magisterial courts or traffic court should remain pending and not be disposed of for more than thirty days after arrest.
She underscores that magistrates are reminded that they are a month-to-month court and have limited territorial and subject matter jurisdiction. Therefore, it’s mandatory that they expeditiously dispose of cases because the legislative intent for the establishment of magisterial courts is to keep the peace within their respective magisterial jurisdiction.
The Liberian Chief Justice reveals that the Supreme Court has embarked on a straight implementation monitoring mechanism to ensure that magisterial courts adhere to prescribed time limits for cases, particularly against frequent deferral or granting of continuance in cases of persistent non-support.
“Any practicing lawyer will recognize that such actions by magistrates are not only unjustifiable but ultra-virus. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has mandated that magistrates resolve cases of persistent non-support within two days. The Supreme Court also notes instances where a magistrate grants a continuance for up to six months to allow a defendant to obtain their deed in the action of summary proceeding to recover possession of the real property. This is a travesty of justice,” she points out.
She continues that any practicing lawyer is aware that even if a defendant returned with his or her deed, the magistrate court immediately loses jurisdiction, wondering what is the purpose of granting countenance for up to six months to allow a defendant to go and find his or her deed, a practice she notes the Supreme Court describes as travesty of justice.
The Chief Justice says it is, therefore, most appropriate that the magistrates expeditiously issue judgment in favor of the plaintiff in such a summary proceeding to recover possession of real property cases. When the defendant appears with the deed, he or she has a remedy at law to file it with the circuit court that has jurisdiction.
“The Supreme Court with vested constitutional authority to administer the law transparently, expeditiously and fearlessly to all citizens and residents alike with a strong resolve to discourage by appropriate penalty, the act of filibustering by some lawyers and their clients, determined to delay cases in our courts through unnecessary legal technicality just to frustrate the end of justice. This, my colleagues and friends, will not continue with this Bench”, Justice Youh warns. Editing by Jonathan Browne
