“THE ONGOING CONFLICT within the House of Representatives is a matter that, though it may involve Constitutional questions, is primarily political in nature. It requires a political resolution through institutional dialogue, consensus-building, and adherence to democratic norms. While the Court may offer interpretative guidance on legal issues, the enforcement and implementation of its opinions in such matters depend heavily on political goodwill and respect for Constitutional boundaries.
“UNDER LIBERIAN JURISPRUDENCE and practice, a Bill of Information is intended to clarify or enforce a judgment where there is confusion or obstruction. While the Court’s decision to allow the Bill of Information was justified and procedurally correct given the confusion surrounding the meaning and application of its prior ruling of December 6, 2024, the LNBA observes that the Supreme Court expanded the function of the Bill of Information by re-asserting and elaborating its prior ruling, effectively issuing a new substantive decision rather than simply clarifying it. This expansion risks inflating the Bill of Information into a de facto remedial tool, inviting future parties to misuse it for re-litigation rather than clarification.
“THE LNBA BELIEVES that the Supreme Court has indicted itself of committing a very serious offense under the circumstance. That is why it is important that the Supreme Court quickly reconsiders its Opinion and Judgment and expunge itself from this embarrassment. Moreover, the Supreme Court’s Opinion and Judgment constitute judicial overreach into matters exclusively reserved by the Constitution to the House of Representatives; and this violates the Separation of Powers doctrine—the cornerstone of a Republican form of government.
“THE LNBA SHALL not condone legislative overreach in matters reserved by the 1986 Constitution to the Judiciary. Similarly, the LNBA shall not idly observe judicial overreach in matters reserved by the Constitution exclusively for the Legislature – matters such as determining who shall be the House of Representatives’ Speaker and how the Speaker may be removed from office for cause. This is simply a violation of the Political Question Doctrine.
“THAT IS WHY the LNBA notes the opinion of the Supreme Court that Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa remains the Legitimate Speaker of the House of Representatives on ground that his removal was un-Constitutional consistent with Article 49 of the 1986 Constitution, which states, ‘The House of Representatives shall elect once every six years a Speaker who shall be the presiding officer of that body, a Deputy Speaker, and such other officers as shall ensure the proper functioning of the House. The Speaker, the Deputy Speaker and other officers so elected may be removed from office for cause by resolution of a two-thirds majority of the members of the House.’
“THE LNBA THEREFORE calls on the Supreme Court not to allow this dangerous precedent, which will erode confidence in the governance of Liberia, to remain standing. Finally, the LNBA notes that should the Supreme Court fail to recall and reverse itself, thereby making the 2025 budget illegal, disbursements of salaries and payments made by the Executive for goods and services will be illegal and this will disrupt government operations and undermine the credibility of the State. Some might liken this to criminal subversion of the government. The LNBA, as a critical institution responsible for the guidance of the state, calls on the Supreme Court to quickly move to avoid any calamity in Liberia, the impact of which will affect the stability of the country. This call is against the background of preserving public policy interest.
“AS THE LEGAL community, we stand ready to provide guidance and support in navigating these complex Constitutional issues. The LNBA reaffirms its dedication to upholding justice, protecting Constitutional rights, and ensuring the stability of Liberia’s democratic institutions.”
