Chief Justice Gbeisay Justification of Son’s Appointment Raises Eyebrows on Ethics, Nepotism, and Abuse of Power

Chief Justice Yamie Gbeisay

MONROVIA, Sept 29 – Judicial credibility is not a question of legal technicality but of public trust. When the Chief Justice himself—charged with protecting the Country’s legal integrity—uses statutory ambiguity to justify the selection of his own son as magistrate, the ethical fault line is plain. While Chief Justice Gbeisay claims no explicit law bans him from recommending his family in any statute or the constitution, that argument sidesteps an open secret: Liberia’s judiciary does not simply recommend names for magistrate; it compiles the very lists the Executive Mansion publishes.

In his defense, Chief Justice Gbeisay challenged critics: “My son’s recommendation to serve as Associate Magistrate was not an act of favoritism but a reflection of his capabilities and interest in public service. The law does not disqualify him on the basis of relation, nor does it forbid me from exercising my right to recommend. Until NATJL can present a clear violation of law or ethical breach, their concerns remain speculative and unfounded. The Judiciary must operate on the basis of law, not innuendo.” Referring directly to the governing statute, he added, “If you show me any law that says the president cannot appoint a non-lawyer as associate magistrate, I will resign my position today.”

Liberia’s 2014 Code of Conduct was crafted specifically to guard against such scenarios. The law bans public officials from championing relatives for posts in their agency—a clear warning against the blurring of public duty and private interest. Professional associations like the National Association of Trial Judges (NATJL) have emphasized that bypassing required training and transparent recruitment channels for personal or familial considerations forfeits the hard-won progress toward a credible, rules-based judiciary.

“The law’s silence is not the same as a license,” the NATJL declared in a recent letter, emphasizing the judiciary’s leading—though unofficial—role in formulating magistrate appointee rosters. The association’s warning is unambiguous: when magistracy appointments devolve into networks of personal ties, Liberia’s courts risk losing their public standing altogether.

This controversy is not limited to one appointment but goes to the heart of the standards that govern Liberia’s legal system. Judges and legal experts caution that skirting ethical lines and eroding processes built over decades can transform the judiciary from a citadel of impartiality into another outpost of patronage. Justice, they warn, must not be vulnerable to the invisible hand of private interest—not if it is to mean anything at all in the eyes of the Liberian public.

__________________________________

Get Involved

Do you have additional facts to add to this insight or an opinion you would like to express?

Email Us

analysis@insightsliberia.com