Glassco Goes to ECOWAS Court: At Best, a fight for Moral Victory, and Nothing more

Emma Glassco & Former Justice Kabineh Jaineh

Emma Glassco’s $10 million lawsuit against Liberia at the ECOWAS Court of Justice brings attention to the paradox of regional justice in West Africa: binding legal authority exists on paper, but enforcement remains hostage to political whims1. The court’s 2005 Supplementary Protocol empowers it to adjudicate human rights violations, with judgments enforceable through national courts via writs of execution4. Yet, compliance is voluntary, and Liberia exemplifies this systemic flaw.

In Valentine Ayika v. Liberia (2015), the court ordered an investigation into extrajudicial killings, but authorities shelved the case indefinitely1. Similarly, Cllr. Kabineh Ja’neh—Glassco’s lawyer—won a 2019 ruling against his unconstitutional impeachment, only for Liberia to dismiss it as “foreign interference”1 5.

This defiance reflects a regional crisis: 70% of ECOWAS Court rulings go unenforced, with Nigeria (43 ignored judgments), Togo (23), and Liberia (4) leading in non-compliance5. Landmark cases like Moukhtar Ibrahim Aminu v. Nigeria (2018), where compensation for unlawful detention was ignored5, and Barrow v. Gambia (2019), where a $100,000 torture award was disregarded5 6, reveal a pattern of hollow victories. Even clear directives, such as reinstating legislator Jerry Ugokwe in Nigeria (2005), collapse against the wall of sovereignty7.

ECOWAS’s enforcement toolkit, including Article 77 sanctions like trade bans or membership suspension, gathers dust as political solidarity trumps accountability2 3. The bloc hesitated to sanction Gambia for ignoring the Barrow ruling, fearing instability during its democratic transition5. Similarly, Liberia’s leadership changes at NaFAA—flouting statutory procedures—showcase how governments manipulate domestic law to evade scrutiny1.

For Glassco, a favorable ruling faces hurdle:

Political calculus: President Boakai risks emboldening critics by complying, given her ties to ex-President Weah1.
Regional instability: ECOWAS may avoid pressuring Liberia amid latest stance of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger5.
Structural barriers: Only 4 of 15 ECOWAS states have authorities to process court writs; Liberia isn’t among them3 5.

The court’s rare successes, like SERAP v. Nigeria (2022)—which forced COVID-19 spending transparency—required relentless civil society pressure5. Glassco’s case lacks comparable mobilization, and Liberia’s state-influenced media could downplay a ruling1. Past moral victories, like Ja’neh’s reinstatement order, boosted credibility but failed to alter outcomes1 5.

ECOWAS’s credibility hinges on transcending its “paper tiger” reputation. Unlike the European Court of Human Rights, which leverages EU conditionalities, ECOWAS lacks geopolitical leverage7. Reforms like an enforcement directorate or tying aid to compliance are proposed2 7, but member states resist ceding sovereignty.

Glassco’s lawsuit tests whether ECOWAS can evolve beyond symbolism. While a ruling might spotlight governance failures, Liberia’s likely non-compliance would reaffirm the court’s impotence1 5. For West Africans, this cycle erodes trust, relegating justice to aspirational rhetoric5 6. Glassco’s case may just join Liberia’s ignored judgments5, but it could galvanize demands for reforms—like enforceable sanctions2 7. Until then, justice remains a mirage in Liberia’s governance desert1 5.