The recent opinion issued by the Justice Minister directly challenging the Supreme Court's ruling creates a dangerous precedent that threatens Liberia's constitutional order. The Minister's interpretation attempts to circumvent the Court's clear ruling that "the Constitution must be interpreted in light of the entire document rather than a sequestered pronouncement"[1].
The Justice Minister's opinion, issued under Section 22.2 of the Executive Law, attempts to justify legislative actions that the Supreme Court explicitly declared "ultra vires"[1]. This creates a troubling scenario where an executive branch official presumes to override the constitutional authority of the Supreme Court as "the final arbiter of constitutional issues"[1].
The Minister's interpretation particularly contradicts the Court's unambiguous finding that "whether a simple majority is sitting or a lower number, in both cases a Presiding Officer, defined in Article 49 of the Constitution is the Speaker, and in his/her absence, the Deputy Speaker"[1]. Instead, the Minister suggests alternative arrangements that directly contravene this constitutional requirement.
More concerning is the Senate's endorsement of the majority bloc's plan to proceed with budget hearings based on the Minister's opinion rather than the Supreme Court's ruling[1]. This effectively elevates the Justice Minister's interpretation above the Supreme Court's constitutional authority.
The Court explicitly established that "any sittings or actions by members of the Legislature not in conformity with the intent of Articles 33 and 49 of the Constitution are ultra vires"[1]. Yet the Justice Minister's opinion attempts to validate precisely such actions, creating a constitutional crisis.
The risks to national stability are heightened by the Justice Minister's opinion directly contradicting the Court's clear mandate that "whether a simple majority is sitting or a lower number, in both cases a Presiding Officer, defined in Article 49 of the Constitution is the Speaker, and in his/her absence, the Deputy Speaker"[1]. The Minister's interpretation suggesting alternative arrangements creates a dangerous precedent where constitutional requirements can be selectively interpreted based on political convenience.
The path forward is complicated by the Minister's attempt to validate legislative actions without proper constitutional authority, potentially invalidating crucial governmental functions like budget approval. This creates uncertainty about the legality of legislative actions taken under such circumstances, particularly given the Court's emphasis that "any sittings or actions by members of the Legislature not in conformity with the intent of Articles 33 and 49 of the Constitution are ultra vires"[1].
The overall implications for governance are severe, as this challenges the very foundation of constitutional authority and the rule of law. The Minister's opinion effectively creates a parallel system of constitutional interpretation outside the Supreme Court's authority, undermining the constitutional framework for resolving disputes[1].
This constitutional crisis, sparked by the Justice Minister's contradictory opinion and endorsed by political actors, presents a fundamental threat to Liberia's democratic governance and constitutional order. The situation requires immediate attention to prevent the establishment of dangerous precedents that could permanently undermine the Supreme Court's constitutional authority as established in Article 66[1].
______________________________________________________________________________
Get Involved
Do you have additional facts to add to this insight or an opinion you would like to express?
Email Us
References
[7] https://frontpageafricaonline.com/breaking-news/liberia-senate-upholds-justice-ministers-opinion-to-recognize-koon-as-speaker/The New Final Arbiter, Constitutional Crisis in Liberia New Final Arbiter, Constitutional Crisis in Liberia
Comentários