Liberia: Speaker Koffa, Allies Petition Supreme Court Over Alleged Constitutional Violations By House Majority Bloc

Date:


Monrovia — Speaker J. Fonati Koffa and his allies have petitioned the Supreme Court of Liberia to address what they describe as unconstitutional actions by a faction of the House of Representatives. The petition, filed on Thursday, is addressed to the full bench of the Supreme Court, presided over by Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene G. Yuoh.

The petition accused Deputy Speaker Thomas Fallah and other lawmakers, including Representative Samuel Kogar, of convening unauthorized plenary sessions, suspending lawmakers without due process, unlawfully restructuring statutory committees, and seizing control of the 2025 draft national budget–all in alleged violation of Liberia’s Constitution and the House’s Standing Rules.

Key Allegations

Unauthorized Plenary Sessions

Speaker Koffa and his allies argue that the respondents convened plenary sessions without the Speaker, the constitutionally mandated presiding officer under Article 49 of the Liberian Constitution. According to the petitioners, these sessions undermine the Speaker’s authority and violate House Standing Rule 10, which grants the Speaker exclusive powers to call and preside over sessions.

Article 49 of the Liberian Constitution mandates that the House of Representatives shall elect, once every six years, a Speaker who shall serve as the presiding officer of the body, a Deputy Speaker, and such other officers necessary for the proper functioning of the House. The Speaker, Deputy Speaker, and other elected officers may be removed from office for cause through a resolution passed by a two-thirds majority of the House members. While Rule 10.1 states: “When the office of the Speaker becomes vacant due to removal, death, resignation, inability, or other disabilities, the Deputy Speaker shall act as Speaker until a new Speaker is elected within sixty days. When the Speaker is absent from a session, the Deputy Speaker shall act in accordance with Rules 8.1 and 8.2. In the absence of both the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker, a member of the House, as elected by the House for that purpose, shall preside. Such a member shall be known as ‘Speaker Pro-Tempore.”‘

Speaker Koffa and colleagues contend that no vacancy has occurred in the Speaker’s office to warrant such actions and that the Majority Bloc’s actions undermine the established procedural framework of the House.

Suspension of Lawmakers Without Due Process

The petitioners allege that Representatives Edward Flomo (District 13, Montserrado County), Abu Kamara (District 15, Montserrado County), and Marvin Cole (District 3, Bong County) were suspended arbitrarily and without adherence to due process. They claim the suspensions violated Article 20 of the Constitution, which guarantees due process, and House Standing Rule 48, which outlines procedures for disciplinary actions.

Illegal Restructuring of Committees

The petition also accuses the majority bloc of unlawfully restructuring statutory committees. According to Speaker Koffa, the reconstitution of these committees ignored the required two-thirds approval of the House membership, as mandated by legislative rules. Additionally, the appointments made by the Speaker for three-year terms were disregarded.

Seizure of the 2025 National Budget

The petitioners contend that Deputy Speaker Fallah and Representative Kogar unlawfully seized the 2025 draft national budget, submitted by President Joseph Boakai, which was addressed to the Speaker as the presiding officer of the House. This act, they argue, undermines the Speaker’s authority and violates established legislative protocols.

Legal Basis

The petition invokes Article 6 of the Constitution, which designates the Supreme Court as the final arbiter in constitutional disputes. It also cites Chapter 2, Section 2.2 of the Judiciary Law, granting the Court jurisdiction over extraordinary writs.

In addition, the petitioners allege that the respondents’ actions contravene Article 49 of the Constitution, which defines the Speaker’s authority, as well as multiple provisions of the House Standing Rules.

Relief Sought

The petitioners are requesting the Supreme Court to declare the respondents’ plenary sessions unconstitutional and nullify all decisions made therein, reinstate the suspended lawmakers and rule their suspensions as unconstitutional, nullify the restructuring of statutory committees, declare the seizure of the 2025 draft national budget unlawful and reinstate the Speaker’s authority over budget deliberations.