The Liberian National Bar Association (LNBA) has issued a sharp critique of the Supreme Court’s recent decision involving House Speaker J. Fonati Koffa, warning that the ruling risks destabilizing Liberia’s constitutional order and could render the 2025 national budget illegal.
In a strongly worded statement released Monday, the LNBA acknowledged the Court’s authority but dissented from its April 23 ruling, which declared all legislative sessions held without Speaker Koffa presiding “unconstitutional.” The Bar argued that the decision encroaches on the Legislature’s autonomy and sets a dangerous precedent for judicial overreach in political disputes.
At the heart of the controversy is the Supreme Court’s interpretation of a December 6, 2024, ruling, which initially addressed constitutional compliance in legislative proceedings. The LNBA contends that the Court improperly expanded the scope of a Bill of Information, a legal tool meant to clarify judgments, to effectively issue a new ruling on legislative leadership.
“The Court’s decision to intervene in the House’s internal governance undermines the Political Question Doctrine,” said Cllr. Bornor M. Varmah, LNBA President. “Matters like electing or removing a Speaker are inherently political and should be resolved by lawmakers, not judges.”
The Bar warned that if the ruling stands, it could invalidate the 2025 budget and all related government expenditures, creating chaos in public administration. “If the Court insists that sessions held without Speaker Koffa are illegal, then every salary paid and every contract signed under this budget could be challenged,” the statement read.
The LNBA also disputed the Court’s stance on legislative quorums, arguing that the ruling fails to account for practical governance. “What if a quorum exists, but the Speaker refuses to preside?” the statement questioned. “Must the entire government grind to a halt?”
The Bar emphasized that Article 33 of Liberia’s Constitution grants the House the authority to regulate its own procedures, including selecting presiding officers. The Supreme Court’s decision, it argued, disrupts this balance.
Rather than prolonged legal battles, the LNBA proposed an independent mediation committee, comprising former Chief Justices, religious leaders, and civil society figures, to broker a political resolution between warring factions in the House.
“The judiciary should not be the default arbiter of legislative infighting,” Cllr. Varmah said. “Dialogue, not litigation, is the path forward.”
Legal analysts say the standoff reflects deeper tensions in Liberia’s young democracy. “This isn’t just about Speaker Koffa,” said political scholar Emmanuel Johnson. “It’s about whether Liberia’s institutions can resolve conflicts without eroding public trust in each other.”
The LNBA’s rare public dissent signals unease within the legal community. While reaffirming respect for the Court, the Bar urged justices to reconsider the ruling to “avoid calamity.”
With the budget’s legality now in question and the House still divided, pressure mounts on all branches to seek compromise. The Supreme Court has yet to respond to the LNBA’s appeal, but observers warn that further judicial intervention could deepen the crisis.
For now, Liberia waits to see whether its leaders will heed the call for dialogue, or let a legal dispute spiral into governance paralysis.
