Tensions within Liberia’s House of Representatives have escalated as the self-styled “Majority Bloc,” led by Honorable Richard N. Koon, filed a Petition for Re-Argument before the Supreme Court, challenging its recent ruling that affirmed Speaker J. Fonati Koffa’s legitimacy.
The petition, submitted during the Supreme Court’s March Term, seeks to overturn the Court’s April 23 decision, which declared all legislative actions taken without Speaker Koffa’s presence “unconstitutional and without the pale of the law.” The Koon-led faction argues that the Court overlooked critical facts and legal precedents, including evidence that Koffa was lawfully removed by a two-thirds majority vote under Article 49 of Liberia’s Constitution.
At the heart of the dispute is a power struggle that began in August 2024, when Koffa was ousted by 50 lawmakers, more than the required 49 votes, amid allegations of misconduct. However, the Supreme Court’s December 6, 2024, ruling sidestepped the legality of his removal, focusing instead on procedural quorum requirements.
The petitioners warn that the Court’s latest decision could plunge Liberia into chaos. They argue that if all legislative actions taken without Koffa presiding are void, then the 2025 National Budget, approved by the Koon-led bloc, would be invalid, potentially freezing government operations and salaries, including judiciary funds already disbursed.
In a striking rebuttal, the petition accuses the Supreme Court of hypocrisy, noting that the Judiciary itself submitted its budget requests to the same lawmakers it now deems “unconstitutional.” The filing states: “Your Honors have enjoyed the benefits of an allegedly illegal process while condemning it.”
The petition also raises concerns over judicial overreach, citing the Separation of Powers Doctrine. It contends that the Supreme Court improperly interfered in legislative affairs by mandating Koffa’s reinstatement, a move the petitioners claim has no enforcement mechanism.
“How can the Court compel lawmakers to sit under a Speaker they legally removed?” the filing questions, referencing past rulings that bar courts from clarifying judgments via “Bill of Information” procedures.
The political standoff has divided public opinion. Supporters of Koffa hail the Court’s decision as a defense of constitutional order, while critics accuse the judiciary of enabling a leadership impasse that paralyzes governance.
Legal analysts suggest the Supreme Court faces a historic test: either reaffirm its stance, risking governmental dysfunction, or reconsider its ruling to avert a crisis.
As Liberia watches closely, the Supreme Court’s response could redefine the balance of power, and the fate of its democracy.
