MONROVIA, Liberia – Clar Hope Foundation has formally petitioned Criminal Court “A” to quash a Writ of Subpoena Duces Tecum issued at the request of the Assets & Property Retrieval Task Force (APRTF), contending that the court lacks the legal authority to issue compulsory process in the absence of a pending case.
In a motion filed through its legal counsel, International Law Group, LLC, the foundation argues that no civil action, criminal charge, or petition is currently before the court involving Clar Hope Foundation. As a result, it maintains that the subpoena is invalid and without legal effect.
The disputed subpoena, requested by the Assets & Property Retrieval Task Force chaired by Cllr. Edwin K. Martin, directs the foundation’s General Manager, Jackson P. Gbamie, to produce documents related to funds received for the construction of the foundation’s facilities.
The foundation describes the subpoena as an “impermissible fishing expedition,” asserting that it infringes on constitutional protections, including the right against self-incrimination.
According to the motion, Liberian law limits the issuance of subpoenas to situations where a judicial proceeding is already underway. It notes that subpoenas, whether ad testificandum or duces tecum, are ancillary legal tools intended to aid an existing action, not to serve as independent investigative mechanisms.
“Judicial power may not be invoked in a vacuum,” the motion states, adding that courts cannot compel testimony or document production without a live case or controversy properly before them.
The foundation relies on provisions of the Civil and Criminal Procedure Laws to support its position. Section 14.1 of the Civil Procedure Law defines a subpoena as a process issued within an action, while Section 14.2 authorizes issuance only by the court in which such action is filed. Similarly, Section 17.3 of the Criminal Procedure Law permits subpoenas only upon the request of a prosecuting attorney or defendant, implying the existence of an active criminal proceeding.
The motion further contends that any subpoena issued where no action exists is void ab initio for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Clars Hope Foundation also cites Article 21(h) of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia, which guarantees the presumption of innocence and protects individuals and institutions from being compelled to furnish evidence against themselves.
According to the foundation, the subpoena seeks broad access to financial, donor, and institutional records without any accompanying charges or adjudicatory process, amounting to coerced evidence gathering in violation of constitutional safeguards.
“The Constitution does not allow the State or its agencies to use the courts as investigative shortcuts,” the foundation argues, insisting that due process and jurisdiction are prerequisites for the exercise of judicial power.
The foundation further maintains that Criminal Court “A” lacks investigative or inquisitorial authority outside the framework of an actual case, and that the subpoena, as issued, constitutes an abuse of judicial process.
Clars Hope Foundation is therefore asking the court to quash the subpoena, release it from any obligation to comply, and affirm that compulsory judicial process may only issue upon the filing of a proper action before a court of competent jurisdiction.
