The matter is closed. Koffa is the Legitimate Speaker. All actions taken by the Majority bloc are illegal according to the Supreme Court.
One of the illegal acts taken by the Majority bloc was the passage of the budget.
The Court was aware the budget was passed by a Majority vote of the total membership of the House of Representatives whose Sitting the Court had condemned as illegal.
The Court has since been drawing salaries and benefits from a budget which was illegally passed into law which is clearly in violation of the law.
Rule of Law Advocates have chosen to ignore this fact which stares them in the face. Application of the law must be above Board leaving no room for its selective application. There should be no Cherry-picking of the law.
Rule of Law Advocates have also refused to acknowledge that the Court was in error when it referred to a Majority Sitting and Minority Sitting.
Legally and constitutionally, a Sitting of the House of Representatives must meet the threshold requirement of a Quorum which is made up of a Simple Majority of the total membership.
Rule of Law Advocates especially lawyers are fully aware of this Constitutional provision but instead maintained a stony silence when the Supreme Court erringly referred to a Minority Sitting.
The Court itself apparently confused by Its own declaration stated the obvious- that the Constitution did/does not provide a way forward on how to deal with a “Minority Sitting vs a Majority Sitting”.
Theirs was clearly a New but Illegal Construct intended to accommodate Koffa for this was the first time ever in the history of Liberian jurisprudence that such an Illogical and Ill-fitting Construct was being foisted into law.
Quite notably the Liberia National Bar Association has abjectly failed to comment or raise a voice against such an illegal and unconstitutional Construct called a “Minority Sitting” of the House of Representatives.
It appears quite strange indeed that lost in the discussion is the word “Quorum” which is enshrined in the Constitution. Only a MAJORITY of the House’s membership can form a Quorum.
Under a Democracy, the MAJORITY assumes primacy. Without a Simple Majority(QUORUM) Koffa cannot assert his authority as Speaker. Since the saga began nearly a year ago, Koffa has not been able to form a Quorum.
The Majority of his colleagues have rejected his leadership and there is nothing the Supreme Court can do to change this. Instead they have given a rigid and straight- jacketed interpretation of the Constitution far from the will and intent of its framers.
The Constitution provides that neither House can sit for more than five days without or in the absence of the other.
If Koffa cannot form a Quorum the Senate after five days of Sitting in the absence of the House of Representatives will have to adjourn meaning that Government will have to shut down.
All of this can be attributed to decisions taken by the Court to selectively apply the law. It maintains that all actions taken by the Majority are illegal but have yet been dipping into funds from a budget illegally passed into law.
If President Boakai should enforce the law as he is being urged to do, in addition to restoring Koffa to his Post, he should demand restitution of Salaries,, Benefits and Operational funds all spending entities have received including the Supreme Court.
After all said and done, the Law is the Law and its application should not be selective. Associate Justice Yarmie Gbeissay made this clear in his dissenting opinion in which he lambasts his colleagues for what he considers a flawed interpretation of the law and a gross MISCARRIAGE of Justice.
