EDITORIAL: AS LAWMAKERS, PLEASE USE THE LAW IN YOUR ACTIONS, PROCEEDINGS

MONROVIA—LIBERIA IS EXPERIENCING SERIOUS laceration in its governance structure – though not strange- in light of the hubbub on Capitol High, at the House of Representatives specifically, where a group of agitating lawmakers are seeking the removal of House Speaker, Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa, on allegations of wrongdoing and missteps in the conduct of the House business. These developments are having huge impact on the country due to the fact that business of government is being undercut and undermined by the current political tension at the House of Representatives, as the Senate can’t fully function – passing bills and approving legislative actions without the concurrence of the House.

IT WOULD BE THE highest of neglectability if anyone could infer that what is obtaining at the HOR is unique to Liberians politics, or it is new political order that is being introduced and unleashed by a group of angry lawmakers seeking self-aggrandizement. Equally, the fact remains that lawmakers opposing the leadership of the Speaker may not doing so in isolation of circumstances, and that is why it is important that diplomacy or greater tolerance is activated in the pursuit of solutions to these pernicious proceedings because outcomes in these situations always favor the opposition blocs.

Besides, it is a normal game in legislative politics that a group of lawmakers dissatisfied with occurrences, procedures and activities, would choose to revolt against the Speaker, who is the head of the First Branch of Government. In this scenario, either the political aspect takes precedence or the judicial side triumphs; although it has never been the case in the two different upheavals in removing speakers.
ALTHOUGH LARGELY GUIDED BY the Liberian Constitution, which is the organic law of the Republic, the National Legislative is however privileged to make their own rules that govern their operations, and any violations thereof are equally punishable as unto the Constitution. However, based on the crescendo of the upheaval to the extent the belligerent lawmakers are not bowing down, and even creating their own platform, it becomes imperative to draw attention to the legal aspect of dealing with such issue of removing anyone – let alone the Speaker, to woo them to prioritize the application of the law or legal process since they are lawmakers who are under incontestable obligations to operationalize the law in their undertakings. Besides the politics often used in these arrangements, it is hard time lawmakers inclined to walking on the side of the law than riding on the wings of politics, smartly using ‘compel compliance’ method to push and achieve their agenda.

THERE IS A STRONG need that we draw lawmakers’ attention to Article 31 of the Constitution, which states that “Each member of the Legislature, before taking his seat and entering upon the duties of office, shall take and subscribe to a solemn oath or affirmation, before the presiding officer of the House to which such person was elected and in the presence of other members of that House, to uphold and defend the Constitution and laws of the Republic and to discharge faithfully duties of such office.”

IN THE DEEPEST CORNER of our individual and collective cogitation, this constitutional provision places an undeniable and inescapable burden on lawmakers to do everything, including impeachment or removing Speaker, through legal means – meaning activating all the legal perimeters to pursue this case. In the same manner, Article 33 states that “A simple majority of each House shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, but a lower number may adjourn from day to day and compel the attendance of absent members.”

THOUGH WE DO NOT have the legal torchlights to explain the legal ramifications of a simple majority transacting business, it does not sound prudent enough for us to suggest or infer that any group of lawmakers, on the basis of simple majority, could detach itself and conduct its own business. While it is within the purview of any group of lawmakers to demand of their Speaker good performance and exemplary leadership deportment, the legal layers of doing so should be followed and applied, in keeping with their status as lawmakers – not ordinary citizens.

FOR US, IT WOULD be a betrayal of the confidence, power and fidelity of the Liberian Constitution when lawmakers, occupants of the First Branch of Government, because of petulance and other forms of dissatisfaction, become inconsonant just to realize their egocentric goal of getting rid of the Speaker or any other member. Yes, ordinary citizens do not have voting rights in this matter of grave concern, they have obligation to understanding and knowing how they lawmakers go about addressing the ugly situation, and they strongly think it would be incredibly rewarding if the law takes its course in this matter so that it becomes a good precedence, an exemplary module preceding lawmakers might apply in situations like the one at bar – removing of Speaker.

TAKE IT OR LEAVE it, it is totally wrong for the law to be circumvented on the back of ‘majority carries the day,” which of course, the majority itself can be very wrong in its decision. Use the legal side as lawmakers, not the political side.

New Republic Liberia

Alphonso Toweh

Has been in the profession for over twenty years. He has worked for many international media outlets  including: West Africa Magazine, Africa Week Magazine, African Observer and  did occasional reporting for CNN, BBC World Service, Sunday Times, NPR, Radio Deutchewells, Radio Netherlands. He is the current correspondent for Reuters 
 He holds first  MA with honors in International  Relations and a  candidate for second master in International Peace studies and Conflict  Resolution from the University of Liberia.