In the wake of mixed views in the public surrounding the Supreme Court’s transitional Saga, The President of the Liberia National Bar Association Cllr. Bornor M. Varmah said there is no potential for a constitutional and institutional crisis.
However, he stated that such is dependent on how the transition is managed.
Cllr. Varmah carefully following the issue as well as giving legal backgrounds and analysis recommends way forward for the process.
Among other things, he wants strict adherance to constitutional timelines.
At the same time, he calls for delay in the oath and formal assumption of office by the new Chief Justice until August 15, 2025 or a day after, when the incumbent retires.
Moreover, as part of his recommendation, the Bar Association boss also encouraged clear communication to the public on timeline to avoid speculation or confusion.
According to him, it is time that Liberia’s judiciary avoid any appearance of impropriety or power struggle at the top of its apex court.
“A smooth, transparent, and constitutionally timed transition is essential for maintaining public confidence in the rule of law and the impartiality of the judiciary”, he re-emphasized.
He maintained and confirmed that there is no potential for looming Constitutional Crisis as it is being alleged by some members of the public.
In fact, Cllr. Varmah re-emphasized that a smooth transition is being proffered between the outgoing and incoming Chief Justices.
Speaking on a related development, he pointed out that even though the President acted within his powers by nominating and securing Senate confirmation of a new Chief Justice before the effective retirement date of the incumbent,
The key issue lies in timing and assumption of office under Liberian constitutional law and judicial traditions.
He provided some Legal and Constitutional Framework as basis for the issue as :
Retirement of Justices:
Article 72(b) of the Liberian Constitution states:
“The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of the subordinate courts of record shall be retired at the age of seventy…”
Once that age is reached, the Justice must vacate office.
Nomination and Appointment of Justices:
Article 54(c) gives the President power to:
“Appoint… the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, with the consent of the Senate.”
Article 68 adds that:
“The Chief Justice and Associate Justices shall take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation before taking office…”
Key Issue: Timing of Commissioning and Assumption of Office.
Highlighting the Scenario at Hand, he reemphasized that the Current Chief Justice remains in office until August 15, 2025.
However, a New Chief Justice has been confirmed by the Senate and is set to be commissioned soon but Latest information has it that such commissioning ceremony is said to be on hold for now.
Raising Possible Constitutional Concern, he added that if the new Chief Justice is commissioned and attempts to assume office before August 15, 2025, while the current Chief Justice remains legally in office, there may be an unconstitutional dual occupancy or usurpation of judicial authority.
Making reference to the Liberian Judicial Tradition and Practice, Traditionally, he stressed that the outgoing Chief Justice remains in office until the effective date of retirement.
The new Chief Justice only takes the oath of office and assumes the role after the retirement or resignation becomes effective.
“The commissioning (instrument from the President) is not equivalent to assuming office; the key step is the oath of office, which cannot precede the vacancy”, he noted.
Providing more Analysis, he re-emphasized that there is no immediate constitutional crisis if; The new Chief Justice is commissioned now (i.e., receives the formal instrument of appointment), but does not take the oath of office or begin performing judicial functions until August 15, 2025, or immediately after the current Chief Justice vacates the seat.
However, he mentioned that a constitutional or legal controversy could arise if, The new Chief Justice takes the oath of office and begins to act in office before the seat is legally vacant.
Such action he pointed out could render
decisions or administrative actions taken by either Chief Justice as questionable during any overlap.
He reechoed that Legal challenges could be mounted against Supreme Court decisions made under uncertain leadership.
