Monrovia – FrontPageAfrica has gathered that the Government of Liberia has been unable to file its defense in a human rights violation and rights to fair trial suit filed by ECOWAS Court Judge Micah Wilkins Wright.
Report by Lennart Dodoo – [email protected]
Justice Wright is also a former Solicitor General of Liberia.
His litigation against the government of Liberia emanates from a ruling by the Supreme Court of Liberia which suspended his law license for a year for allegedly breaching provisions of the Moral and Ethical Conduct of Lawyers without giving him his right to fair hearing.
As a result of the suspension of his license and subsequent communication forwarded to the regional body, Cllr. Wright was also suspended as the Vice President of the ECOWAS Court of Justice.
In that regard, he filed a tripartite application at the Registry of ECOWAS Court of Justice on March 30, 2017; Application for Expedited Procedure pursuant to Article 59 of the Rules of Community Court of Justice dated 30th March, 2017; and Application for Provisional Measure pursuant to Article 20 of Protocol A/P1/7/91 on the Community Court of Justice and under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court dated 30th March, 2017.
The ECOWAS Court reportedly served all these applications on the Defendants including the Republic of Liberia; President of ECOWAS Commission; and The ECOWAS Judicial Council on April 6, 2017, directing the defendants to file their respective defenses within 30 days after service of the Applications on them.
However, while the Court expected to have received the Government of Liberia’s defense on the alleged violation of the right of fair hearing and due process, amongst other violations, the government of Liberia, instead of lodging a valid Defense before the ECOWAS Court of Justice, has filed a motion for extension of time to file Defense, dated May 12, 2017 and signed by the Solicitor-General, Cllr. Betty Lamin Blamo.
In an attempt to justify the request for extension of time, the government stated that Republic of Liberia is currently engaged with the preparation of the conduct of Legislative and Presidential elections come October 2017 and the Ministry of Justice resource capacity is challenged at this time.
As a result, the Ministry of Justice requested the Court to give the attorneys assigned to the case additional time to allow them interpose a solid defense on behalf of the Government of Liberia.
Rights advocate and human rights organizations have frowned at what they consider as a display of gross disrespect for the ECOWAS Court by the Government of Liberia.
The Director General of Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Rights (CESAR) in Nigeria, Frank Tietie, expressed disappointment at the Government of Liberia’s inability to defend its action against Justice Wright.
Tietie concluded that the government’s request for extension of time is simply because it does not have a valid defense for the alleged rights violation meted against the former Solicitor General.
Also, the Executive Director of Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) A. A. Mumuni, admonished the Liberian government to tread on the path of caution and take notice of the case being level of public interest in the case.
He therefore termed the action of the government of Liberia as “a ridicule of the procedure before an International Court”, for the Solicitor – General of Liberia to file a “baseless motion” for extension of time, without attaching a Defense, even if it is filed out of time.
An Associate Lawyer with an International human rights organization, Avocat Sans Frontiers, Barr. Noel has also criticized the action of the government of Liberia through a telephone conversation with our correspondent.
He stated that Government is a continuum. “Conduct of Election, including campaigns and plans do not have any bearing on the activities of the judiciary both within and outside the Republic of Liberia, therefore, the baseless reason forwarded by the Solicitor General is a shame to the Legal Profession,” he said.
He has challenged the Solicitor General to list the specific roles and responsibility of all the Lawyers in the Ministry of Justice in connection with the upcoming election, which is of higher priority to their basic core responsibilities of defending the government.
Solicitor General Blamo could not provide FrontPageAfrica clarity on the government’s request for extension as she said she was at the moment at of the telephone call deeply engaged in preparing some briefs for a case.
In February 2017, the Supreme Court of Liberia found Wright liable of breaching Rules 8 & 9 the Moral and Ethical Conduct of Lawyers. He allegedly obscured his lawyer-client relationship with a former client while representing the government against the same client in his capacity as Solicitor General of the Republic.
Justice Wright, while pleading on behalf of the Government of Liberia as Solicitor General, concealed his relationship with his former client, FIDC/Sochor, when at the time, he conceded to a US$15.9 million fraudulent judgment against the Government of Liberia, the Supreme Court opined.
Rule 8: “It is the duty of the lawyer at the time of retainer to disclose to the client all of the circumstances of his relations to the parties if there be any and any interest in or connection with the controversy, which might influence the client in the selection of the counsel. It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests.”
“Rule 9”: “Within the meaning of this rule, a lawyer represents conflicting interests when, on behalf of one client, it is his duty to contend for that which duty to another client requires him to oppose.
The obligation to represent the client with undivided fidelity, and not to divulge his secrets or confidences, forbids also the subsequent acceptance of retainers or employment from others in matters adversely affecting any interest of the client with respect to which confidence has been reposed.”
However, Justice Wright in his complaint to the ECOWAS Court stated that the Supreme Court of Liberia rendered such judgment without informing him of any pending litigation against him.
He noted that before and within the period of his statutory appointment as a judge at the Community Court of Justice and ECOWAS, he has not exhibited any act contrary to the professional ethics of the legal profession.
The complaint: “Even if there had been such a complaint for ethical misconduct against Justice Wright, a natural justice demands that a lawyer accused of ethical misconduct would be served copy of the complaint and given the opportunity to defend himself and confront his accusers in a hearing before the Grievance and Ethics Committee of the Liberian National Bar Association, whose findings and report would then become the subject of a hearing before the Supreme Court of Liberia, and upon which a decision would be based.”
The complaint further asserted that Wright cannot be condemned without being given the opportunity to defend himself.
“And this is so because the Supreme Court itself cannot take evidence in an investigation but will review the report growing out of such investigation, but there was no such opportunity given to Justice Wright to appear and put in a defense.
“There was no evidence that Justice Wright was ever summoned for such investigation; as such Justice Wright puts the Government of Liberia to strictest proof of his even being served with process of any kind to appear before the Grievance and Ethics Committee or any other investigating body for any investigation, and he challenges them to produce the records of such hearing.
“Accordingly, it was grossly improper, highly irregular and seriously prejudicial to Justice Wright for the Supreme Court to have initiated suo moto, as opposed to judgment to a review, a disciplinary proceeding against the Applicant and entered judgment suspending Justice Wright where such original powers lie only in the Grievance and Ethics Committee.”
The complaint noted that immediately after imposing such “harsh punishment” on Wright, the Supreme Court expeditiously issued a press release on the same day which was published in several local dailies and on the internet.
The publications, which Wright believes was sponsored by the Government of Liberia, according to him, was intended to assassinate his character and reputation which is in violation of his right to dignity as recognized and guaranteed by the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights.
He added that the “viral state-sponsored” publication of the judgment in the print and electronic media has eroded public trust and confidence in his person; as he is also of being castigated by parties before the Court of Justice of ECOWAS and organs of the Community have already persecuted him as a result of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Liberia.