Monrovia – The Supreme Court of Liberia has agreed that Liberty Party’s vice standard bearer, Harrison Karnwea, flouted the Code of Conduct, but opined that the National Elections Commission’s (NEC) failure to conduct due process before his rejection is graver.
Report by Lennart Dodoo, [email protected] and Bettie Johnson-Mbayo, [email protected]
Mr. Karnwea was rejected by the NEC on ground that he was barred by the Code of Conduct (CoC) due to his failure to resign two years prior to the election as specified in Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of the CoC.
However, reading the Supreme Court’s opinion on the matter, Associate Justice Philip A. Z. Banks, III, averred that Karnwea should have been served a lesser punishment instead of disbarment.
In the view of the Justices, he substantially complied with the CoC when he resigned after the Supreme Court upheld the CoC as law in the Selena Mappy-Polson Vs The Government of Liberia case.
“NEC should have given him a less penalty than disbarment,” Justice Banks read before the jammed pack Court.
The Justices of the Court acknowledged that Karnwea violated Section 5.1 of the contentious Code of Conduct (CoC) by holding a press conference on March 14 while serving as Managing Director of the Forestry Development Agency (FDA). He announced his resignation from the ruling party and officially joined the Liberty Party.
Section 5.1 of the Code of Conduct states, “All officials appointed by the President of the Republic of Liberia shall not:
Engage in political activities, canvas for elected offices;
Use of government facilities, equipment or resources in support of partisan or political activities;
Serve on a campaign team of any political party, or the campaign of any independent candidate.”
Irrespective of the violation, being disbarred from contesting the election is not one of the punishments Karnwea should have suffered, the Supreme Court noted.
The Justices averred that Karnwea should have been punished in accordance with Section 5.9 of the Code of Conduct.
Section 5.9 states: “Any public official, after due process, who is found guilty of violating any provision of this section, shall be immediately removed from the position or office held by him/her, and thereafter no part of the funds appropriated by any law for such position or office shall be used to pay compensation to such person.”
No Due Process
The Supreme Court also observed that the NEC failed to follow due process before rejecting Mr. Karnwea and also Amb. Jeremiah Sulunteh of the Alternative National Congress (ANC).
“There is no record filed by NEC lawyers and everyone should be must be given due process. No one should be personally bound until he/she a day in court.”
“NEC made serious error in that the rejection was single handedly signed by the Chairman instead of everyone on the board of commissioners.”
Further reading from the opinion, Justice Banks said NEC was in grave breach of the Constitution and the election law by rejecting Karnwea without due process.
“Due process is mandatory and must be accepted by all legal institutions and it’s a requirement,” Justice Banks said.
The Supreme Court reversed the NEC decision to reject Karnwea as well as ANC in separate but similar opinions.
“He resigned after the Code of Conduct was declared constitutional. His conduct of not resigning two years earlier is in violation, we don’t believe that the action is egregious in nature.”
The Supreme Court has therefore asked the NEC to serve Karnwea and the Liberty Party a notice of withdrawal of the rejection within 48 hours. The withdrawal notice must be signed by all the commissioners, the Court ordered.
The NEC has also been mandated to revisit Karnwea’s case and conduct investigation and hearing in the spirit of due process and apply punishments enshrined in the Section 5.9 of the Code of Conduct instead of disbarment.
The Supreme Court opinion was greeted with wild jubilation from Liberty Party supporters who gathered in the premises of the Temple of Justice.”
“Their huge presence prompted unusual deployment of Police Support Unit of the Liberia National Police to the premises of the Temple of Justice.
Gongloe Taken Aback
Human Right Lawyer, Cllr. Tiawon Gongloe expressed his disappointment over the Court’s opinion.
He said it would have been better off if the Court had left the entire matter with the NEC to conduct due process without restricting the punishment to Section 5.9 of the Code of Conduct.
He said he strongly disagree that anyone who resigned their appointed office after the Court’s ruling on the Selena Mappy-Polson vs The Government of Liberia case is in substantial compliance with the law.
“I respectfully disagree with that because the part of the Code of Conduct that says if you hold a presidential appointment, resign two years prior to the election is an eligibility criteria,” he stated.
He noted that in the very court there is criteria set for lawyers to practice for five years before being considered as consolers at law, noting that the supreme has over the years rejected many lawyers who have practiced for just three years because they don’t meet the criteria set by the court.
“It is the same with the Code of Conduct, once you did not resign two prior you need not to be qualified, that’s the law,” he said.
He continued that if eligibility criteria are set, it should be followed to the letter without fear or favor.
Code of Conduct Meaningless
Cllr. Alexander Zoe, one of the lawyers representing NEC sees the Supreme Court opinion as a means of lessening the tension ahead of the election.
“Actually from what we see and the tension people sense with the coming elections, the Supreme Court tried to be a bit balanced in admitting everybody on board, even though it’s like making the Code of Conduct meaningless,” he told FrontPageAfrica.
As if the NEC expected and is in favor of the Supreme Court’s ruling, Cllr. Zoe noted that in his understanding, the Court took into consideration that rejecting all aspirants found in violation of the CoC would create havoc.
“So the Court chose to draw a line – it’s the line in the Polson case – that after that decision, all persons that resigned, though you’re in violation, but not as harsh as it was in the Abu Kamara’s case,” he said.