PRESIDENT JOSEPH BOAKAI’S national address Thursday following the Supreme Court’s decisive ruling on the House of Representatives impasse was an opportunity to reaffirm the executive branch’s fidelity to the Constitution and judicial authority.
INSTEAD, it raised alarm.
BY SIGNALING HIS intention to continue governing with a so-called “functioning quorum” — despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that declared the actions of the breakaway ‘Majority Bloc’ led by Richard Koon unconstitutional — President Boakai has stepped onto dangerous constitutional ground.
THE APRIL 23 RULING of the Supreme Court was unequivocal: the leadership and proceedings carried out by Koon and his faction lacked legal legitimacy. The Court’s interpretation is not advisory — it is binding, final, and enforceable.
YET, LESS THAN 24 hours after the verdict, the President stood before the nation and, while claiming to respect the Court’s decision, effectively sidelined it by asserting his administration would “continue to work with the quorum that will ensure the full functioning of our government.”
THIS IS NOT FIDELITY to the law — it is a calculated circumvention of it.
AT ITS CORE, this move represents a breach of the very principle President Boakai swore to defend: the separation of powers. No executive leader in a constitutional democracy can cherry-pick which judicial decisions to observe and which to reinterpret for political expediency.
THE PRESIDENT’S LANGUAGE introduced a new, ungrounded phrase— “constitutional quorum” — to justify engagement with a faction the Court explicitly deemed unlawful. It is a rhetorical sleight of hand that masks a troubling reality: the rule of law is being tested from the top.
TO BE CLEAR, this impasse in the House of Representatives is not a mere political squabble. It is a legal dispute that reached the highest court in the land —and was resolved. The President’s refusal to align his administration’s actions with that legal resolution undermines judicial authority and sets a precedence that laws are negotiable when inconvenient.
THE PRESIDENT ATTEMPTED to deflect from this contradiction by emphasizing ongoing consultations with traditional leaders and national stakeholders. Dialogue is indeed important.
BUT NO VOLUME of consultation can substitute for legal compliance. If governance is to proceed on the shaky foundation of political compromise over legal clarity, then the entire structure of democratic accountability begins to erode.
WHAT’S MORE, this controversy unfolds against a backdrop of increasing instability. A fire at the Capitol Building and acts of vandalism targeting democratic institutions should serve as stark warnings. President Boakai was right to condemn these incidents. But his failure to reinforce judicial authority as the cornerstone of order only invites more chaos, not less.
IN MOMENTS LIKE THESE, a leader’s character is defined not by the comfort of unity speeches but by the courage to uphold principles in the face of partisan pressure.
PRESIDENT BOAKAI HAD a rare opportunity to lead by constitutional example. Instead, he has chosen a path that risks undermining the very institutions he claims to protect.
LIBERIA’S DEMOCRACY, though fragile, has made great strides since its civil war era. These gains are not self-sustaining — they require daily reinforcement through respect for the rule of law. When the President himself appears willing to defy the judiciary, it sends a chilling message to citizens, lawmakers, and future leaders that legal limits can be bent to suit political goals.
THIS MUST not stand.
IF PRESIDENT BOAKAI wishes to preserve his legacy as a democratic statesman, he must immediately reverse course. His government must abide fully and transparently by the Supreme Court’s ruling. Anything less threatens to drag Liberia backward, eroding faith in institutions that have taken decades to rebuild.
THE RULE OF LAW is not optional. It is the bedrock of governance. And no leader, no matter how seasoned or sincere, is above it.
