Monrovia – Judge Boima Kontoe presided over one of the cases that embattled Justice Kabina Ja’neh expected to be impeached of, making his appointment as an ad-hoc justice of the Supreme Court a conflict of interest, some legal experts say.
Report by Bettie K. Johnson-Mbayo, [email protected]
The Constitution allows President George Weah to appoint an ad-hoc justice from a circuit court when there is no quorum in a case being heard by the Supreme Court.
The appointment of Kontoe is in keeping with Article 67 of the 1986 Liberian Constitution, which states: “The Supreme Court shall comprise one Chief Justice and four Associate Justices, a majority of whom shall be deemed competent to transact the business of the Court. If a quorum is not obtained to enable the Court to hear any case, a circuit judge in the order of seniority shall sit as an ad hoc justice of the Supreme Court.”
However, Judge Kontoe, the resident judge of the Ninth Circuit Court in Bong County, presided over the Austin Clarke VS. EcoBank’s case, one of the cases cited by the House of Representatives which it claims Justice Jan’eh wrongly ruled over.
It can be recalled that Judge Kontoe issued a writ of execution on the Management of Eco Bank for the action of damage for wrong in favor of Clarke.
The writ of execution dated October 19, 2017 states, “You are hereby commanded to seize and expose for sale the lands, goods, and chattels of the Appellant/Defendants herein named of the City of Monrovia, Montserrado County, Republic of Liberia and if the sum realized therefrom be not sufficient, then their real property, until you shall have raised the sum of One Million, Eighty Thousand, and twenty United States dollars (US$1,080,020.00) and twenty thousand five hundred Liberian dollars. (LD$20,500.00).”
“In addition thereto seizure and sale; and if you cannot find said lands, goods and chattel of said defendants, you are hereby commanded to arrest the living body (ies) and bring them before any judge of competent jurisdiction to be dealt with according to law; unless they will pay the said sum(s) of money (ies) or show property to you to seize and sell for same.”
A legal pundit, who asked for anonymity, said legal principles and rules require that once a judge had a prior heard and ruled in the same subject or in cases relating to an ongoing issue involved, he/she has to recuse him/herself if this same case comes up in a higher judicial forum where the judge is also presiding or co-presiding.
Since the appointment of Judge Kontoe, there have been rumbling questions about an apparent stalemate in the impeachment proceeding.
The appointment of Judge Kontoe was reportedly based on a letter from the Chief Justice who reportedly said that there is a tie between Justices of the court and there is a need for the most senior lawyer to break the tie, as stipulated in the constitution.
“I wouldn’t know if there is a tie but I think that maybe there is a tie because four justices can decide because there is a quorum,” a judicial source said.
“Anytime an ad-hoc judge is a name, it is either a problem on the bench between justices or the chief justice is avoiding a tie prior to judgment.”
Another pundit said justices of the court have reportedly gone into their deliberation room and decided what to vote for, and they believe that since Judge Kontoe presided and handed judgment in one of the cases, he may most likely vote for the impeachment of Justice Jan’eh.
Another legal pundit said judge Kontoe should have recused himself because the subject matter of the hearing grew out of his ruling.
“It is like he is reviewing his own act and that is against the code of ethics, which prohibits him sitting on the proceeding,” a legal luminary said.
One of the lawyers of Justice Ja’neh, Cllr. Johnny Momoh objected to the Ministry of Justice’s request to represent the House of Representatives on the ground that the Supreme Court had asked the Justice Ministry to give an opinion on the case at bar, not to be a legal representative to any of the parties involved.
The court is yet to rule on the request and petition if the writ will be granted or not.
Meanwhile, Justice Jan’eh has continuously said that he is prepared for the proceeding and will not bow in sorrow.