Monrovia – The Ad Hoc Committee set up by the Speaker, Dr. Bhofal Chambers, had completed its work and made a resolution stating reasons which plenary could consider to vote for the impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Kabineh Ja’neh.
Report by Gerald Koinyeneh, [email protected] and Henry Karmo, [email protected]
Strangely, as the Chief Clerk, Mildred Siryon, read the resolution before votes could be taken, she suddenly found herself wanting – the pages of the resolution containing the counts on which Justice Ja’neh should be impeached were missing.
More surprisingly, the Chairman and other members of the Ad Hoc Committee who tried to run to her rescue could not find their copies, too.
The dramatic scene ignited serious debate amid laughter.
There were chants from a section of lawmakers asserting that it was the power of ‘God’ intervening on behalf of Justice Ja’neh.
“You will not find the document. You can go up and down, but you will not find it; unless we can’t pray to Allah,” taunted Representative Gonpue Kargon of Nimba District #4.
This prompted Speaker Chambers to call for a 10-minute break in a bid to retrieve the missing pages of the bill and save them from further embarrassment.
To the goodness of the Committee and the Chief Clerk, the missing pages were found and the entire document was read. The lawmakers went ahead with the proceeding that took a vote in favor of the bill to impeach Justice Ja’neh.
However, another drama ensued when all eight members from the Nimba Legislative Caucus that were present chose to walk out of session because their attempt to amend a motion made by Francis Dopoh of River Gee County District #3 was denied.
In the Nimba Caucus’ argument filed by Rep. Dorwohn Gleekia (Dist. #6) and Rep. Johnson Gwaikolo (Dist. #9), they called for the vote on the impeachment bill to be taken by headcount and not by ‘yae’ or ‘nay.’
Interestingly, after the lawmakers walked out, a similar amendment to the motion was made by Representative Acarous Moses Gray, one of the two proponents of the impeachment bill and was accepted by the Speaker.
The Bill of Impeachment
In the Bill of Impeachment submitted by the Special Committee set up by the Speaker, the Committee, among other things, found that there was probable cause for the impeachment of Associate Justice Ja’neh for official misconduct because his intention is nothing more than putting the House of Representatives at loggerhead with the Supreme Court and engender an unnecessary confrontation between both branches of government and maliciously exposing the House to public ridicule.
In the Bill of Impeachment, the lawmaker accused Ja’neh of stealing information (minutes) from a meeting held by an ad hoc committee chaired by Representative Kanie Wesso, Co-chair on Judiciary that drafted the rules and procedure that led to his impeachment.
Excerpt of the Committee’s report: “Theft of records: The Special Committee found that there is probable cause for the impeachment of the respondent, Associate Justice Kabineh Ja’neh for reasons of officials misconduct because the records which were not in the public domain was attached to the rate of prohibition and as such he must be made to show how these records came into his possession.”
The Bill of Impeachment also calls for the suspension of Associate Justice Ja’neh from the full bench during the impeachment proceedings by the House of Senate but should be allowed his salary, benefit and other emoluments.
Rep. Acarous Gray’s Response
Rep. Acarous M. Gray, one of the proponents of the impeachment petition, termed the House’s decision as historic and a triumph of good over evil and called on Associate Justice Ja’neh to resign.
Rep. Gray’s called on the Supreme Court to dissociate itself from the statement of Cllr. Arthur Johnson, who has called on all lawyers and criminal justice practitioners in the country to boycott court activities for three days as a protest against the House of Representatives’ refusal to honor the mandate of the Supreme Court.
He warned that such action undermines the court and warrant an act of impeachment.
“For the lawyer to even call on lawyers or Judges to boycott the court system for two or three days and to even call for a sit-in action undermines the independence of the Court itself. I believe that the Judges will not listen to that. They work for the people of Liberia. They may have assigned cases and such action could be impeachable also. You cannot leave your obligations because you took an oath and made a commitment. We don’t expect that, and we doubt whether it will ever happen. I think we have well-meaning lawyers and Judges in this country that will disassociate themselves from the political lawyer called Arthur Johnson,” he warned.
He maintained that the House of Representatives has done nothing wrong ignoring the Supreme Court’s order on grounds that no one can stop a bill when it has not been passed into law.
He assured that Justice Ja’neh will be accorded due process during the impeachment hearing at the Liberia Senate which is expected to be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Liberia.
Background of the Saga
The petition to impeach Justice Ja’neh was filed before the House by Representatives Acarous Gray (Mont. County, District 8) and Thomas Fallah (Mont. County District 5). Both alleged that Justice Ja’neh “committed a serious official misconduct by engaging in a wanton and unsavory exercise of his judicial discretion far exceeding the bounds of elementary judicial interpretation of issues simply to satisfy his personal ego”.
The lawmakers also want Ja’neh impeached for what they termed as “proved misconduct, gross breach of duty, inability to perform the functions of his office by allegedly allowing justice to be served where it belongs no matter the status of the party affected.”
Article 43 of the 1986 Constitution gives the House of Representatives the power to prepare a Bill of Impeachment.
“The power to prepare a bill of impeachment is vested solely in the House of Representatives, and the power to try all impeachments is vested solely in the Senate. When the President, Vice President or an Associate Justice is to be tried, the Chief Justice shall preside; when the Chief Justice or a judge of a subordinate court of record is to be tried, the President of the Senate shall preside. No person shall be impeached but by the concurrence of two-thirds of the total membership of the Senate. Judgments in such cases shall not extend beyond removal from office and disqualification to hold public office in the Republic, but the party may be tried at law for the same offense. The Legislature shall prescribe the procedure for impeachment proceedings, which shall be in conformity with the requirements of due process of law,” the Article said.
Ja’neh’s Lawyers: Wrongful Procedure
Lawyers representing Associate Justice Ja’neh filed a petition for a Writ of Prohibition with the Supreme Court, indicating that the Speaker of the House of Representatives violated Section 57.3 of the Rules and Procedures of the House of Representatives. According to them, the Speaker erred when he constituted a Special Ad Hoc Committee to investigate the allegations raised by the two lawmakers.
According to the lawyers, said section confers exclusive jurisdiction on the House Committee on Judiciary to hear, among other things, all matters relating to judicial proceedings, civil and criminal. “It does not vest any authority in the Speaker to remove arbitrarily and unilaterally transfer same to a Special Ad Hoc Committee as was done in the instant case by the Speaker.”
Justice Ja’neh’s lawyers further relied on Article 73 of the Constitution that provides that “No judicial official shall be summoned, arrested, detained, prosecuted or tried civilly or criminally by or the instance of any person or authority on account of judicial opinions rendered or expressed, judicial statements made and judicial acts done in the course of a trial in open court or in chambers, except for treason, or other felonies, misdemeanor or breach of the peace…” According to them, the lawmakers’ reliance for the impeachment grossly violates Article 73 of the Constitution.
The petition for the Writ of Prohibition on the House’s proceeding noted that the Constitution requires that the impeachment of a Supreme Court judge must be based on proved misconduct, gross breach of duty, inability to perform the functions of their office and/or conviction in a court of law for treason, bribery or their infamous crimes.
“Petitioner further submits that a valid and proper application of any of these grounds must strictly comply with the Due Process requirements of Article 20(a) of the Liberian Constitution. Petitioner says that in the instant case, on its face, the allegations of the Impeachment Petition clearly have not met any of the four valid constitutional grounds for the impeachment of a Supreme Court Justice,” the petition noted.