Varney Sherman Tells Supreme Court: “Senators Decisions Are Not Questioned”

Monrovia – Appearing before the Supreme Court Tuesday, November 27, 2018 in defense of majority Senators for changing of Rule 63, Grand Cape Mount Senator Varney Sherman alluded that decisions taken by the Senate cannot be questioned.

Report by Kennedy L. Yangian, [email protected]

The Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman comments come amid a petition from four of his colleagues and an argument put forward by their counsel that the action of the 21 Senators to change Rule 63 for the sole purpose of impeaching Associate Justice Ja’neh was in violation of Article 43 of the Liberia Constitution.

In his argument prior to Senator Sherman’s resistance, Cllr. Tiawan Gongloe who earlier took the stand on behalf of the four aggrieved Senators opposing the change of the rule, argued that Article 43 of the 1986 Constitution provides that “the Legislature shall prescribe procedures for impeachment consistent with due process of law”, but this was not with the case of the change of Rule 63 by the Senators.

Cllr. Gongloe further argued that in the change of Rule 63 that was single-handedly done by the Senators and passed onto the House of Representatives for concurrence, was unconstitutional.

The human rights lawyer told the four judges that the action of the Senators to change the rule when the issue of the impeachment of Justice Ja’neh was on the Senate floor was ex-po facto claiming any law that was not made at the time of the commission of an alleged crime is Ex-po facto.

“Changing of the rule at the time when the Senators have plan to carry out impeachment proceeding against Associate Justice Ja’neh and making of law when the action has taken place is Ex-po facto,” Cllr. Gongloe stated, praying the high court to overturn the Senators’ decision.

However, resisting Cllr. Gongloe’s petition, the Senate Judiciary Committee head stated that the four Senators who filed the petition to the high court did not have the legal standing because they were part of the decision making through the voting process.

According to Senator Sherman, it was very unfortunate on the part of the four Senators to vote in the process and later run to court, adding that Senators are not to be individually questioned as in this case that have brought the 19 Senators to court.

Senator Sherman told the Judges that when there was deliberation for change of the rule, Gbarpolu Senator Daniel Natehn stated that he was not a part and instructed that his message should be put on the record so that posterity could not judge him, which was done.

He said if people feel that the decision that they as senators took to change the rule was wrong; let the electorate should vote them out.

“Your honours, we have something in there called legislative privilege what we do there no one question us individually but the body which is the Senate,” said Senator Sherman, who added that lawmakers don’t have to come together for any action.

According to Senator Sherman, the change of Rule 63 was not for Associate Justice Ja’neh’s impeachment rather for all other impeachment proceedings as Rule 63 was promulgated under the first regime of former President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, adding that “expo facto” is law that was not a law when a crime was committed.

Rule 63, according to the Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman, was changed from vote of the majority lawmakers to that of 2/3 of the Senators present during the voting process. 

Following the arguments, witnessed by 11 out of the 19 Senators invited, Chief Justice Francis Korkpor reserved ruling based on notice of assignment that will be issued by the high court.