Bong County District #7 Representative Foday E. Fahnbulleh has triggered controversy with his sharp criticism of Associate Justice Yarmie Quiqui Gbeisay’s explanation regarding the Supreme Court’s absence from President Joseph Boakai’s second State of the Nation Address.
Justice Gbeisay recently clarified that the justices chose to refrain from attending the event to avoid political entanglement in the ongoing leadership dispute within the House of Representatives. He asserted that the Court had already ruled on the matter, emphasizing that legislative decisions must comply with legal standards.
In his statement, Justice Gbeisay explained that legislative decisions require a quorum, which must be presided over by a duly elected Speaker.
He pointed out that while the so-called majority bloc claimed to have a quorum, it lacked a Speaker, rendering its decisions legally void. He further stated that the minority bloc must continue to adjourn from day to day and compel absent lawmakers to participate, as the law provides no specific mechanism for enforcing such participation. He noted that any decisions made without meeting quorum requirements remain ultra vires and therefore illegal.
Gbeisay clarified that the Supreme Court left both factions to resolve their leadership dispute internally, as it does not control political decisions. He added that while other government entities, including the Senate and the President, may recognize one faction over the other, the Court must maintain neutrality by not accepting an invitation from either side.
Representative Fahnbulleh, a vocal member of the majority bloc, reacted strongly, dismissing Gbeisay’s explanation as a “liquor statement,” implying it lacked credibility and seriousness. His remarks have intensified tensions within the House, with the minority bloc seizing upon his comments to strengthen its position. Meanwhile, the majority bloc, including Fahnbulleh, views the Justice’s clarification as a hindrance to their political efforts, fearing it could weaken their authority.
Meanwhile, the House leadership crisis remains unresolved, with both factions using legal interpretations to justify their stance. With the Supreme Court maintaining its distance, the resolution of the impasse remains uncertain.
