The Liberia Coalition of Human Rights Defenders, a prominent civil society organization, has filed a petition for a writ of prohibition against the Special Investigative Committee led by President Joseph Boakai’s Legal Advisor.
The petition, supported by the Chairperson of the Independent National Commission on Human Rights (INCHR), targets Cllr. Bushuben Keita, Cllr. Aloysius Jappah, Cllr. George Sagbeh, and Cllr. Bendu E. Clark.
The petitioners have approached Chamber Justice Yusuf Kaba, requesting that the Legal Adviser prohibits and restrain the Special Investigative Committee established by President Boakai to address a dispute among the INCHR Board of Commissioners.
They argue that the authority to investigate such matters lies with the civil society organization, as stipulated in Article VII (3) of the 2005 Act that established the INCHR.
Article 11 of the Act states that the commission shall regulate its own procedures.
Based on this provision, the commission developed a standard operating procedure (SOP) for resolving disputes among its commissioners.
Section 3.9 of the SOP addresses complaints and disputes involving commissioners, stating that unresolved disputes should be referred to civil society, including eminent citizens.
The petitioners claim that this process is being bypassed by the president’s legal advisor.
The petitioners further argue that a precedent was set by former President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, who adhered to the SOP provision of the Commission.
They cite Article XX (2) of the Act, which prohibits interference with the Commission by any state organ or member.
The petitioners informed Justice Kaba that the Liberia Coalition of Human Rights Defenders is prepared to mediate and settle the disagreement among the INCHR Board of Commissioners to restore order.
Recently, another writ of prohibition was filed against the Chairperson of the INCHR, Cllr. Dempster Brown, by a majority of commissioners.
They claim that Cllr. Brown overstepped his authority by unilaterally deciding to withhold their salaries, a power they assert belongs solely to the president.
The commissioners emphasize that INCHR commissioners are appointed by the president from a list of individuals submitted by the Chief Justice’s office, which falls within “other agencies of government independent of the ministries.” They argue that Cllr. Brown’s decision contradicts President Boakai’s instructions to the Legal Advisor to investigate the ongoing crisis among commissioners at the commission.
The petitioners assert that, as co-equals, Cllr. Brown does not have the authority to withhold salaries, a power reserved for the president.
On June 24, 2024, Cllr. Brown directed the Human Resource Manager to withhold the June salaries of four commissioners, citing their absence from work and alleged misconduct, including visiting radio stations to disseminate false information and engaging in other paid occupations, contrary to the commission’s 2005 Act.
The petitioners claim that this internal power struggle within the INCHR is being exacerbated by the interference of the President’s Legal Advisor, which they argue undermines the independence of the commission.
They stress that the Special Investigative Committee, led by Cllr. Bushuben Keita and his colleagues, is overstepping its boundaries by intervening in matters that should be resolved internally according to the established SOP and by civil society actors.
The legal action taken by the Liberia Coalition of Human Rights Defenders reflects growing concerns about the independence of the INCHR and the proper adherence to legal frameworks designed to safeguard it.
The petitioners argue that any deviation from the established procedures risks undermining the commission’s credibility and its ability to function effectively.
The outcome of this legal battle will be closely monitored due to its potential impact on the governance and operations of the INCHR.
If Justice Kaba grants the writ of prohibition, it could set a significant precedent for the independence of the commission and the role of civil society in mediating internal disputes. Conversely, if the writ is denied, it could embolden further executive interference in the affairs of independent commissions.
The Liberia Coalition of Human Rights Defenders and the INCHR Chairperson have expressed their commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the commission operates free from undue influence.
They call on all stakeholders, including the executive branch, to respect the established legal frameworks and support the independence of the INCHR.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the broader implications for governance and human rights in Liberia remain at the forefront of public discourse.
The case highlights the delicate balance between executive authority and the autonomy of independent bodies tasked with safeguarding human rights and upholding justice.
By: G. Watson Richards
