“RESPONSE TO THE SUB JUDICE NATURE OF THE LNBA’S PRESS STATEMENT IN LIGHT OF THE PENDING RE-ARGUMENT
For Immediate Release
April 29, 2025
As a Supreme Court Bar member and one of counsel for J. Fonati Koffa, Speaker of the Honorable House of Representatives, I wish to express my profound disappointment with the utterly unacceptable press statement released by the Liberian National Bar Association (LNBA) on April 28, 2025. This statement, addressing the Supreme Court’s Opinion on the Amended Bill of Information submitted by Speaker J. Fonati Koffa on April 23, 2025, is legally flawed, misguided, deeply troubling, inconsistent with the ethical responsibilities of the Bar in safeguarding the rule of law.
The LNBA’s role in promoting legal discourse is commendable; however, its public commentary on issues currently awaiting re-argument before the Supreme Court raises significant concerns about contempt and the potential violation of the sub judice rule. This conduct undermines the integrity and independence of the judicial process.
- The Sub Judice Rule in Liberian Law
I want to remind the LNBA that under Liberian jurisprudence, the sub judice rule prohibits public commentary, particularly from legal professionals and institutions, on cases actively under judicial consideration. The effect of this rule is to avoid prejudicing ongoing proceedings, protect the impartiality of the Court, and preserve the administration of justice.
Unfortunately, the LNBA’s Statement seeks purposely to undermine and denigrate the Supreme Court. This principle is implicit in Liberia’s commitment to due process and the independence of the Judiciary under the 1986 Constitution, notably Article 21(h) – which guarantees due process in all proceedings before any tribunal, while Article 65 – vesting judicial power in the Supreme Court and other subordinate courts and emphasizing the independence of the Judiciary. In Republic v. Sieh et al., 29 LLR 87 (1981), the Supreme Court warned against acts which, “however well-intentioned, seek to bring the Court or its proceedings into public disrepute or influence its decisions extrajudicially.”
Furthermore, Rule 15 of the Code for the Moral and Ethical Conduct of Lawyers in Liberia (adopted by the Supreme Court) bars lawyers from making “extrajudicial statements” that could materially prejudice ongoing adjudications.
Therefore, this blatant and unsolicited impropriety of the LNBA’s Statement MUST NOT go unnoticed for the following legal reasons to wit:
- The LNBA, as a statutory body created by an Act by an act of the National Legislature, is charged with upholding the rule of law and the dignity of our esteemed legal profession. Yet, the April 28 statement:
- Offers a legal conclusion on the very issues pending re-argument before the Supreme Court;
- Characterizes the Court’s earlier Opinion as judicial overreach and illegal, thus undermining public confidence in the Judiciary;
- Threatens institutional embarrassment and economic disruption should the Court fail to reverse itself—language that can reasonably be construed as an attempt to pressure the Court.
Such an arrogant posture from the nation’s premier legal association, shredded in a skewed knowledge and understanding of the law, is reckless and sets a dangerous precedent and borders on contempt.
- Duty of Restraint Pending Judicial Review
Matters under re-argument are not subject to parallel adjudication in the press or public square. The Supreme Court Rules (Revised) and controlling precedent dictate the proper avenue for challenging a ruling, must be a motion for re-argument, not a public editorial. All legal actors—especially officers of the Court and arms of the Court- must respect the finality and sanctity of judicial forums. - Call for Institutional Discipline
Liberia’s legal community must not allow the narrow political passions of some spineless, greedy, self-seeking individuals who have become stooges to individuals in the corridors of power to override its constitutional obligations. As custodian of legal ethics and the rule of law, the Bar must model restraint and respect for the judicial process.
I therefore call on the LNBA and its leadership to refrain from public commentary on the pending case until the Supreme Court makes a final determination; this is how civilized and well-governed legal institutions behave. A continued violation of the sub judice rule risks contempt proceedings and undermines the moral authority of our esteemed Bar, which is currently at its lowest ebb of leadership. “The Supreme Court will punish for contempt any deceptive practice which might have the tendency to reflect discreditably upon the judicial branch of the government, or which might tend to belittle it for its decisions, or which might embarrass it in the performance of its duties, or which might show disrespect to it or its justices, or which might defy its authority.” See, In Re: C. Abayomi Cassell, 14LLR391 (May 19, 1961).
The preservation of Liberia’s democratic order demands nothing less. “The Judiciary is the anchor which holds stabilized government in balance; without it vested interest might suffer, sacred rights might be violated, constituted authority might be challenged, and in fine, administrative chaos could result.” See, In Re: C. Abayomi Cassell, 14LLR391 (May 19, 1961).
Based on such opprobrium and shame, the conduct of the President of the LNBA has lavished on this venerated legal body, so let him do the honorable thing and resign.
Signed:___________
Cllr. Jonathan Massaquoi”
