Monrovia – The Supreme Court embarked on a legal battle on Thursday, July 4, 2024, as it commenced hearings involving the Asset Recovery Team led by Cllr. Edwin Kla Martin and the management of Gracious Ride Inc.
The contentious Issue revolves around Executive Order No. 126, established by President Joseph N. Boakai on March 5, 2024, which empowered the Asset Recovery Task Force to investigate and seize government assets allegedly acquired through illicit means.
Gracious Ride Inc., a transport company reportedly linked to former President Weah’s Chief of Protocol, Nora Finda Bundoo, found itself in the crosshairs of this operation, prompting a legal challenge from its management.
During the proceedings, lawyers representing Gracious Ride questioned the legality of President Boakai’s authority to institute the Asset Recovery Task Force.
They argued that the Executive Order overstepped constitutional bounds, particularly citing concerns under the amended LACC Act of 2022 and the Anti-Money-Laundering and Counterfeiting Financing Act of 2021.
Specifically, Gracious Ride’s legal team contended that Section 22.2 of Executive Order No. 126 contradicted provisions in these Acts, which assign responsibilities related to asset recovery to the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC).
However, the team faced scrutiny from the bench for failing to pinpoint exact violations within the legislative framework.
In response, the Ministry of Justice and representatives from LACC defended the Executive Order, emphasizing the President’s constitutional prerogative to combat corruption and safeguard public resources.
They underscored that Executive Order No. 126 was a valid exercise of quasi-legislative authority aimed at addressing rampant corruption within the government.
The Asset Recovery Task Force, acting under the authority of the Executive Order, initiated actions against Gracious Ride Inc., seizing its vehicle fleet.
This prompted the company to seek judicial relief, initially petitioning Justice in Chambers Yusuf B. Kaba for a writ of prohibition, which was subsequently denied.
During the full bench hearing, the Supreme Court weighed the arguments presented by both sides.
The government’s legal representatives argued that Gracious Ride lacked the necessary legal standing to challenge the Executive Order, asserting that the company failed to substantiate its claims with precise legal citations.
As the deliberations progressed, the court reserved its ruling on the matter, signaling the complexity and significance of the constitutional and legal issues at hand.
The outcome of this case is anticipated to have far-reaching implications for executive authority, anti-corruption efforts, and the protection of private entities against government overreach in Liberia.
G. Watson Richards
