By Precious D. Freeman
The Supreme Court on Wednesday April 24, revoked President Joseph Boakai’s nomination of several individuals to tenure position.
The court said the petitioners’ rights were violated stating that tenure should be respected while unexpired.
The court’s decision means that petitioners’ Andrew Peters of the National Identification Registry; Atty Garrison Yealue of the Governance Commission; Edwina Crump Zackpah of LTA, and Reginald Nagbe of the National Lottery Authority are protected and will remain in their respective positions and at the same time, accorded due process as provided by law.
The court ruled that the action of President Boakai is not in line with the law and those occupying the positions as mentioned were never accorded due process.
Using Article 89 and 56 of the Liberian Constitution as it reliance, the Supreme Court opined that nominating people to the petitioners positions while their tenures are still in force and unexpired is tantamount to their removal from office.
“The nomination giving rise to these petitions are hereby ordered revoked, and the decision also affirmed the alternative writ of prohibition issued by Justice in Chambers and granting the peremptory writ prayed for,” the Court opined.
It can be recalled that the government and the heads of the five agencies have been in a legal feud over the legitimacy of the tenure positions.
They are Andrew Peters, Executive Director, of the National Identification Registry, Reginald Kpan Nagbe, Director General of the National Lottery Authority, and all deputies under their authority, Atty. Garrison Doldrh Yealue, Jr. Chairman of Governance Commission, and Edwina Crump Zackpah, Chairperson of the Liberia Telecommunication Authority.
Others are Israel Akinsanya, James Gbaryea, Zatowon Titus and Osborne Diggs, Commissioners of the Liberia Telecommunication Authority versus government and Abdullah Kamara, Patrick Honnah, Clarence Kortu Massaquoi, Ben Fofana, and Angela Bush Cassel.
However, government lawyers on the other hand during the separate arguments informed the court that the issues raised by the petitioners were premature since the President nominated people to these positions which had to be approved by the Senate.
Government lawyers further argued that the fact that nominations have to be approved by the Senate, those contending should have waited for these people nominated to be confirmed by the Senate and commissioned by the President before coming to raise the said issue.
According to a government lawyer, the petition is Premature and that President Boakai has Constitutional rights to nominate and that those raising the claims about tenure should not do so when they are in the Executive Branch, because those appointed are serving at the will and pleasure of the President.
The four victorious petitioners who filed separate cases at the Supreme Court, against President Joseph N. Boakai’s decision to appoint individuals to various agencies, argued that it was a violation of their rights and the Act established these institutions for nominations to be made to tenure positions while their terms have not yet expired.
The petitioners in their separate argument noted that the action by President Boakai is tantamount to causing injury for which the Supreme Court should place a prohibition on the President’s decision and grant them the rights to occupy these positions in consonance with the Act established them.
Meanwhile, the government managed to win just one, out of the four embattled tenure cases. The win was against the former Executive Director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Prof. Wilson Tarpeh who had also been claiming occupancy of a tenure position at the agency.
The court opined that the former EPA boss was acting and not appointed contrary to his petition filed before the court for a writ of prohibition. Besides, Tarpeh was never nominated by the EPA Policy Council for appointment by the President, in line with the act establishing the EPA.
The court noted that the fact that Tarpeh failed to establish documentary proof that he was chosen from among a list of three persons recommended by the Policy Council to the former President and that Tarpeh appointment was an interim appointment, for which tenure is inapplicable.
The court narrated that since it has been established that Tarpeh had served in an interim position, his removal was in consonance with the Executive Order 123, signed by former President Weah on November 22, 2023.
The Executive Order 123 mandated all non-tenured presidential appointees to be presumed to have resigned as of the date of the inauguration of the incoming President Boakai.
The Supreme Court said added, “That a Writ of Prohibition will not be granted by the court where, as in the instant case, the respondent, the Executive Branch of Government, did not proceed wrongly by appointing Emmanuel K. Urey Yarkpawolo as Interim Executive Director of the EPA in the absence of the formation of the Policy Council.”
“Wherefore and in over of the foregoing, the alternative writ of prohibition issued by the Justice in Chambers is hereby quashed, and the peremptory writ prayed for denied,” the high court ruled.
