The Supreme Court is expected to entertain a legal argument in the legitimacy of the Assets Recovery Team headed by its chairperson, Edwin Martin, on Thursday, July 4.
The court’s decision is based on a petition filed by Gracious Ride, questioning the Taskforce’s legitimacy to recover stolen assets.
The Taskforce was set up by President Joseph Boakai on March 5 through Executive Order # 126 to search, seize, and investigate government assets that were obtained illegally.
The President’s Executive Order includes a seven-count mandate that empowers the Taskforce to recover illegal properties and finances acquired from previous governments dating to the former President Williams Tolbert regime.
But Gracious Ride questioned the legitimacy of the Asset Recovery Team and filed a petition to the high court to dissolve the team days after the Taskforce gathered evidence showing that the company’s vehicles were obtained through fraudulent means.
Gracious Ride argued that there is an established body to investigate corruption and corruption practices and as such, the President decision to form the assets recovery is in violation of the Liberian law without citing a specific law the Taskforce is currently violating.
In addition to Gracious Ride petition, the Taskforce has faced more writs from upper and lower courts to stop the recovery of stolen properties in an attempt to delay the major steps made in fighting corruption.
However, Cllr. Martin, in his returns, asked the Supreme Court to strike the petitioner’s petition from the court’s docket based on its inability to cite constitutional provisions that render the act of the President to issue Executive Order #126 that created the task force illegal.
Cllr. Martin further argued that the issuance of an executive order is a quasi-legislative and judicial lawmaking authority and power granted to the President of Liberia by the 1986 Constitution, Chapters four and five, to eliminate the misuse of government’s resources and other corrupt practices.
Among other mishaps, Associate Justice Yussif Kaba on Monday April 8, scheduled a conference to address Gracious Ride Transport Service’s non-compliance with the court’s five-day ultimatum issued on April 1.
The ultimatum required Gracious Ride to provide ownership title documents for vehicles seized by the Assets Recovery Taskforce but as of April 5, Gracious Ride had not met the court’s directive.
Following the seizure of the company’s vehicles by Cllr. Martin-led Assets Recovery Taskforce, a claim was made by the company’s purported manager, Francis Blama, that he owns the seized vehicles. Blama’s legal authority to represent the company in the matter was questioned by the Supreme Court, highlighting potential discrepancies in the lawsuit filed by Blama without proper authorization.
Justice Kaba denied issuing a stay order on the Assets Recovery Taskforce’s operation to seize multiple cars belonging to the company.
A letter from the Taskforce, indicated that there may have been legal irregularities in the initial confiscation of Gracious Ride’s vehicles, influenced Justice Kaba’s decision.
In a letter dated April 8 and submitted to the Justice in Chamber, the Taskforce referred to a legal mistake during the confiscation of Gracious Ride cars but stated that the team reserved the right under the law to conduct a legal inquiry.
The Taskforce letter further maintained that its action was not intended to disenfranchise the petitioner, but rather to examine the accusations of suspicion surrounding the procurement of the vehicles.
“We maintain that the investigation of suspicious assets falls within the mandates of Executive Order#126, which was announced by His Excellency Joseph Boakai, President of the Republic of Liberia,” the letter to the Justice-in-Chambers said.
In deciding the case, the Associate Justice presiding in Chambers declined to issue the writ prayed for by the petitioner, reserving the rights considering the attached communication from the respondent, you are hereby informed that the respondent to proceed in keeping with the law.”
The Communication Director of the Temple of Justice, Ambrose Nmah also told the public through the Ok FM that the Justice-in-Chambers informed the company that the court could not prevent the task force from carrying out its legal duties.
The high court’s communication Director concluded that the court said the taskforce said government assets are illegally converted to private use noting, “So we cannot stop them, and we cannot allow them to do so outside of the law. Also, now that they have written and stated their intention to enforce the law, we will proceed. In other words, while the asset recording acknowledged some procedural errors in some areas, we urged them to follow the law.”
However, because the taskforce admitted to procedural errors, Justice Kaba denied the company’s request and instead advised the taskforce to follow the law.
As both sides appear in court tomorrow, the high court will hear legal arguments in the case and thereafter make a decision which is expected to put the matter at rest.
