By: Staff Writer
The 6th Judicial Circuit Civil Law Court at the Temple of Justice has with immediate effect dismissed a petition for Declaratory Judgment lawsuit filed by Hon. Jonathan Fonati Koffa and his Co-Respondents citing jurisdictional issue.
The judge of the Civil Law Court George Smith making his ruling Monday, January 27, 2025 said his court lacks jurisdiction to review the constitutionality and legality of the actions and conduct of the Members of the House of Representatives and grant reliefs as prayed for by Hon. J. Fonati Koffa and his Co-Respondents in their Petition for Declaratory Judgment. Only the Honorable Supreme Court has that jurisdiction and power.
Judge Smith: “assuming that this Honorable Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter in these proceedings, of course which is not the case; would a rendition of declaratory judgment terminate the uncertainty or controversy giving rise to the petition for Declaratory Judgment?”
The judge said his Court thinks the answer is NO and, therefore, this Honorable Court would “refuse to render or enter a declaratory judgment where such judgment, if rendered, would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy giving rise to” these proceedings.
He expressed that Civil Law Court lacks jurisdiction to review the constitutionality and legality of the actions and conduct of the Members of the House of Representatives and grant reliefs as prayed for by Hon. J. Fonati Koffa and his Co-Respondents in their Petition for Declaratory Judgment. Only the Honorable Supreme Court has that jurisdiction and power.
“This Honorable Court also acknowledges that the decisions and mandates of the Honorable Supreme Court should always be strictly enforced by judges of subordinate courts for the promotion and administration of justice, and for the preservation of the authority, integrity, and dignity of the Honorable Supreme Court. This Honorable Court is also cognizant that our law, like in other jurisdictions, that judges of subordinate courts are required to respect the Honorable Supreme Court’s mandate and comply with its orders without delay.
Further, this Honorable Court is well aware that the Honorable Supreme Court is the court of last resort; and its judgments are final and binding on all courts in the Republic,” the judge emphasized.
He asserted that based on the citations of law, the Civil Law Court under no parity of reason have the jurisdiction and authority to review a decision of the Honorable Supreme Court, without him (Judge) escaping the pain of contempt of the High Court.
Prior to the judge’s ruling, in the main Petition for Declaratory Judgment proceeding, Hon. Jonathan Fonati Koffa and certain other Members of the House of Representatives, as Petitioners, filed a twenty-two count Petition for Declaratory Judgment on the 14th day of January 2025, against Hon. Richard Nagbe Koon and other Members of the House of Representatives, as Respondents, by which Petitioners requested that certain other Members of the House of Representatives, Respondents, held parallel/rival session of the Honorable House of Representatives, which were not presided over by Hon. Jonathan Fonati Koffa in his capacity as Speaker of the House of Representatives and should therefore be declared illegal.
The petitioners argued that the election of Honorable Richard Nagbe Koon as Speaker of the House of Representatives to succeed Hon. Jonathan Fonati Koffa should be declared null and void as it is void of any legislative legitimacy, ultra vires, and inconsistent with RULE 7 of the HOUSE’S STANDING RULES and ARTICLE 33 and ARTICLE 49 of the CONSTITUTION.
The petitioners also asked the court to declare that ARTICLE 49 of the CONSTITUTION and RULE 9.1 of the HOUSE’s STANDING RULES are the only binding legal authority governing the removal of Hon. Jonathan Fonati Koffa from the Office of Speaker of the House of Representatives and certain other officers of the House of Representatives from the offices to which they were appointed in that these officers of the House of Representatives were not removed from office consistent with due process of law and therefore their replacements should not exercise the powers and authorities of those offices or enjoy the emoluments of those offices.
They called on the court to issue a Stay Order and any Provisional Relief Order upholding their rights to participate in any and all sessions, discussions and elections and preside over committees.
In counter argument, Hon. Richard Nagbe Koon and his Co-Movants filed a motion to dismiss the case pleading that as they are members of the First Branch of the Liberian Government, only the Honorable Supreme Court has the power and authority to determine the constitutionality and legality of their conduct and actions.
