By Tiawan Saye Gongloe
The political turmoil in Liberia’s House of Representatives, sparked by an attempted and unconstitutional removal of Speaker J. Fonati Koffa, has paralyzed the legislative process and endangered constitutional governance.
At the heart of the crisis is a deliberate and dangerous refusal by the faction of the lawmakers headed by Representative Richard Koon to accept the Supreme Court’s clear and binding ruling: that Speaker Koffa remains the lawful presiding officer of the House.
Some have argued, strangely, including lawyers, although quite erroneously, that the issue of quorum is a political matter and not a legal one. That is not only false; it is deeply corrosive and dangerous to our constitutional order. It is certainly a recipe for chaos and total lawlessness. Those who support the Koon faction are advocating for the rule of the jungle, where authority is determined by physical strength, not the rule of law.
Authority under the rule of law is determined by the constitution of a country, statutes and precedents established by court. The quorum requirement under the Constitution of Liberia is enshrined in Article 33 of the Liberian Constitution, which states:
“A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may compel the attendance of absent members.”
This provision is not aspirational—it is the law. This provision provides no other option or even a room for descretion on the part of the Speaker, if absent members do not voluntarily return to session. The constitution provides for the continuous functioning of the government and leaves no room for vacuum.
Therefore, for the continous functioning of the House of Representatives, article 33 of the Constitution gives Speaker Koffa a constitutional mandate to compel attendance of absent members of the House, in order to obtain the quorum required for the conduct of legislative business. It is important to note that the paralysis in the House is not a political deadlock; it is a legal violation of the Constitution. And the solution is equally legal: enforcement through the constitutional mechanisms already in place.
How should it be done? There have been challenges faced by the House and the Senate over the years, but this one is slightly different in terms of the length of time that the standoff has taken and the refusal of some members of the House to accept the decision of the Supreme Court. There has also been no legislative crisis in which the word “compel” in article 33 had been ever used to force absent members to attend session. But there have been instances in the past when the sergeant-at-arms was used to remove lawmakers from session in order to maintain order. We do not have any example of any house of the Liberian Legislature compelling lawmakers to attend session in order to attain a quorum. Therefore, we must look for guidance from the experiences of other countries under the common law system. In resolving legal issues in Liberia, if there is no law or precedent, we first look to the United States and if we are unable to find a precedent in the US, we go to the source of the common law, England. Therefore, on this matter, the US has precedents that will assist our lawmakers to understand how such standoffs in the legislature can be resolved. This will help all lawmakers and the Liberian people to understand that Liberia is not alone in facing such a challenge. Interestingly, the United States Constitution contains nearly the identical language in article 33 of the Liberian Constitution in Article I, Section 5, of its constitution, that empowers each legislative chamber to “compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.”
This power is not theoretical. It has been exercised—vigorously and repeatedly—throughout American history as follows:
1. On November 14, 1942, during a civil rights filibuster, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Alben Barkley ordered the arrest of absent senators to restore quorum. Senator Kenneth McKellar was forcibly removed from his apartment by Mark Trice, the deputy sergeant-at-arms, at the Mayflower Hotel, where Sen. Kenneth McKellar (D-Tenn.), the Senate’s third most senior member, maintained an apartment and returned him to the Capitol.
2. In 1988, House Democrats led by Senate Majority leader Sen. Byrd directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to detain Republican members who walked during a senate debate to prevent a decision of the Senate.
In all these cases, force was not only authorized—it was constitutional.
Likewise, in Liberia, Speaker Koffa may lawfully direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring back to session absent members of the House. The Sergeant-at-Arms is, after all, an officer of the Legislature and may execute orders necessary to uphold its constitutional role.
As a Step-by-Step Procedure for Liberia to restore function and lawfulness, Speaker Koffa should do the following:
1. Convene a meeting of the House.
2. Declare absence of quorum via a roll call, if there is no quorum.
3. Invoke article 33 of the Constitution.
4. Issue a formal order to the Sergeant-at-Arms to locate and compel the attendance of absent House members, by seeking the assistance of the police, if necessary.
5. Resume legislative business after obtaining a quorum.
Let it be clear that the refusal to attend session under a duly recognized Speaker is not politics—it is a dereliction of constitutional duty. And the failure of the Speaker to act would be a dereliction of constitutional duty on his part.
Speaker Koffa is not only permitted to act; he is constitutionally bound to do so. The alternative is legislative collapse, where the courts are ignored, the Constitution is mocked, and a small group of people can override the will of the people simply by walking away.
Liberia is a constitutional republic, not a theater of impunity, as some Liberians, sadly want the world to believe. The time has come to put to rest the fiction that this crisis cannot be legally resolved. The Constitution provides the solution. The U.S. provides the precedent. And Speaker Koffa has the authority—indeed, the obligation—to act now.
History will judge hashly those who ignore the law.
A better Liberia is only possible through adherence to the rule of law.