THAT LIBERIA ESPOUSES democracy and the rule of law as foundational principle for governance is not an arbitrary choice. It is an outgrowth of a well-thought-through intent based on historical circumstances. Democracy’s act of equality, pluralism and justice resonates with a people whose forebears were subjected to centuries of slavery underpinned by discrimination and subjugation, and who returned to these shores and began to replicate the same conditions of servitude and injustice they had endured. Against the backdrop of such a checkered history and the dire longing for freedom, justice, peace and equality, the obsession for civil, political, economic and cultural rights was dominant thought for delegates who gathered in the central provincial city of Gbarnga to draft a national constitution. This is why nearly 40 percent of 1986 Constitution was devoted to the guarantee of human freedoms, liberties and equality. That is why the Constitution dwelled exhaustively on checks and balances amongst the three branches of our government, so that one is never imperial, and whenever such a temptation came about, there are adequate mechanisms to nip it in the bud.
FEARING THE RESURGENCE of one-party state, tyranny or anything that has resemblance to the dark days of jungle justice, arbitrariness and discrimination, and aware that autocracy is in the gene of any human family, the drafters of the Constitution were meticulous enough to make due process, or the rule of law – not guilty until given a day in court – a fundamental principle of government. By this principle of justice, it means power does not lie in the hands of the strong, or the majority. It means “might does not make it right”. It means one’s being right or wrong lies in hearing, only hearing, consistent with the laws and Constitution. That is where the nation finds guarantee for civility, harmony and peace.
IT SEEMS THE writers of the Constitution knew 28 years ago that at one point in the future, there would be a group of lawmakers seeking the disposal of their leader based on allegations of corruption and other acts. Yes, corruption is wrong. It violates the laws of the nation. But here is it. The Constitution says, “All persons are equal before the law and are therefore entitled to the equal protection of the law.” Article 11c. It further states: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, security of the person, property, privilege or any other right except as the outcome of a hearing judgment consistent with the provisions laid down in this Constitution and in accordance with due process of law. Justice shall be done without sale, denial or delay; and in all cases not arising in courts not of record, under courts martial and upon impeachment, the parties shall have the right to trial by jury.” Article 20a.
THAT THE SUPREME Court has asked parties to the House of Representatives conflict, mainly the “majority bloc” to “return to status quo ante”, to engage from further hostilities, is a way of saying, “Pause. With all the fussing here and there, someone deserves to be heard. With claims and counterclaims, one party could be right and another can be wrong but not until a hearing is held according to law.” That’s what exactly the Supreme Court is saying to the parties.
IN A SENSE, the Supreme Court is saying, with all the fighting, all the hurting one another, the insulting of one another, and the possible anarchy, this is not the solution. If every citizen fights any perceived wrongdoer only because he got the bigger strength, what would Liberia become. Complete Chaos. And if there is anyone or group of citizens highly expected to know this, it should be the lawmakers. They are the lawmakers. They should be the first respecters of the law.
OR SHOULD THE Supreme Court not intervene? Is its intervention of the High Court understood to be interference? Should the lawmakers be left along to close doors and offices in the faces of one another unhindered? Should they be left to fight physically over parking spaces? What will the lawmakers say then when other citizens were to be as violent and lawless as they seek to be, or if the Executive Branch or any of its members were to act afoul to the law? What would the lawmakers say?
THE SUPREME COURT is right. Stop the lawlessness. Stop the conflict. This is the country of law, not men. The sooner the lawmakers on Capitol Hill realize this, the more honorable they deserve to be called. The more moral ground they shall garner to police other branches of Government, and every citizen found afoul with the law. Thus, let them show total respect for the Supreme Court.