MONROVIA – On Thursday, July 4, 2024, the Supreme Court of Liberia heard and reserved ruling in the case involving Gracious Ride vehicles, where the petitioner questioned President Boakai’s Executive Order #126 and declared it as unconstitutional.
The petitioner, Gracious Ride, argued that they have standing because the Asset Recovery and Property Retrieval Task Force seized their vehicles without legal authority. Cllr. Weight, representing Gracious Ride, contended whether President Boakai has the authority to assign legislative roles to the Task Force and if issuing Executive Order #126 violated the Constitution of Liberia.
Cllr. Weight asserted that President Boakai overstepped legislative authority as outlined in Article 3 of the Liberian Constitution. He also claimed violations of Articles 89 and 5(C). While not challenging the President’s authority to issue executive orders, Cllr. Weight questioned the establishment and conduct of the Task Force, pointing out that existing entities like the LACC and FIU are legally responsible for similar duties.
Relying on Article 34(I) of the Constitution, Cllr. Weight argued that the Executive Order violated their rights by unlawfully stopping their vehicles and displacing passengers without a court order. He maintained that the legislature should be the body to legitimize such a task force, either through new legislation or amending the LACC Act.
Cllr. Weight concluded by requesting the Court declare the Executive Order unconstitutional, emphasizing the legislature’s sole authority to create laws in Liberia.
On behalf of the Executive Branch, Edwin Kla Martin argued that Gracious Ride lacked the standing to sue, citing Chapter 11 sub-section 11(e) of the Civil Procedure Law of Liberia. He contended that the establishment of Executive Order #126 did not violate the petitioner’s rights, as executive order powers are vested solely in the President, per Article 50 of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia.
During the arguments, Justice Gbeisay questioned whether it was necessary for the Task Force to act like police officers by seizing vehicles without legal grounds. Cllr. Martin responded that the seizures were to verify title documents, fulfilling their obligation to investigate suspicious or stolen government properties. Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene G. Yuoh further questioned if there were any prior notices or publications before seizing Gracious Ride vehicles. Cllr. Martin admitted partial errors in this regard but defended their actions based on Articles 3 and 5(c) of the 1986 Constitution.
Cllr. Martin requested the high court rule in favor of the Executive Branch, asserting the President’s exclusive right to issue Executive Orders.
Discussion about this post