Bad blood is boiling between His Honor, Chief Justice Yamie QuiQui Gbeisay, and the President of the National Association of Trial Judges of Liberia, Judge Nancy F. Sammy, over allegations of nepotism.
By Lincoln G. Peters
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Liberia, His Honor, Yamie QuiQui Gbeisay, the National Association of Trial Judges of Liberia (NATJL) and the Resident Judge of Lofa County, Nancy F. Sammy, have faced-off here publicly, in a heated argument over nepotism, conflict of interest in the judiciary and government, revealing deep secrets about their families thus, bringing the judiciary to public disrepute.
Section 9.7 of the Code of Conduct for Public Official says, “A public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in a civilian or military position in the agency or branch of Government in which he or she is serving, or have jurisdiction or control, any individual who is a Relative, as defined in Section 1.3.21 of this Code. An individual who is a Relative of a Public Official may not be appointed, employed, promoted, or advanced in or to a military or civilian position in an agency or branch of Government if such appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement has been influenced or advocated by the Public Official. Any such appointment upon investigation shall be declared null and void. Upon being declared guilty in accordance with due process, the appointing authority shall be subject to dismissal, suspension or impeachment in accordance with due process.”
Chief Justice Gbeisay, over the weekend in Lofa County during an acquaintance visit to the County, sharply reacted to the NATJL communication signed by their President, Judge Sammy, regarding the appointment of his (Chief Justice Gbeisay’s) son by President Joseph N. Boakai to serve as magistrate in the judiciary, something they see as illegal and nepotistic.
But, responding to the Trial Judges through its President during the meeting, Chief Justice Gbeisay said that it’s very wrong for Judge Sammy to have accused him of such an allegation and raised such an alarm when in fact, she is part of the same practice.
He quoted that it’s wrong for one who is living in a glass house to throw a stone, and he who preaches equity should come with clean hands, and if anyone shows one finger at a person, an additional four are coming in return; therefore, she should refer to herself on the subject matter.
“You are a Resident Judge; your husband, Cllr. Aaron Kpanlie is an Assistant Minister for Taxation. Also, his brother, who is your brother-in-law, Stanley S. Kpaline, is a member of the Good Governance Commission. So, if you say my son couldn’t serve, you have to resign. I have not violated any law.” Justice Gbeisay countered.
Defending his son’s appointment by President Joseph N. Boakai as Magistrate and the subsequent appointment of non-lawyers as Magistrates, he argued that President Boakai and he have violated no law.
According to the Chief Justice, a few weeks ago, he recommended some magistrates to President Boakai, including his son, most of whom he claimed are law school graduates and students.
He explained that his son is a third-year law school student at the Louis Arthur Grimes School of Law at the University of Liberia, but he has been receiving calls following the appointment of those magistrates and his son, especially after receiving the letter from the NTJA, which was shared on Facebook, raising alarm.
He argued that the law and Constitution grant President Boakai rights to appoint people to the judiciary, but when it comes to a stipendiary magistrate, the law mandates that the person shall be a law school graduate; therefore, if the President makes an error in that direction, the Chief Justice can call the President to order.
Therefore, he contended that when it comes to the appointment of Magistrate and Associate Magistrate, the President has the power to do so, while defending the fact that his son is of age and is also a Liberian in law school, which he sees as qualifying him.
He stated that the judiciary still has Magistrates, who are not lawyers, and they are on the payroll, while arguing that the fact that they decided to train university graduates to serve as Magistrates didn’t take away the President’s appointment power to appoint associate magistrates.
The Chief Justice further indicated that there are precedent cases in the judiciary where law school students were appointed to serve as magistrates; therefore, the President is not wrong in appointing his son.
“So, I nominated him to the President, and the President sees him fit to appoint him. I don’t see anything wrong with that, Madam. So, the President and I didn’t violate any law; therefore, I can’t intervene and advise him. Now, if you can show me any law that prohibits the President from appointing a non-lawyer as an Associate Magistrate, I will resign; I challenge you. I know what the law is, but it’s unfortunate that the judges, who should interpret the law, don’t know the elementary basis of the law. Don’t make statements that will undermine the reform that my administration is undertaking.” Chief Justice Gbeisay concluded.
However, responding to the Chief Justice, the President of the National Association of Trial Judges, Judge Nancy F. Sammy, stated that a few days after the appointments were made by the President, the Associate Magistrates brought their complaint to her, saying that non-law school graduates had been appointed as Associate Magistrates in different areas.
Commenting on the issues related to nepotism in her family, regarding her husband and brother-in-law serving in government, she said that her husband had occupied that position for a long time.
“Your Honor, you also raised the issue while you were speaking, saying that those who speak equity must come with clean hands, and you mentioned my husband. Yes, my husband is an Assistant Minister, and he has served in that capacity for 18 years. I met him while he was already serving in that position, before I even became a judge or married him. His job has nothing to do with the work I am doing now. So, I do not see any conflict of interest between his job and mine.” She contended.
“We are talking about the integrity of the Judiciary, Your Honor. So, when they gave me that information, I told them: whatever information you are giving me, let it be credible, because I don’t want to be raising issues on your behalf before it turns out to be false. Let it be legitimate.” She stated.
Accordingly, she added that they gave her the list of eight persons, and that is how she wrote a communication, requesting the Chief Justice’s intervention to safeguard the integrity of the Judiciary, something she claimed was the tone of her letter.
“What made this issue get out of hand, I don’t know. My letter was not a bad letter. But how it got to the public is what disappointed all of us. I don’t feel good about it. In fact, I even wrote the Associate Magistrates, telling them: You can’t be doing this to me after you complained to me and then allowed the communication to leak to the public.
Your Honor, I was very angry with them, so I did a lengthy communication to them, expressing my disappointment that the letter had leaked.” She stated.
She clarified that she has nothing to do with the leakage of that letter, adding that the one who mentioned his son’s appointment, and noted that she is a sixty-year-old woman, a judge, and a lawyer, so she would not be so unprofessional as to send him a letter and then release it on social media thus distancing herself. Editing by Jonathan Browne
