Liberia SocietyLiberian News

Red Flag Raised: Lack Of Transparency, Accountability Hinder Judiciary Workings

(Last Updated On: )

As Judicial Workers Call For Audit

PHOTO: Temple of Justice in Monrovia, seat of Liberia’s Judiciary

By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com

Monrovia- The Judiciary by the 1986 Constitution of Liberia should have been The Judiciary is expected to be an independent and fair body that fights corruption, but some Judicial working are raising concerns and are demanding audit.

This is because the judiciary has failed to follow the New Judicial order number seven on financial autonomy calls for the Supreme Court to provide quarterly report on various fees collected by courts throughout the country.

Since her ascendancy, Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene G. Yuoh has not issued any public mandate for courts to make comprehensive financial report on fees collected as stipulated in the order.

Sources at the Temple of Justice hinted that most disappointedly and because of their failure to hold judges accountable for not publishing various fees, courts around the country continue to collect huge amounts believed to be in the tune of millions of dollars, even though most courts lack the needed logistics that undermine efficient and effective service delivery.

In the wake of the failure to publish courts costs, fees and fines collected, Judicial staffers are Calling for Audit of Courts Cost, Fees, Fines Collected by the Supreme Court. The recent developments surrounding calls for audit of the other two the three branches of the government– the Legislature and the Executive—appears to be increasingly gaining traction within the corridor of the Judiciary. Some judicial workers say it has ‘caught significant attention’ across the judicial branch, with some essential workers are calling for the consideration of the Judiciary despite the promise of the Chief Justice to rebrand and restore to the image of the Judiciary.

The judicial workers say their call for audit is intended to enhance efficiency and effectiveness and to hold accountable the Supreme Court’s failure to adhere with the November 9,2017 Act of the Legislature that gives financial autonomous to the Judiciary Branch of the Government.

Liberia’s 1986 Constitution specifically Article 75, gives in the Supreme Court of Liberia the authority and power to prescribe rules deemed by the Court as necessary to facilitate and properly discharge the functions of the courts.

Article 75 states: “The Supreme Court shall from time to time make rules of court for the purpose of regulating the practice, procedures and manner by which cases shall be commenced and heard before it and all other subordinate courts. It shall prescribe such code of conduct for lawyers appearing before it and all other subordinate courts as may be necessary to facilitate the proper discharge of the court’s functions. Such rules and code, however, shall not contravene any statutory provisions or any provisions of this Constitution.”

Also, section 21.6 of the Legislative Act gives the Supreme Court the authority to publish within three months’ revenues raised from court cost, fees and fines.

It states: “The Supreme Court is hereby empowered to fix from time to time by rules and regulations all fees, costs, and per diem for clerks of courts in civil actions, magisterial courts, justice of the peace courts, allowance of costs to prevailing parties represented by counsel in civil actions, witness fees, marshal fees, sheriff fees, juror fees, and any other fees, costs, and per diem it deems proper and reasonable, taking into consideration the present circumstances of the country.

All such fees, costs, per diem shall be published by the Supreme Court and posted at each court in the Republic, the same to take effect and be applicable no sooner than a period of three months from the date of publication of the same.” However, the workers accused the Supreme Court and the Court Administrator office of failing to publish and post revenue collected to each court throughout the Republic of Liberia.

Some of the workers accused the Supreme Court of raising hundreds of United States dollars over the last three to four years for service deliverables purposes, but has deliberately refused to provide those services and calling for a comprehensive audit of the monies.

Another staffer claims that they would welcome the audit to establish whether the revenue collected over the years has not been accounted for by the Supreme Court, despite Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Yuoh’s commitment to ensuring a transparent and accountable Judiciary under her rebranding process.

Many of them believe that over the years those funds have been siphon at the detriment of the suffering masses who have been left alone to fend for themselves particularly in providing stationery, Internet connection and several other activities at making the job easier and efficient.

“We believe an audit will confirm the concerns expressed for years and underscores the reason we have been advocating for an audit for the past years beginning with the Francis Saye Korkpor’s Bench.” Another court worker said. “The administrative office of the court mismanagement and misplaced prioritizes have compromised the delivery of justice,” they argued.

“This is imperative to improve accountability.”

As Lawmakers are pushing for audit, we also want similar requests to be extended to the judiciary because of our financially devastated trial courts, it is imperative that the Legislature demand improved accountability and transparency, so as to restore taxpayers’ trust in the judicial branch and ensure the timely access to justice that is at the heart of all of us,” another employee noted.

Some have raised questions of wasteful administrative spending at the Judiciary and noncompliance behaviour towards the Judiciary Law. But this has not been independently verified.

According to some of the judicial workers, such behaviour is creating lengthy delays in accessing justice.

“There is no ink for the computer no stationery we have to provide them personally, while they are raising money throughout the country leaving us to personally finance everything we need to move work further,” another person laments.

For example, Article XIlI of the Act Establishing the Commercial Court provides that the Commercial Court shall be financed from (a) annual financial appropriations for the Judiciary, and (b) twenty-five percent (25%) of the filing fees paid for processes brought before the Commercial Court;

and WHEREAS, the Commercial Court is part and parcel of those courts constituting the Judicial Branch of Government headed by the Supreme Court; 

 and WHEREAS the Supreme Court has determined that the allocation of the twenty- five percent (25%) of the filing fees to be paid for processes brought before the Commercial Court was not designed to be operated under the exclusive control or supervision of the Commercial Court or to not affect the constitutional authority of the Supreme Court to control the fiscal administration of the courts of Liberia, including the Commercial Court; 

 and WHEREAS the Supreme Court has the duty to ensure that full accounting and accountability of all fees and other revenues coming into all courts of the Judiciary, in respect of the budget, and as stipulated by the Judicial Financial Autonomy Act, and from which budget the Commercial Court is financed. 

 NOW, THEREFORE, exercising the authority and powers granted under the Constitution and aforementioned other laws in vogue, and to provide consistency in the reporting and budgetary process, it is hereby ordered:

 (a) That all fees of whatever nature, falling under the purview of the Commercial Court, shall be deposited directly into a special account controlled by the Judiciary, the same as with fees from other courts, which shall be supervised by the Court Administrator. Consequently, the Commercial Court shall collect no fees directly or maintain any accounts directly other than as specified herein.

 (b) That the twenty-five percent (25%) filing fees required to be paid for the processes brought before the Commercial Court, as provided by the Act Establishing the Commercial Court, having been ordered deposited directly into a special account managed by the Judiciary Administration.

You Might Be Interested In

Hoffman River Overflows Its Banks, Flooding Harper General Market

News Public Trust

The Free Press Under Attack From Multiple Forces

News Public Trust

Activa Insurance Launches Emergency Medical Evacuation & Repatriation Scheme

News Public Trust