By Kruah Thompson & Lincoln G. Peters
In the wake of a prohibition filed before the Supreme Court of Liberia by former Minister of State, Senator Nathaniel McGill, who is accused of payroll padding and administrative malpractices, the Government of Liberia says the law will take its course in the matter.
Monrovia, Liberia, August 28, 2024 – The Government of Liberia, through the Ministry of Information, Cultural Affairs, and Tourism (MICAT), says the Ministry of Justice, the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), and the court will determine whether former Minister of State for President Affairs, Senator Nathaniel McGill is immune from prosecution in the administrative malpractice and corruption allegations against him.
The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission and the Civil Service Agency are linking Senator McGill to payroll padding and corruption when he served as Minister of State for Presidential Affairs under former President George Weah.
The LACC cited him on August 21, 2024, for alleged payroll padding and administrative malpractices.
But McGill argues that former President Weah appointed him as Minister of State for Presidential Affairs and by such appointment, was designated as “principal assistant” of the President in the President’s Office, enjoyed and exercised executive privilege, and performed actions and activities at the behest of the President whose office is constitutionally immune from all criminal prosecutions, including but not limited to, criminal investigation unless impeached for a felonious crime as in keeping with Article 61 of the 1986 Constitution.
He has filed a twenty-eight (28-count) petition before Chamber Justice Yusuf D. KABA for the issuance of an ALTERNATIVE WRIT OF PROHIBITION against the Government of Liberia.
The Supreme Court of Liberia has held that: “A writ of prohibition is the proper remedial process to restrain an inferior court from taking action in a case beyond its jurisdiction or having jurisdiction the court has attempted to proceed by rule different from those which ought to be observed at all times.” See Parker v Worrell 2 LLR 525 (1925)
He submits and argues that the Office of the President has never been the subject of any criminal investigation or inquest because the President democratically surrendered power through the ballot box. Therefore, the Office of the President is and remains constitutionally sacrosanct to any form of investigation.
He points out that his actions and duties performed upon the instructions or directives of the President, consistent with Articles 18 and 25 of the 1986 Constitution, are not reviewable by any judicial or quasi-judicial inquest or any form of criminal investigation because they are protected under the scope of executive privilege, except when impeached consistent with due process.
He notes that this does not exist in the instant case, and therefore, revealing such information absent an impeachment and removal of the President under Article 43 or upon an order of a court of competent jurisdiction will no doubt amount to an illegal invasion of the constitutional immunity of the Office of the President and will jeopardize national interest and national security, saying “Your Honor is most respectfully requested to take judicial notice of the immunity of the president’s office to any form of criminal investigation.”
Senator McGill further argues that assuming without admitting that the Office of the President initiated a supplementary payroll outside of the CSA process, which is not valid, the Respondents lack the legal capacity or standing to question neither the President nor his principal assistant, who occupies the Office of the President and through whom all actions based on the instructions and directives of the President are performed within the Ministry of State for Presidential Affairs.
Speaking here Tuesday at a press briefing in Monrovia, Liberia’s Minister of Information Jerolinmek Piah acknowledged that following the official citation, McGill filed a petition for an autonomous writ of prohibition before the Supreme Court, arguing that the LACC’s investigation should be halted.
According to the Minister, McGill’s principal argument is that, as an assistant to the former President at the time of the alleged corruption, any issues with the payroll process should be attributed to Mr. George Weah instead and that since the Ex-President cannot be investigated, neither should he (McGill) be held accountable.
Minister Piah commends the Margibi County Senator for seeking legal recourse but emphasizes that while the legal process unfolds, the government will maintain its own processes.
He underscores that there should be no impunity for unlawful actions carried out by individuals claiming to act on behalf of the President.
Minister Piah highlights that public officials are obligated to follow lawful orders and avoid unlawful acts.
“When an order is unlawful, you have a legal duty to refrain from it because your conduct will not be protected by law. As an officer or agent of the State, you are obligated to obey lawful orders.” The government here argues.
Minister Piah believes that Senator McGill might be avoiding accountability by resorting to legal maneuvers but notes that “the court will decide” on the appropriate course of action.
He expresses confidence that the right course of action will be taken and that the Supreme Court will address the matter appropriately. Editing by Jonathan Browne
