-In US$ 20 million damages case

IPNEWS: The authority of the Liberian National Bar Association (LNBA), has disclosed that Nanborlor Singbeh, the Secretary of the Liberian Senate, lead lawyer, Counselor Joseph P. Gibson, is disqualified from practicing law throughout the country, due to his failure to pay a yearly fee of US$380, to obtain his 2022 license from the bar.

Providing an update on Cllr. Joseph P. Gibson’s attestation to practice law for 2022, the Executive Director of the LNBA, Edward W. Bonwinkor writes, “we, accordingly, have delved into the archive of the Liberian National Bar Association, and found the lawyer referred to as Cllr. Joseph P. Gibson has not paid his 2022 bar due, has not paid his project levy and Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA) fees for 2022, and is, therefore, not a licensed lawyer.”

Bonwinkor’s disclosure is contained in his response dated September 15, to Counselor Amara M. Sheriff’s communication to the bar, requesting the LNBA’s Secretariat to attest as to whether, or not Cllr. Joseph P. Gibson is a licensed lawyer.

Cllr. Gibson, is a member of the Wrights and Associates Law firm, owned by the former Associate Justice, Cllr. Wilkins Wright.

It is not clear whether Judge Nancy Sammy would see it legally prudent to revoke all of Cllr. Gibson’s pleadings he had filed on behalf of Singbeh, in the pending US$ 20 million case.

The Code of Moral and Professional Ethics of the LNBA among others, particularly, Rules 1 and 37.

Rule 1, entitled ‘The Lawyer’s Duty to the Courts’ it says, “It shall be unprofessional for any lawyer to advise, initiate or otherwise participate directly or indirectly in any act that tends to undermine   or impugn the authority, dignity, integrity   of the courts   or judges   thereby   hindering   the effective administration of justice.”

While, Ruel 37 also entitled, ‘Aiding the Unauthorized Practice of Law,’

It provides that” No lawyer should permit his professional services, or his name, to be used in aid of or in connection with, or to make possible, the unauthorized practice of law by laymen or lay agencies, personal or corporate, or by persons who have failed to strictly comply with the rules controlling the admission of lawyers.   Any lawyer found guilty of violating this rule shall be suspended for a period to be determined by the court.”

If she does, it means that she could order the arrest of Singbeh, until, he can find a new lawyer, this time, that is licensed to represent his legal interest in the case.

And, it is also not clear, as to why Cllr. Gibson, known very well that he is not a licensed lawyer, collected an unspecified amount of money from his client and had him under the pretense of representing his legal interest.

According to the LNBA, a lawyer should be suspended from practicing law in the country, for not paying his or her annual dues as required, which Cllr. Gibson has no exemption.

It also put the fees of Counselor-At-Law at US$380 and for Attorney-At-Law to US$180.

Cllr. Sheriff’s communication was triggered by the attitude of Cllr. Gibson, to challenge his indemnity surety bond, in the amount of US$ 1 million that he attached to his damages for defamation and libel lawsuit filed before the Civil Law Court annexed ‘A’ at the Temple of Justice.  The indemnity surety bond was secured by the Sky Insurance Company, on behalf of the Sheriff’s client, a British investor, Hans Armstrong.

Sheriff’s intention in attaching the bond is to have Singbeh to file a bail that is more than US$1.5million preferably in the amount of over US$ 5 million, to avoid being sent to jail, until his bail can be secured, which amount no insurance company, in the country can guarantee.

Earlier, Cllr.  Gibson had argued that the attached bond does not meet the requirements of the law, and the provision of the civil procedure law in that Armstrong is demanding US$ 20 million but posted and got an approved attached bond of US$ 1 million.

Gibson, then based his argument on pages 84 and 85 Section 7.15 (2) of the revised Civil procedure law which, he says provides, “an application for an order of attachment the plaintiff shall give a bond in an amount equal to one and half times the amount demanded.”

“The movant (Singbeh) lawyer maintains that the one million dollars approved bond from Sky insurance company is far drastically below the requirements of the statute,” Gibson then argued, though he does not have any legal standing to file a pleading to any court in the country.

“The bond should be declared null and void and therefore set aside as it does not meet the requirements as stated on pages 84 and 85 section 7.15 (2) of the revised Civil procedure law of the country, “Cllr. Gibson said.

The case arose when Cllr. Sheriff, on behalf of Armstrong, filed the lawsuit, alleging that the November 24, 2020, edition of the Heritage Newspaper carried a caption that “Senate Secretary Singbeh Complaint Judge Willie of unethical behavior — writes Chief Justice Korkpor.”

In the article, the suit contends that Judge Willie of the Criminal Court ‘A’ illegally obtained Singbeh’s cell number 0886511308 from the management of Lonestar GSM Company and issued it to Armstrong, who is using it to hack his account.

Further to the lawsuit, the publication alleges that Armstrong, a Syrian/Norwegian fugitive on Interpol Red Alert and Self-acclaimed British national, is wanted by Norway for crimes allegedly committed against children in that country.

“Singbeh’s sole intent is for the publication to have Armstrong lynching, erode his business career and for his reputation to be damaged and has been damaged, all to the injury and detriment of the plaintiff,” the suit said.

“The conduct of the defendant Singbeh was intended to present Armstrong in a defamatory manner to the Liberian people and the international community, the business community, to the effect that plaintiff is fugitive and on the red alert list,” the suit said.

Furthermore, the lawsuit said: “the content and tenor written to the chief justice shows that the defendant has other reasons for demonizing and tarnishing the image of the plaintiff, which has a damaging effect on the integrity of the plaintiff.”

“The defendant’s actions are designed to bring harm and injury to the plaintiff, especially the defendant being fully aware of the effect of such false and malicious publication for such unwarranted acts, damages will lie against the defendant,” the suit claims.

The lawsuit also alleges that the defendant furnishing copy of the letter to Heritage Newspaper maligned/damaged the character and reputation of the plaintiff to the effect that it has indicated that the plaintiff has been associated with criminal activities without any proof and is a fugitive and on Interpol red alert.

That because the defendant’s publication was made with malice, hatred and ill will towards the plaintiff and with the desire to injure plaintiff,” the suit contends.

“The defendant’s letter and its content publication were reckless and deliberate without investigating or verifying the facts, total disregard for the truth, thereby bringing plaintiff into public disrepute, which acts on the part of the defendant is reckless and in total disregard for plaintiff’s fundamental rights under the Liberian Constitution,” the suit added.

If successful, the suit would not lead to criminal penalties but would result in compensation for any ill-treatment of Armstrong. By: Taisiah K.Merfee