—- As Chief Justice Threatened to stop the budget law if the 55th Legislature fails to explain why the judiciary Branch Continues To Receive Low Budgetary Allocation
IPNEWS: Barely 24hrs after Associate Justice of the Honorable Supreme Court of Liberia, Yusif D. Kaba, alarmed over uncomfortable Political interference within the Justice system of Liberia continues to pose significant challenges to independence of the Judiciary across many African countries including Liberia, Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Gyapay Yuoh has threatened to stop the budget law if the 55th Legislature fails to explain why the judiciary Branch of Government continues to receive low budgetary allocation.
Speaking Thursday at the ongoing International Conference of Judges hosted by the National Association of Trial Judges of Liberia Chief Justice Yuoh, said the judiciary is a branch of government and not a segment of the executive that should be questioned about her budget.
Justice Yuoh, added that the president, the speaker and the pro-term of the house of representative are not subjected to defending their budgets so as the judiciary which is a separate branch of government.
According to her, the judiciary is not begging to be given money, as all dollars or cents sent to the judiciary is required by law, stating that the judiciary law requires that the chief justice shall make a salary in line with the vice president of the republic.
Chief Justice Sie-A-Nyene Gyapay Yuoh, maintained that if the judiciary cannot be informed as to why it is given lesser amounts, they have the adherence power to stop the budget law.
On Wednesday, May 8, 2024, Justice Kaba stated that this action by political people he termed as heavyweight undermines the impartiality and integrity of the judiciary.
Speaking on a topic ‘Reflecting on Judicial Independence and Justice for All in a Democratic State within the African Context’, Associate Justice Yusif D. Kaba said the continued political interference by political actors to influence judicial decisions or control the appointment, promotion or removal of Judges for their own political gains, it erodes the fundamental principles of separation of powers and the rule of law.
“This interference can manifest in various forms and such as:
Appointment of Judges in some cases, political leader appoints judges based on loyalty rather than merit, compromising the Judiciary’s and erode public trust in the judiciary’s ability to deliver impartial justice.”
Justice Kaba further named case fixing as another political interference can extend to specific cases where powerful individuals or interests pressure judges to rule in a certain way to advance their political agenda or protect their interests which undermines the fairness and credibility of the judicial process.
He also added that another way the Judiciary can experience interference is budget control where the government through the branches of government namely Legislature and Executive control the judiciary’s budget can wield significant influence over its operations including the allocation of resources, infrastructure and staff.
Justice Kaba, furthermore, call for Judicial autonomy to put an end to the continue challenges that continues to hinder the Judiciary to properly function independently.
The legal luminary named ‘retaliation’ as another Judiciary interference cited by Justice Kaba where judges who ruled against the government or ruling party may face threats, intimidation or even removal from office as a form of retaliation. This climate of fear can deter judges from upholding the rule of law and dispensing justice without bias.
According to Justice Kaba, Legislative interference played a great impact with the independence of judiciary because political actors may pass laws that restrict judicial independence, such as limiting the jurisdiction of courts, altering judicial procedures, or imposing arbitrary disciplinary measures on judges. These Legislative measures can weaken the judiciary’s ability to act as a check on government power.
“Addressing political interference in the judiciary requires a multi-faceted approach that involves strengthening legal safeguards, promoting transparency and accountability, and fostering a culture of judicial independence the Supreme Court Justice added. International Standards, such as the United Nations basic principles on the independence of the judiciary, provide guidance on safeguarding judicial independence and resisting political pressures,” he said.
