Liberia’s Office of the Ombudsman has opened an ethics investigation into Chief Justice Yamie Quiqui Gbeisay following a formal complaint accusing him of breaching anti-corruption and judicial conduct rules by seeking the appointment of his son to a magisterial post.
The complaint, filed by lawyer and former Maritime diplomat Isaac Jackson, centers on statements the Chief Justice reportedly made in early October defending his recommendation of his son to President Joseph Boakai.
Jackson cites an alleged remark by Gbeisay — “There is no law against nepotism. My son is of age; he is in law school. I recommended him to the President, and if the President saw it fit to nominate him, I see nothing wrong with that.” — as evidence of misconduct that threatens public confidence in the judiciary.
Gbeisay’s son was appointed as an assistant magistrate but resigned after public outcry and opposition from the Trial Judges Association.
Jackson told the Ombudsman that the resignation does not render the issue moot and urged the office to formally investigate the Chief Justice’s conduct.
In an email to Jackson, the Ombudsman’s Administrative Assistant, Younger McGill, acknowledged receipt of the complaint and said the office “will investigate expeditiously,” adding that the institution takes the matter seriously and that no public official — including the Chief Justice — is above ethical scrutiny.
The correspondence thanked Jackson for bringing the matter to the Ombudsman’s attention.
Jackson thanked Cllr. Finley Karngar and his colleagues at the Ombudsman’s Office for initiating the probe and pledged full cooperation with the investigation.
He also urged the Ombudsman to apply the law “without fear or favor,” stressing that “the law stands above all social classes.”
In his letter, Jackson referenced Article 5 and Article 90 of the Liberian Constitution, Section 9.6 of the Code of Conduct, and Judicial Canons 9, 14 and 28, arguing that the Chief Justice’s actions risk normalizing corruption and eroding the judiciary’s integrity.
The complaint also invoked historical concerns about past judicial conduct to underscore the need for robust oversight.
The Ombudsman has not provided a timeline for the inquiry or indicated what procedural steps will follow.
The matter is likely to draw public attention as the office proceeds with its review and determines whether formal disciplinary or remedial actions are warranted.
