A University of Liberia law professor has warned that a public campaign surrounding a land judgment in Gompa City risks undermining the rule of law by shifting disputes from the courtroom to political and ethnic mobilization.
Cllr. Kanio Bai Gbala, an assistant professor at the Louis Arthur Grimes School of Law and leader of Liberia’s Centrism Movement said in a statement Wednesday that criticism of judicial decisions is protected in a democracy, but efforts to obstruct enforcement of judgments or pressure judges through public campaigns pose a more serious threat.
“A court judgment can’t be overturned by a radio microphone, a crowd, or a deliberate appeal to tribal sentiments,” Gbala wrote, arguing that disputes should be resolved through appeals and other legal procedures rather than public pressure.
The dispute centers on a land case decided by the Gompa City Magisterial Court in Nimba County. Gbala said that, according to court records, no appeal was filed and that the judgment therefore remains enforceable unless overturned through procedures established by law.
The professor also rejected calls for President Joseph Boakai to remove Chief Justice Yamie QuiQui Gbeisay from office in connection with the dispute, saying the chief justice did not hear the underlying case.
He cited Article 71 of Liberia’s 1986 Constitution, which provides that Supreme Court justices hold office during good behavior and can be removed through impeachment and conviction by the Legislature on specified grounds.
“Under Article 71 of the Constitution, the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices hold office during good behavior,” Gbala said. “The President holds no such power.”
Gbala said the dispute has taken on an ethnic dimension that could carry broader risks in Nimba County, which was heavily affected by Liberia’s civil conflicts.
“Recasting a property judgment as an ethnic contest gambles that hard-won peace for short-term advantage,” he said.
At the same time, Gbala distinguished criticism of the courts from conduct that he said could interfere with the administration of justice. He noted that Article 15 of the Constitution protects freedom of expression and said Liberians have the right to describe a judicial decision as wrong or criticize a judge’s reasoning.
The Judiciary has also emphasized the importance of public scrutiny of court decisions, according to Gbala.
But he argued that intimidation of judicial officers, efforts to prevent enforcement of judgments and calls for communities to resist court orders fall into a different category.
Gbala cited Sections 12.5 and 12.6 of the Judiciary Law, Title 17 of the Liberian Code of Laws Revised, which address conduct that obstructs the administration of justice. He also pointed to Supreme Court jurisprudence recognizing the judiciary’s authority to protect its proceedings.
The professor called on people who disagree with the Gompa ruling to use the legal system, including appeals and judicial review where available.
“Appeal where appeal lies. Seek review before the appropriate court. File a complaint through the Judiciary’s established mechanisms,” he wrote. “That is how a citizen fights a judgment in a republic.”
He also cautioned the Judiciary against using contempt powers excessively, saying courts must protect their authority while preserving legitimate criticism.
“Contempt is a shield for the administration of justice, not a sword for the sensitivities of any official,” Gbala said.
The dispute, he argued, ultimately raises a broader question about how Liberia resolves conflicts.
“The question before the nation is not whether one land judgment in Gompa City was right,” he wrote. “It is whether disputes in this country will be settled in the courtroom or in the crowd.”
