The judicial action and the corresponding response of the executive ought not to pass unnoticed because they are instructive of the society we aspire to become, and testify to how far we have travelled to institutionalize the rule of law.

A few years ago, a different course was followed; a different precedent was established. A similar suspension by the Supreme Court of the license to practice law of a Justice Minister and Attorney General witnessed the public trouncing of the Supreme Court by the presidency. The court’s decision was summarily reversed. Another public brush with the courts occasioned the forceful resignation and replacement of the court’s bench. Needless to say, the courts withered in irrelevance.

That the courts shall say what the law is is the bedrock of governing under the rule of law. Naturally therefore, when the courts are made to be weak, notwithstanding how strong and dominant the presidency may appear to be, our democratic aspirations fade and the society becomes weak, lawless and insecure. Such is the ripple effect of undermining the courts as the final venue for the adjudication of disputes and the resolution of claims.

That we must continue to govern under the rule of law is not a choice we must make only when it seems easy to do, or when it affects others with whom we share no affinity. It is a collective charge we must always keep because it is right, and it makes our communities safer and our society better. This is the lesson to be drawn here. 

Undoubtedly, keeping this charge has proven to be difficult in the face of a serious breakdown in the individual and institutional capacities to boldly say what the law is, and to correspondingly seek its enforcement without fear or favor.

These difficulties are further compounded when we continue to view individual breaches to the law through tribal and political lenses – when we constantly invite the Executive to intervene in matters that are properly cognizable before the courts; when lengthy legal processes and procedures do not necessarily inspire public confidence; when archaic laws are unsupportive of current aspirations; when we exude the mistaken notion that our political or professional association, station, gender, position, tribe or religion somehow precludes us from either answering to the law or having its edicts enforced against us; and much worse, when we continue to wrongly imagine that our new-found freedoms are writs to violate the rights of others with impunity.

However, as this recent experience has demonstrated, and others will continue to prove, the resolve of the government is unwavering to continue to secure our society under the rule of law, and to erase from the national psyche, the unfortunate impression that all are not equal before the law. Across the Judiciary, reforms including to the jury system, as well as harsher measures against ethical breaches by officers of the court, including judges and lawyers, are all taking roots.

During this recent suspension of the license of the Justice Minister and Attorney General, we have seen it argued that the Executive can disagree with the courts. Of course the Executive can, and the Executive should offer disagreements whenever it sees fit. But a commitment to govern under the rule of law does not command the Executive or, for that matter, anyone else to necessarily agree with the decisions of the courts in order to enforce it. Nor does governing under the rule of law establish a position, station, tribe, religion or association for whom the law can be selectively applied, or against whom it cannot be enforced.

The rule of law simply commands the court to be the proper venue to determine what the law is, and instructs the Executive to enforce the law on all persons without fear or favor. And so, from the well-connected to the un-connected; from those who may know the law to those who may be ignorant of the law – irrespective of position, tribe, gender, religion or association – as demonstrated in this matter, it is, and shall remain, the sacred duty and solemn promise of the Government of Liberia to enforce the law equitably against all persons.

Many have been the sacrifices in blood, sweat and tears to discontinue the unsettling precedent that we were not all equal before the law. And although we have more to do – and yes, even more to undo – this experience lays a clearer marker by which we would continue to build our society into one in which all, and not only some, were seen and known to be equal before the law. And that our courts – the true anchor of our democracy – as the Liberian Constitution commanded, will continue to grow in independence, stature and relevance, to always say, with courage and confidence, what the law is.

A second, and equally important feature of this recent experience, which is worthy of notice, is the implication it pervades for an imperial presidency. The imperial presidency effectively installs a president as the law of the land, affording the presidency “special powers”, often not assigned by the Constitution, to decide all matters. Simply put, under the imperial presidency, everything begins with the president and ends with the president.

Because it essentially negates the tripod structure of the State and undermines the independence and coordination which ought to exist between the branches of the government, the imperial presidency thrives where the rule of law is weak. The appearance of dominance which the imperial presidency exudes is really a mirage intended to choke off the fundamental principles of check and balance for which the branches exist, as well as undermine the foundational doctrine of the separation of powers.

Expressed in more graphic terms, under the imperial presidency, the Legislature is rubber-stamped into obedience and the courts are marginalized from being the proper venues for the adjudication of civil and criminal disputes. Sadly, we came to see that as the imperial presidency grew larger, the Liberian State became smaller. And we lost our bearings.

Today, our society has gotten freer, and our democracy has gotten stronger. Today, the Legislature is growing in demonstrated independence. Today, the Judiciary is effusing with courage as it stands gallantly on the side of justice and equality before the law. Today, power is being shared; respect is being accorded; and authority is being decentralized. And today, albeit imperfectly, even political parties are getting in on the act conducting local conventions and primaries across the country – essentially acceding to the right of the people to choose their leaders and not have leaders imposed upon them by a few who are far removed from the local realities of the people.

Through all of these important processes of change in the body politic, we see the welcome death of the imperial presidency and the birth of a more democratically-functional society. This is progress. And it makes our society better.

But make no mistake: This is not simply a chance occurrence – a sort of natural evolution without human inputs. In her inaugural address, the President promised to shred the imperial presidency. Each democratic action, including demonstrating increased tolerance for the exercise of freedoms; dutifully enforcing the decisions of the courts even if it proves to be difficult; and being loyal and faithful to the commands of the Liberian Constitution that power be shared and that each branch grows in independence to check and balance the other – each thoughtful and democratic action has been a step deliberately taken toward keeping the promise of shredding the imperial presidency. And so, it should warm our hearts that the administration continues to keep its promises.

As the Liberian people have exercised their rights and freedoms – as the Legislative and Judicial branches have grown in independence and relevance; and as the license to practice law of the Justice Minister and Attorney General was suspended by the Supreme Court, and the Executive enforced the decision of the Highest Court, we have heard the argument that the administration is weak.

This argument is specious and unfortunately trapped in time. Neither an administration nor a society is weak because its people are free. It is when people are not free, and the law cannot be applied equally against all persons without fear or favor that an administration and the society are weak. For freedom is not a license to be lawless; it is a writ to be responsible and law abiding. And where the law is broken, it is the duty of a free society to ensure the enforcement of the law.

No government on the face of the earth can stop the commission of all crimes. But, like ours, every democratic government has a duty to punish criminals when they are proven to be so by the courts after the benefits of due process of law. This is our measure of strength – and must remain the measure of the strength of our society.

Just as freedom is not the measure of weakness, so too is fear not the measure of strength. Our shared experiences testify to this truth. As we have seen, it is when we have constricted the spaces for broader participation and have slipped outside the confines of the constitution – when we have resorted to means not provided by the law – either in search of powers to make us seem “strong” or to seek resolutions of grievances; that is when we have undermined the essence of constitutional authority, and have compromised our collective peace and security. That is when our democratic aspirations have faded; that is when we have become entrapped by fear; and that is when our society has become weak, intolerant, lawless and insecure.

However, when we stay within the authority of the constitution, as we are determined to do, and continue to hold each other accountable for violations thereof, we share the weight of leadership to which the various branches of the government are justly entitled, and all are made stronger and better.

This is also true for every citizen. When we use the law to always assert our claims, we add value to our citizenship. We set the right examples for others to follow. And we keep ourselves and our communities safe.  

Of course, sharing the weight of leadership requires that the various branches of our government will coordinate and consult more, and not less. It also requires that we will disagree, as we must, without seeming disagreeable, so as to afford all achieve the purposes of our nation and improve the welfare of our people. This is real strength. And on account of how we lost our way, this is courageous; it is right; and it is transformative.

Here, too, all Liberians must lead from wherever we are – in the government as well as outside the government. We must continue to work every day – continue to tackle the difficulties of the moment which have the potential to distract us. But we must also continue to lift our sights beyond the difficulties to see that as we continue to do the little things that are right – not because they are easy but because they are right – then, and only then, will we bring ourselves closer to the vision we share for a safer, freer, just, more equitable, democratic and prosperous society. Only then will we be the best that each of us can possibly be.

Finally, Minister Tah is a valuable and senior member of the Executive. She continues to demonstrate diligence to duty and faithfulness to the aspirations of our country. We are all delighted to have her back to work. And notwithstanding the difficulties of the last six months, together, we are happier that this administration has not been found wanting in enabling our society to know that we are all equal before the law.

Through this important experience for the country, we are proud that this administration vindicated its quest to change our society for the better, and confirmed the constitutional authority of the court not only to say what the law is, but also to see the court’s decisions even against a senior member of the Executive, dutifully enforced by the Executive.

Although we did not invite this challenge, we were deeply honored to equal the opportunity to reverse the unsettling precedent which was established a few years ago – the precedent that withered the courts into irrelevance, and exuded the false impression that we were not all equal before the law.  

Today, the same is also true of the Legislature. The increasing relevance of that body and its growing sense of independence have now made its hallowed chambers an attractive place for many who previously imagined the Liberian presidency to be the only place of leadership and authority in our country. Let us commit to always keep it this way. Let us commit to continue to keep our country safe and peaceful. And let us commit to continue to recreate our society into one of laws and not merely of men.

We will continue to keep the promise!

God bless Liberia.

By Lewis G. Brown, Minister of Information, Republic of Liberia