MONROVIA, Liberia — Fresh questions are emerging over the legality of the House of Representatives’ controversial decision to remove Montserrado County Representative Yekeh Kolubah, following claims by former House of Representatives Press Director Isaac Garyeazon Redd Sr. that constitutional procedures may not have been properly followed.
In a Facebook post following recent developments surrounding the matter, Redd argued that the process used by members of the House was flawed and potentially inconsistent with provisions of Liberia’s 1986 Constitution.
His comments came amid heightened public attention surrounding the ongoing dispute involving Representative Kolubah and House leadership, a matter that has generated legal and political debate over legislative authority and constitutional procedures.
According to Redd, the decision reached by 45 lawmakers to remove a sitting member of the House may not satisfy the constitutional threshold required for such action.
“The law requires 48,” Redd wrote, suggesting that the action allegedly failed to meet the constitutionally mandated two-thirds majority requirement of the entire House membership.
Under Article 38 of the 1986 Constitution, expulsion of a member of the Legislature requires a two-thirds vote of the entire membership of the respective chamber. With a House membership of 73 representatives, observers note that the required threshold would generally be 48 votes.
Beyond the issue of numbers, Redd also questioned the procedure allegedly used during the voting process.
He argued that legislative votes should not simply be conducted through announcements over a public address system, raising concerns over whether the process followed established parliamentary standards and procedures.
“Besides not meeting the required number, you do not vote by having names announced over the PA system,” he stated.
Redd further drew attention to Article 37 of the Constitution, which outlines procedures for filling vacancies in the Legislature.
The provision states that when a vacancy occurs in either chamber of the Legislature, notification should be communicated to the election authority within 30 days to facilitate a by-election process within 90 days.
As part of his argument, Redd questioned whether House administrative officials had formally notified the National Elections Commission (NEC) that Representative Kolubah’s seat had become vacant.
“Since the April 17 decision was reached, has the Chief Clerk written the NEC to say John Brown’s seat is vacant?” he questioned.
His comments appeared to suggest that uncertainty surrounding subsequent procedural actions could indicate unresolved legal questions about the validity of the original decision.
Redd also argued that if House leadership intends to pursue disciplinary measures lawfully, members could initiate a new resolution under proper constitutional procedures and secure the required votes from the full body.
“If they choose to do it right, they can proceed with a new resolution and obtain the expressed votes of 48 or more members of the House,” he stated.
While raising legal concerns, Redd also addressed Representative Kolubah directly, urging him to continue serving as an alternative voice within Liberia’s democratic process while adopting a more measured approach.
He acknowledged Kolubah’s role in raising issues affecting ordinary citizens and credited his advocacy with contributing to public discourse and accountability efforts.
“The Liberian people benefited and are still benefiting from Yekeh’s advocacy,” Redd wrote, while also advising him to avoid inflammatory language.
The former House communications official additionally praised the judiciary, describing recent legal developments as an important affirmation of constitutional principles.
He emphasized that the current matter should not be compared to historical legislative expulsions, noting that Liberia’s democratic institutions have evolved significantly over time.
The controversy surrounding Representative Kolubah’s status continues to attract national attention, with legal analysts and political observers closely monitoring the implications for legislative procedures, constitutional governance, and the balance of power between institutions of government.
The matter has increasingly shifted beyond an individual political dispute and now raises broader questions about how constitutional requirements are interpreted and enforced within Liberia’s democratic system.
As public debate continues, attention remains focused on whether future actions by lawmakers and judicial authorities will provide greater clarity regarding the legal boundaries governing legislative disciplinary proceedings.
