MONROVIA, LIBERIA – Prominent Liberian lawyer and former Solicitor General Cllr. Tiawan Saye Gongloe has weighed in on an ongoing legal debate surrounding where constitutional challenges should originate under Liberian law, arguing that petitions seeking declaratory judgments on the constitutionality of statutes can lawfully be filed in Circuit Courts and are not required to begin at the Supreme Court.
In a detailed public education commentary, Gongloe sought to address what he described as a growing misunderstanding among some legal commentators and members of the public regarding the jurisdiction of Liberia’s courts in constitutional matters.
The senior legal scholar emphasized that while the Supreme Court serves as the final authority on constitutional questions, the Constitution does not require all constitutional disputes to be filed directly before the nation’s highest court.
According to Gongloe, recent public discussions have incorrectly suggested that any challenge to the constitutionality of a statute must be initiated at the Supreme Court of Liberia. He argued that such a position is inconsistent with both constitutional provisions and established legal precedent.
“The Constitution of Liberia clearly defines the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court,” Gongloe explained. “Outside a limited number of specific cases, the Supreme Court functions primarily as an appellate court rather than a trial court.”
He pointed to Article 66 of the 1986 Constitution, which identifies the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of constitutional issues while limiting its original jurisdiction to cases involving ambassadors, foreign ministers, and disputes in which a county is a party.
Gongloe noted that because constitutional challenges often require the presentation of evidence and factual determinations, they generally begin in lower courts where records can be developed before appellate review.
“The Constitution does not state that every constitutional issue must originate at the Supreme Court,” he said. “Had the framers intended such a requirement, they would have expressly included it.”
The former President of the Liberia National Bar Association further argued that Liberia’s Civil Procedure Law reinforces this interpretation.
Citing Section 5.64 of the Civil Procedure Law, Gongloe explained that the law specifically addresses situations in which the constitutionality of legislative acts is challenged in court. The provision requires that the Attorney General or other designated government attorneys be notified whenever such constitutional questions arise in proceedings where the government is not already a party.
According to Gongloe, the existence of this provision demonstrates legislative recognition that constitutional disputes may originate in courts throughout Liberia, including Circuit Courts.
“If Circuit Courts lacked authority to hear constitutional questions, there would have been no reason for lawmakers to create procedures requiring government notification when those questions arise,” he asserted.
To strengthen his argument, Gongloe referenced the landmark 2011 declaratory judgment proceedings brought by the Liberty Party and the Movement for Progressive Change (MPC) against the National Elections Commission (NEC).
He noted that those cases, which involved significant constitutional and electoral issues, were filed in the Civil Law Court for the Sixth Judicial Circuit in Montserrado County rather than directly in the Supreme Court.
“The Supreme Court itself acknowledged that the petitions were properly filed before the Civil Law Court,” Gongloe stated.
Drawing from personal experience, he revealed that he was among the attorneys who represented the NEC during the proceedings, while the late Cllr. Charles Walker Brumskine represented the petitioners.
According to Gongloe, the participation of experienced constitutional lawyers on both sides of the case reflected a shared understanding that the Civil Law Court was the proper venue for initiating the proceedings.
He further highlighted that when the case eventually reached the Supreme Court, the High Court criticized the trial judge for declining to decide certain constitutional issues presented before him.
“The Supreme Court made it clear that lower courts have a duty to hear evidence, establish facts, and address legal questions properly presented before them,” Gongloe explained.
The legal scholar argued that the ruling underscored the principle that trial courts play an essential role in constitutional litigation by creating the factual record necessary for meaningful appellate review.
Gongloe also pointed to other notable cases involving constitutional questions, including Center for Law and Human Rights Education et al. v. Monrovia City Corporation and Citizens Solidarity Council v. Republic of Liberia, both of which originated outside the Supreme Court before ultimately reaching the High Court.
Addressing arguments that constitutional disputes should instead proceed through special “In Re” proceedings before the Supreme Court, Gongloe said such interpretations misunderstand Liberia’s legal history.
He noted that historic cases such as In Re Constitutionality of Legislative Act (1914) and In Re Judicial Law Sections 12.5 and 12.6 (1975) were exceptional circumstances handled directly by the Supreme Court and do not establish a general rule requiring all constitutional challenges to begin there.
“These cases do not mean that every constitutional challenge must originate in the Supreme Court,” he explained.
According to Gongloe, requiring all constitutional disputes to start at the Supreme Court would undermine the structure established by Liberia’s Constitution and procedural laws.
He maintained that lower courts are not merely administrative gateways but are vested with the authority and responsibility to hear evidence, determine facts, and render decisions on constitutional issues before appellate review occurs.
“The law is clear,” Gongloe stated. “Circuit Courts possess the authority to hear petitions for declaratory judgment, including challenges to the constitutionality of statutes. The Supreme Court then exercises its constitutional role as the final arbiter through the appellate process.”
The former Solicitor General concluded that the filing of constitutional challenges in the Civil Law Court of Montserrado County or other Circuit Courts is fully consistent with Article 66 of the Constitution, the Civil Procedure Law, longstanding legal practice, and decisions rendered by the Supreme Court itself.
He expressed hope that his commentary would help educate the public and legal community while dispelling misconceptions surrounding the proper legal pathway for constitutional litigation in Liberia.
The debate has attracted growing public attention in recent weeks as constitutional and legislative disputes continue to dominate national legal and political discussions, making questions of jurisdiction and judicial procedure increasingly relevant to the country’s democratic governance and rule of law.
