-Dismisses Gracious Ride’s Petition
By: G. Bennie Bravo Johnson
The Supreme Court of Liberia has dismissed a petition filed by Gracious Ride Incorporated, which sought to declare President Joseph Boakai’s Executive Order #126 unconstitutional. The court ruled that the petitioner lacked the legal standing to challenge the order, emphasizing that Gracious Ride could not assert the interests of third parties without proper authorization.
In its ruling, the court stated: “Having reviewed the records, heard the arguments and contentions, and considered the relevant laws applicable thereto, it is hereby adjudged that the petitioner has no standing to exert the interest of a third party where it has not been given the authority to do so. The petitioner cannot raise the claims of a third party who is not before the court. In this instance, the petitioner having failed to sustain the burden that Executive Order 126 violates the statute, the petition is denied for lack of proper challenge.”
Executive Order #126, issued by President Boakai in early 2024, established the Asset Recovery and Property Retrieval Task Force. The task force was created to identify and recover public assets allegedly looted through corrupt practices. However, its enforcement was temporarily halted by a Supreme Court stay order following a legal challenge by Gracious Ride Incorporated, a transport service provider owned by Madam Finda Bundoo, former Chief of Protocol under ex-President George Weah.
Gracious Ride argued that the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) holds the exclusive statutory mandate to seize and recover stolen public assets, not a presidentially appointed task force. The company contended that the creation of the task force through an executive order overstepped the president’s authority.
In response, the task force maintained that Gracious Ride lacked the legal standing to challenge the executive order. They argued that the 1986 Constitution grants the president quasi-legislative and judicial authority to issue executive orders, particularly in matters aimed at combating corruption and the misuse of government resources.
The Supreme Court ultimately sided with the task force, ruling that the petition failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove that Executive Order #126 violated the Constitution. The court’s decision paves the way for the Asset Recovery and Property Retrieval Task Force to resume its operations.
In its final judgment, the court declared: “Wherefore, in view of the foregoing, the petitioner’s prayer for an order declaring Executive Order 126 unconstitutional is hereby denied, and the petition is dismissed.”
This ruling marks a significant victory for the Boakai administration’s anti-corruption efforts, allowing the task force to proceed with its mandate to recover stolen public assets. Meanwhile, the decision has sparked debates about the limits of executive power and the role of independent institutions like the LACC in combating corruption.
Ready to work
Based on the ruling, the Assets Recovery Team informs the media and the general public that it will immediately start an investigation into allegations and accusations of suspicious and illegal assets from past and present public officials.
ARREPT says that as much as it complied and abided with the rule of law, every citizen should do the same when invited for questioning, maintaining that the Task Force will do everything within the confines of the laws as guided by the 1986 constitution that calls for due process.
“Now that the Stay Order is lifted by the Supreme Court ruling, individuals of interest will be served a cardinal notice as the principal foundation of the law, and continue to assure the public that no one will be indicted without a formal investigation in keeping with the law.
ARREPT, however, notes that failure on the part of persons of interest to abide by said notice (which will be served three times) will leave its investigative panel with no alternative but to proceed with the investigation and use the evidence available to formally charge said individuals.”
The Task Force wants to inform the media that it has taken seizure of several cases that involve suspicious and stolen assets, including houses, vehicles, companies, corporations, stores, etc., and calls on the public to continue aiding ARREPT with any information on suspicious assets.
ARREPT says it is aware that some of these assets may be in pseudo names with the intent of the owner (formal and present officials) to hide their identity. The task force is also encouraging volunteers’ restitution and confession as a means of settlement out of court.
Meanwhile, ARREPT has unveiled a sealed box at its offices for those wanting to aid the Task Force with information on stolen government assets and reports of suspicious wealth of past and current government officials”
