Yesterday, it was alleged that the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning was going to submit the FY2025 National Budget to the majority bloc led by Deputy Speaker Thomas Fallah. However, pressure from development partners appears to have dissuaded them from taking this step. Speaker Fonati Koffa has since insisted that he will not yield to pressure and resign, but the growing political dynamics suggest a different reality.
Koffa, from the former ruling party, the Coalition for Democratic Change (CDC), was elected House Speaker in January, defeating the ruling party candidate Richard Koon. On that same day, Thomas Fallah, another CDC member, also won the role of Deputy Speaker. Koffa secured his position with 36 votes, while Fallah received 46 votes. For the first time in Liberia’s history, the House was entirely controlled by opposition lawmakers, even though one party did not command a majority, with only 26 out of 76 members being from the CDC.
To maintain his legitimacy, Koffa had to work with both CDC members and non-CDC members. But his approach alienated his party. Koffa supported the President’s budget without serious scrutiny, defended the President’s numerous travels, and appointed around 400 people to the legislature, many of whom were not even from the CDC. But crucially, Koffa did not defend party loyalists who were removed from their positions by the Civil Service Agency. These actions put him at odds with the CDC and even former President George Weah.
Without the full support of his party and facing a government eager to control the legislature, Koffa’s position was precarious. Last month, 47 of his colleagues signed a resolution to remove him as Speaker. While they fell short of the required 49 signatures, 47 was still a formidable number. The plan was to put the resolution up for a vote, but Koffa was in Italy visiting the Pope along with the President. During his absence, it was Deputy Speaker Fallah’s duty to conduct sessions. But Koffa’s supporters physically restrained Fallah from holding a session. Upon his return, Koffa refused to condemn his supporters’ actions, leading the dissenting lawmakers to boycott his sessions, seeing his inaction as an endorsement of violence.
The dissenting lawmakers decided to hold alternative meetings but lacked legitimacy without a legally recognized presiding officer, who could only be the Deputy Speaker. Initially, Fallah, loyal to Koffa and the CDC, resisted presiding over these sessions. Under threat from dissenting lawmakers, Fallah eventually joined them, initially to mediate and ensure due process for Koffa. However, his move was misunderstood, leading to harsh criticism and suspension from the party, pushing him to take an active role in the dissenting bloc.
Koffa sought court intervention to halt these alternative sessions, but the court denied his request. Fallah has since been presiding over these sessions. On Tuesday, the chairs in the joint session room were removed, forcing the majority bloc to improvise. Despite being pepper-sprayed, they continued to meet. Three key officials from the Executive branch also attended the majority bloc’s session to answer questions. This represented the President’s tacit support for their actions. The President’s decision to submit the budget to the Clerk rather than the Speaker shows where he stands.
Supporters of the President have justified his actions as the need to maintain legislative functionality and avoid further political gridlock. The court’s earlier decision granting 43 lawmakers the right to express a vote of no confidence in Koffa provided a legal basis for this shift. With the court legitimizing the opposition bloc, the President’s move can be seen as an effort to uphold the legislative process and ensure government operations continue smoothly.
In response, Koffa has vowed to challenge the executive’s move in court, insisting that he remains the legitimate Speaker. He plans to call on development partners to condemn the President’s actions as an unconstitutional overreach.
If Koffa chooses to hang on and the majority does not budge, several scenarios could unfold. The government might take a side, especially since the call for Koffa’s removal has been endorsed by the Unity Party Legislative Caucus. This could manifest in the government formally submitting the budget to the majority, effectively sidelining Koffa. Koffa might then argue with development partners that the move to submit the budget to the majority was illegitimate, thereby rendering the budget itself illegitimate. This could create a significant issue for the government, as it needs an approved budget before the new year to have an actionable financial plan.
The government has a choice to either make a deal with Koffa or push through their dealings with the legislature majority bloc despite Koffa’s objections. Koffa, on the other hand, faces the challenge of lacking legitimacy, with the majority of lawmakers refusing to sit under his gavel. He could either fight for legitimacy or recuse himself and submit to a due process, although both options appear unfavorable to him.
Koffa hopes that the majority will become exhausted, that public pressure might push them to yield, or that the President might simply call for a cease-fire where Koffa emerges as the winner. However, given the current dynamics, it seems unlikely that any of these outcomes will easily materialize in his favor.
