This morning while on my way to work, I tuned to Truth Breakfast show & I heard the show host who is a brother in faith, politics and profession, speaks to two issues. One is the attempt of the Auditor General attempt to continue his work as “AG”, and the second is the “Liberian lady” issue which he overly emphasized. I feel professionally obligated to provide some enlightenment on the AG dismissal saga because too many persons have struggled unsuccessfully to adequately address this issue. Utterly, it’s either due to professional gap, or oversight. Section 53.2 of the Act that created GAC states” There is hereby established in the Executive Branch of Government, Branch of an independent agency to be known as the General Auditing Office,…” the act further states” The Auditor General and Deputies shall be appointed by the President …..and the Auditor General shall be removed by the PRESIDENT for gross malfeasance or gross nonfeasance in office for mental or physical disability or incompetence. In the absence of the AG, the President shall appoint one of the deputies to act the capacity of the AG”. I just want to inform the public and as well remind my learned colleague(s) of the constitutional law principle which states” what the law/ constitution does not grant, it withholds’. Please reference the opinion of the Supreme Court sitting in its October Term 2007, case title: CDC and Liberty party Vs. Executive Branch of Government, R/L. Furthermore, this maxim of law which states” Expressio unius est exclusion alteries” which means , the expression of one thing in law /constitution may necessary involve the exclusion of other things not expressed. The ACT of GAC does not express the word “concurrence” but rather it does speak of appointment and dismissal by the President. An act to seek concurrence undermines the intent and purpose of the ACT and as well set into motion precedent for future wrong proceedings where Law-makers in future government will challenge any President who attempts to dismiss without concurrence from them. The ACT does not give any power to the President to seek concurrence, what is not expressed in the Act , can’t be construed to imply . For those of us who are allies of the regime, we get embarrassed by these kinds of mistakes especially when we are known to have the best of capacities. I think the legal team close d to the President need to research more eschews reoccurrence of such mistakes to the presidency. Few months back, it was the appointment and subsequent withdrawal of a young lady to my former office, NEC, and my immediate boss to the INHRC. This is my two cent contribution to this debate. On the Liberian lady and Lebanese man issue, I think my brother is proceeding wrongly and could be in violation of the Code of moral and professional ethnic of governing lawyers. I shared his passion for a suffering woman but please think of your status as a lawyer, this what make us distinct from ordinary persons. Regards
Posted on: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 10:51:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015