93 views not be expressed as would or could be translated into a prejudice against a party. The Chairman should therefore have refrained from any expressions or utterances on any allegations made in respect of any of the allegations made by the parties to the proceedings so that no conclusion is reached that he has already prejudged the case and that the appearance before him is nothing more than a formality to meet the procedural rather than the substantive elements of the law, which is a core embodiment of the constitutional guarantee of due process of law. It was particularly important that the Chairman refrained from making any comments dealing with any issue, accusation or allegations made against the NEC in respect of the October 10, 2017 elections while the proceedings was still be heard by the Hearing Officer and a possible appeal could be taken to the Board. This was crucial, given the complicated set up of the electoral framework and the role of the NEC. We must note especially that the NEC does not merely regulate the conduct of the public elections in Liberia, where it promulgates regulations and makes guidelines for the conduct of elections; it actually also conducts the elections and oversees all personnel charged with carrying out the elections. But more than that, in the event of any challenges to the elections, either as the manner in which they were conducted or as to the results announced, it is before that same Body, the NEC, rather than before an independent body, that a complaint is lodged; it is before that same Body that a decision must be made by the Body in favor or against itself. In such a situation, it is important that the Chairman gives every semblance of impartiality so that the integrity and credibility of the process and of the institution is maintained and preserved. The Board of Commissioner was therefore in serious error in denying the motion to recuse; it should have ordered that the Chairman recuse himself from the hearing and not append his signature to the ruling made by the Board. Having him sit on the appeal defied the laws, and especially the decisional laws of Liberia as pronounced by the Supreme Court. In the case Congress for Democratic Change v. NEC, Supreme Court Opinion, October Term, A. D 2011, the Supreme Court in addressing similar instant of a Chairman of the NEC making remarks on a matter pending and undetermined before the NEC held as follow: “…where elections complaints are addressed to the Commission, whether through its Chairman or other Commissioners or officers, the Chairman or other