Previous 19 / 27 Next

8/26/2020 Jupica vs Nec – Supreme Court of Liberia action and the entire petition is a fit subject for dismissal and 1st Respondent so prays. 22. And because as to action 13 of the Petitioners’ petition, 1st Respondent says that consultations were held and the parties in recognition of the impossibility of complying with Article 33 of the Constitution agreed and had reaffirmed their commitment to the holding of elections to advert any constitutional crisis which could roll back the progress in maintaining our democratic values. Please see hereto attached a statement reaffirmation signed by the parties and marked as Exhibit “R/2” in bulk. 23. And also because as to action 14, 1st Respondent says that the counsel for petitioners has a misunderstanding as to his Exhibit E. 1st Respondent says the activities covered under Exhibit E covered up to November 28, 2014 and hence, the insertion in said count as to the back dating of the instrument up to 2013 is false and malicious and hence, the said count should be ignored and denied. 1st Respondent says although not recognized to do so, it acting pursuant to its authority under 2.9 (h and U) of the New Elections Law, promulgated EVD preventative guidelines to be adhered by all participants, including voters, candidates, staff, and observers. Please see hereto attached the referenced EVD preventative measures marked as Exhibit “R/3” in bulk. 24. And as to Action 15, 1st Respondent says same present no traversable issue. 25. And also because as to action 16, same is false and misleading as 1st Respondent has received and dispatched all logistical materials to the various counties and polling centers. Further, 1st Respondent’s actions are consistent with law, and the voters roll are available for inspection at each of 1st Respondent’s offices and at 1st Respondent’s headquarters as provided for by the New Elections Law, Subsection(b), Section 3.6 thereof. Action 16 should therefore be overruled and dismissed. 26. And also because of action above, Respondent says that Section 4.2(4) of the New Elections Law requires the list of polling places to be published not less than ten days before the election. The 2014 Special Senatorial Election is scheduled for December 16, 2014. Accordingly, Respondent has up to December 6, 2014, to publish the list of polling places. Count 7 therefore should be ignored and the entire petition be dismissed. 27. And also because counts 1 through 8 of the petition are repetitive and present no legal ground for the issuance of a writ of prohibition. 28. And also because as to the entire petition, 1st Respondent denies all and singular the averments contained therein not made subject of special traverse herein. WHEREFORE AND IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, 1stRespondent prays that Your Honors will grant its Motion; deny the petitioners’ petition, order the electoral process continued and grant unto 1st Respondent any and all relief as Your Honors may deem just, legal and necessary. Given the respective positions and counter positions of the parties which we have meticulously presented, we will consider the following as the deciding issues in this case: comnetitsolutionsinc.org/toj/jupica-vs-nec-2/ 19/27

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Jupica vs Nec

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the postponement of the Liberian elections to a date when the Ebola threat was still ongoing was unconstitutional?

Alleged Acts: In February of 2014, Liberia was devasted by Ebola virus and on August 6, 2014 the President declared a state of emergency. Elections were scheduled for October 14, 2014 and the National Elections Commission (NEC) informed the government of the impossibility of adhering to the order, which restricted the freedom of movement, and holding the elections on that date. The President issued a proclamation suspending the elections on October 4, 2014 and the legislature endorsed that action but included that the election must be held no later than December 20, 2014. The NEC consulted with the political parties, civil society groups, and religious groups to determine the date of elections and agreed upon December 16, 2016. The Legislature passed a resolution authorizing the elections to be held on December 16 ,2014 and the President signed the resolution into law. The resolution was passed and signed into law when the state of emergency in Liberia was still ongoing. The petitioners filed suit seeking the setting of a date to be undone because it was illegal and the Ebola virus was still present in the nation.

Summary: Because the state of emergency was still in effect, the court determined that the law constituted a modification of the state of emergency originally set forth by the President’s state of emergency order. Although the court stated that elections would need to have guidelines that requires strict adherence in order to protect the health of constituents, the court stated that the election could stand because it was a political questions and could not be purely determined by the courts. Further, if the court had the power to determine that the Executive and Legislative branches’ set election date could be overruled by the court, it would also need the power to compel a new election date.

Conclusion: The court ultimately denied the petitioner’s request.

Legal Issue(s)

Electoral Administration Irregularities
EMB Independence
Health Concerns & Election Administration

Region: Africa

Country: Liberia

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Jan 13, 2016

Geolocation

Latitude: 6.404914557

Longitude: -10.67993335

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Jupica vs Nec – Supreme Court of Liberia.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Jupica vs Nec

Primary Documents

Notifications