Liberia’s former ruling party, the Coalition for Democratic Change (CDC) has announced plans to resist the ruling Unity Party’s sponsored plans to illegitimately remove the Speaker of the 55th National Legislature, Cllr. Jonathan Fonati Koffa. The Secretary General of the CDC, Jefferson Tamba Koijee said in a social media post that the former ruling party will convene an emergency national executive committee to discuss the specific resistance approach to the undemocratic action of the Joseph Nyuma Boakai led administration to circumvent the legal path enshrined in the Constitution of Liberia for a speaker’s removal despite the decision of the Supreme Court. “The CDC stands by the Supreme Court ruling that recognizes Cllr. Koffa as the legitimate Speaker of Liberia. We will make a decision on the mode of resistance to the anarchy President Boakai and his cohorts of desperadoes are plunging this country into,” the CDC Chief Scribe stated. Despite fingers being pointed to the presidency for masterminding Speaker Koffa’s ousting, the Liberian 80-year old President has gone public to support the action of the renegade group dubbed “the majority bloc” to conduct legislative business. The President instructed his Minister of Justice and Attorney General to provide basis for his support to the anti-Koffa group of representatives. Justice Minister Oswald Tweh said, in response to the President’s request, “my reading of the Court’s opinion is that the majority bloc fulfilled the constitutional prerequisites for conducting legislative business,” Tweh stated. “The Constitution mandates that a quorum be present and a presiding officer chair the session. In the absence of Speaker Koffa, the Deputy Speaker legally assumed this role.” According to him, the Court validated the legality of the Majority Bloc’s sessions, given their adherence to constitutional and procedural requirements despite the absence of Speaker J. Fonati Koffa. On the other hand, Lloyd Scott, a seasoned political operative and lawyer, sharply criticized the Supreme Court for leaving critical questions unanswered. “The Court left the issue basically unresolved while lending solace to a Koffa win,” Scott stated. “The cardinal issue was whether the removal of the Speaker was constitutional, and they didn’t even touch that. Instead, they chose to focus on interpreting Articles 33 and 49 without addressing the core constitutional violations raised.” Scott contended that the Majority Bloc’s actions were unconstitutional because Speaker J. Fonati Koffa was not absent when he was removed. “Article 49 makes it explicit that the Speaker or, in their absence, the Deputy Speaker, presides. The Majority’s actions were outside this framework,” he argued. Scott described the ruling as a missed opportunity to resolve the crisis definitively, calling for greater clarity in future decisions. “This was a moment for the Court to settle critical constitutional questions once and for all, and they failed to do so,” he said. The public is apprehensive about what the resistance of the former ruling party would engender.