By Jerromie S. Walters
Monrovia: A draft resolution that carries the names and positions of all seventy-three members of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Liberia proposes new fines and automatic suspensions for members who violate decorum during plenary sessions. This publication has obtained a copy of the draft resolution, titled “Alternative Measures for Decorum on the House Floor,” which aims to codify penalties for disruptive behavior, including shouting across the floor, using profane language, and issuing threats against colleagues.
In her 86th birthday message, former President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf called on the Liberian legislature to focus on making laws rather than creating noise. “It is time for a Legislature that makes laws and not noise,” she said. Many other Liberians have since branded the House of Representatives as a “noisy ground” while giving high regard to the Liberian Senate which has since been considered as the “House of elders”.
The House’s draft resolution dated November 3, 2025, comes less than a week after the House of Representatives plummeted into disorder last Thursday after heated clashes over a controversial anti-homosexuality bill and stalled district development funds, forcing Speaker Richard Koon to abruptly adjourn the session less than an hour after it started. The proposed measures, if adopted, would represent one of the most concrete efforts to enforce discipline in the chamber.
“Recognizing the importance of debate in all legislative matters and the need to maintain decorum during Plenary Sessions to promote ethical behavior, and ensure that colleagues have the opportunity for uninterrupted participation during debates in Plenary Sessions, we, therefore, affix our names and signatures to this resolution, proposing the adoption of the following measures as part of the House Rules…:” the resolution reads.
Central to the proposed rules is a mandate that no legislator shall speak without being formally recognized by the Presiding Officer, directly addressing the core of last week’s disruptions where members repeatedly interrupted proceedings. Furthermore, the resolution explicitly bans the use of profane language or any action meant to provoke colleagues, with specific warnings against making threats, a provision that underscores the personal tensions that have recently flared within the chamber.
For members eager to contribute but not recognized, the draft outlines a formal alternative: they must submit their opinions in writing to the Speaker through the Office of the Chief Clerk, to be placed on the agenda for the following session. This procedure is designed to ensure all voices are heard while maintaining the orderly flow of debate, effectively replacing spontaneous, and often disruptive, interjections with a structured, documented process.
The most striking aspect of the resolution is its graduated system of penalties, which imposes immediate financial and professional consequences for violations. A first offense would incur a fine of LRD 5,000, while a second transgression would see that fine increase to LRD 7,000, with payment required within 24 hours into a government revenue account as a prerequisite for attending the next session.
A third violation would trigger an “automatic suspension” for one week, accompanied by a corresponding salary deduction, all “without further investigation.” The resolution justifies this swift punishment by stating that the prior fines serve as sufficient warning and fulfill the requirements of due process, a clause likely to provoke debate over members’ rights to a defense.
The resolution claims its authority by stating that upon being signed by a simple majority of members, it will serve as prior notice, rendering the standard disciplinary procedure outlined in Rule 48.7 of the House Rules “silent.” This legal maneuver is intended to fast-track the enforcement of these alternative measures, bypassing potential procedural hurdles that could slow down disciplinary actions.
To cement these changes, the draft resolution explicitly amends existing Rules 22.2, 22.4, and 22.5, which already govern debate etiquette but have lacked clear enforcement mechanisms. The proposed measures would layer these existing rules with the new, specific penalties, giving the Presiding Officer a clear toolkit to maintain control.
The resolution concludes with a comprehensive definitions section, leaving little room for misinterpretation of terms like “decorum,” “provoke,” “profane,” and “automatic suspension.” This legalistic approach indicates the drafters’ intent to create a watertight framework that can be applied consistently to avoid claims of biased enforcement.
The push for discipline follows a session of unprecedented turmoil that exposed deep fractures within the legislature. The pandemonium started when River Gee County District #3 Representative Johnson Williams petitioned the plenary to discharge from committee a bill seeking to criminalize homosexuality and amend Chapter 14, Subchapter D of the New Penal Code. His motion ignited immediate and fierce reactions from both supporters and opponents of the bill.
Speaker Koon, however, deferred the communication, a move that drew an angry backlash from several lawmakers who accused him of blocking debate on what they called “a national moral issue.” This decision was seen by many as the catalyst that ignited the subsequent disorder, with members challenging the Speaker’s authority to sideline the contentious topic.
“The House is a place for open debate, not suppression,” Maryland County District #2 Representative Anthony Williams shouted across the floor as tensions rose and lawmakers crowded around the Speaker’s chair. His defiant statement encapsulated the frustration of members who felt their priorities were being marginalized by the chamber’s leadership.
Despite repeated banging of the gavel, Koon struggled to restore order. He eventually ordered Rep. Williams out of the chamber for what he called “disruptive behavior,” an expulsion that only served to heighten the tensions in the room as other members protested the decision.
Outside the chamber, Williams blasted the Speaker’s handling of the debate, claiming it was an affront to democratic principles. His expulsion set a precedent that would be quickly followed, signaling a breakdown of parliamentary discipline and the Speaker’s diminishing control over the plenary.
The uproar did not begin with the anti-gay bill. Earlier in the session, Montserrado County District #9 Representative Frank Saah Foko demanded clarity on the disbursement of district development funds managed by the Liberia Agency for Community Empowerment (LACE). “Mr. Speaker, our people are asking for their money; we want the people’s money,” he declared, drawing applause from several colleagues. This earlier confrontation over finances had already created a charged atmosphere.
Koon, reportedly angered by the repeated interruptions, ordered Foko out of the chamber. This second expulsion in a single session demonstrated the Speaker’s attempt to assert control through punitive measures, yet it also revealed the depth of discontent among the ranks over issues of transparency and resource allocation.
Moments later, Montserrado County District #10 Representative Yekeh Kolubah joined in, accusing the leadership of ignoring the cries of ordinary Liberians. He, too, was expelled. With two expulsions and rising tempers, the session devolved into shouting matches and procedural confusion, making it impossible to conduct substantive business and forcing the premature adjournment.
The House is expected to act on the proposed “Alternative Measures” on Thursday, November 6, 2025. Speaker Richard Nagbe Koon who’s also Montserrado County District #11 Representative
won as Speaker of the House of Representatives of the 55th National Legislature, following an election process against Nimba County District #7 Representative Musa Hassan Bility, in May 2025.
This came after months of leadership crisis within the House of Representatives that led to the resignation of former speaker Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa. The impasse was prompted by some lawmakers’ opinion that they had lost confidence in Koffa. Koon was (previously) swiftly picked as speaker while the matter was in court. After the Court ruled that Koon’s “Majority Bloc” acted beyond its limit, Koffa considered it a victory and resigned. This brought in a fresh “democratic” speakership election which Koon won on Tuesday, 13, 2035.
