Chamber Justice reserves ruling in EPA case

The Environmental Protection Agency’s operations remain halted by court order pending a decision from Chambers Justice Yussif D. Kaba.

By Lincoln G. Peters 

Monrovia, March 27, 2024: Chamber Justice Yussif Kaba reserved a ruling in the writ of prohibition filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by former Executive Director Prof. Wilson Tarpeh on Tuesday, March 26, 2024. 

Prof. Tarpeh petitioned the court because he said his tenure had not expired when President Joseph Nyumah Boakai appointed Dr. Emmanuel Urey-Yarkpawolo as the new Acting EPA Executive Director.

In his petition, Prof. Tarpeh argued that he has 43 months remaining in office and should be paid for this period before his exit or before turning over to the new administration.

Chamber Justice Kaba’s decision to reserve ruling in the legal dispute means the functions of the EPA remain on hold pending a final decision on the writ of prohibition filed by Prof. Tarpeh. 

On Tuesday, both parties representing Tarpeh and the EPA argued and presented their case for the second time since the petition was filed with the Supreme Court and directed to the Chamber Justice for determination. 

Prof. Tarpeh petitioned the court for a Writ of Prohibition on 7 March 2024, claiming that he was the tenured executive director of the EPA.

He further noted that contrary to this, President Boakai replaced him with Dr. Yarkpawolo as Acting Executive Director of the Agency.

The Petitioner stated that his purported tenure accorded him a property right under Chapter III, Fundamental Rights of the Constitution and that he cannot be denied such a right without due process being accorded him.

The Petitioner further claimed that if the President does not want him at the EPA, the government should compensate him for his remaining 43-month tenure.

He narrated that his appointment by former President George Manneh Weah under Section 16 of the EPA Act afforded him a seven-year tenure. 

Prof. Tarpeh also claimed that the President’s appointment of an Acting/interim Executive Director of the EPA was a fit action for a writ of prohibition on grounds that the action was contrary to the EPA Act and beyond the scope the law allows.

Meanwhile, the EPA and Dr. Urey-Yarkpawolo’s legal team, represented by Cllr. Lamii Kpargoi prayed the court to deny and dismiss Prof. Tarpeh’s request.

Cllr. Kpargoi argued that Part III Section 16 of the EPA Act provides for the appointment, tenure, and removal of the Agency Executive Director.

He said the Act allows the President to appoint an interim Executive Director pending the formation of the [Policy] Council. 

On the issue of tenure, he said the Act clearly distinguishes between the Executive Director, who is appointed by the President from the shortlist provided by the Policy Council, and the Interim Executive Director, who is singlehandedly appointed by the President. 

Kpargoi explained that Section 16 Subsection 2 of the Act clearly states that the Executive Director shall have a seven-year tenure, not the Interim Executive Director.

He asked the court to deny the petition, lift the stay order placed on the EPA, quash the alternative writ, deny the issuance of the peremptory writ, and grant the co-respondent such further relief as the court may consider legal.