IPNEWS: The National Elections Commission (NEC) Hearing Officer has ordered the Liberian People’s Party (LPP) to return to the status quo that existed before its internal leadership crisis, effectively nullifying the competing suspensions and expulsions that have fueled a bitter power struggle over the period.
The ruling, issued today, September 7, 2026, by NEC Hearing Officer Atty. Fomba A.M. Swaray followed months of legal arguments between factions aligned with Cllr. Tiawan Gongloe, embattled Chairman J. Yanqui Zaza, and party official Major Tamba Samukai.
However, the legal team representing Zaza took exception to the ruling and announced that it would appeal the Hearing Officer’s decision to the NEC Board of Commissioners, setting the stage for another round of legal and political confrontation over the leadership and internal governance of the LPP.
At the center of the case was a fundamental question as to whether the competing factions properly followed the LPP’s constitution and internal dispute-resolution procedures when they attempted to suspend, remove, or expel party leaders.
The Hearing Officer answered emphatically ‘No’, as in a detailed ruling, Hearing Officer Swaray found that both sides failed to fully utilize the party’s internal mechanisms for resolving disputes before taking their battles to the NEC.
The decision relied heavily on Section 9.0 of the NEC’s Regulations and Procedures Relating to Political Parties, Coalitions, Alliances and Independent Candidates, which requires political parties to maintain comprehensive and impartial dispute-resolution mechanisms and to exhaust those mechanisms before seeking external relief.
The ruling also referenced Article 18 of the LPP Constitution, which gives the National Executive Committee authority to suspend, expel, or remove party members or officers following due process, stressing that simply communicating a disciplinary decision to the NEC does not make that decision legally effective.
“Whatever the authority within a political party, it is not sufficient to write to the National Elections Commission formalizing a decision of the party in taking disciplinary action(s) against a member. What is cardinal here is that said member be subjected to the pre-existing dispute resolution mechanism within the party in keeping with due process,” the ruling stated.
The dispute erupted following a series of conflicting communications sent to the NEC beginning in November 2024, as one faction reported the suspension of Major Tamba Samukai from his position as Vice Chairman for Recruitment and Mobilization and sought NEC recognition of the action.
Samukai subsequently emerged as Acting Chairman and participated in efforts that resulted in the indefinite suspension of Zaza as National Chairman.
Zaza, however, rejected Samukai’s authority, arguing that Samukai himself had been suspended and later expelled, and therefore lacked the capacity to postpone the party’s national congress or take other actions in the name of the LPP.
The competing factions each accused the other of violating the party’s constitution and acting outside established authority, as the resulting conflict eventually landed before the NEC after efforts by the Commission’s Political Affairs section to resolve the matter failed.
During the hearing, Samukai and his witnesses alleged that Zaza had acted unilaterally in running the party, including removing county officials and failing to account for funds allegedly received during the 2021 elections.
Samukai testified that an extraordinary sitting of the LPP National Executive Committee resulted in Zaza’s indefinite suspension, with members and county chairs signing the resolution, as other witnesses supported the position that county officials had participated in the decision to suspend Zaza.
Zaza strongly rejected those allegations.
Testifying in his own defence, he accused Samukai and his allies of disrupting party meetings and making threatening remarks, and also questioned Samukai’s authority, arguing that the position of Vice Chairman for Recruitment and Mobilization was not properly established under the party’s governing documents.
Zaza further argued that the November 15, 2024 meeting relied upon by Samukai was improperly constituted and could not legally authorize actions against the party leadership.
His witness, Mohammed Deygbo, similarly accused Samukai of misconduct and said the matter had been referred to the party’s Grievance and Ethics Committee.
But for the Hearing Officer, the central problem was not simply who was right or wrong in the political dispute, as it was whether either faction had followed the proper legal and constitutional process before imposing disciplinary measures.
The ruling noted gaps in the evidence concerning whether Samukai had been formally served and investigated by the LPP’s Grievance and Ethics Committee.
Similar concerns were raised regarding Zaza, with the Hearing Officer questioning whether the party’s stated decision to refer him to a Grievance and Ethics Committee was actually followed by a formal investigation, hearing, or final determination.
The ruling concluded that the evidence did not establish that the party’s internal dispute-resolution process had been exhausted as required, and in its most consequential finding, the NEC Hearing Officer declared that the competing suspensions and expulsions had no legal effect.
The ruling ordered all parties to return to the status quo ante, the position that existed before the series of suspensions, expulsions, and competing leadership claims triggered the dispute.
“Wherefore and in view of the foregoing, the suspensions/expulsions are of no legal effect and the parties are hereby ordered to return to the status quo ante that existed before the said contentions,” the ruling mandated.
The decision, however, does not appear to settle the broader political question of who ultimately controls the LPP, and instead, it sends a powerful message about the importance of constitutional procedure and due process in Liberia’s political parties.
Meanwhile, with Zaza’s legal team taking exception and announcing an appeal to the NEC Board of Commissioners, the LPP crisis is far from over, as the appeal could determine whether the Hearing Officer’s ruling survives, is modified, or is overturned by the Commission’s higher decision-making body.
The case has also exposed deeper questions about internal democracy, leadership accountability, disciplinary authority, and constitutional compliance within political parties.
The LPP, a party with a long history in Liberia’s political landscape, the dispute represents more than a fight between individual personalities, as it has become a test of whether internal party institutions can resolve leadership disagreements through established rules rather than competing claims of authority.
With an appeal now looming before the NEC Board of Commissioners, Liberia could soon witness another decisive chapter in the LPP’s increasingly contentious leadership battle.
