The lawyer representing Associate Justice Kabineh M. Ja’neh, Cllr. Arthur T. Johnson says he is disappointed in the Monday, 19 November 2018 publication of Daily Observer newspaper that alleged that “delay in prohibition’s ruling frustrates Ja’neh’s lawyer.”
Cllr. Johnson complained Monday, 19 November in interview with reporters that the local daily had his photo along with the story to indicate as if he had granted an interview and had spoken on the issue with the Daily Observer reporter.
“I want to first of all make it clear that at no time did I make such a statement or grant such an interview,” Cllr. Johnson says.As Supreme Court lawyer, he says he is aware that when a case is filed before the Supreme Court and it is being heard, the Court may sit to decide to render the opinion.
Once the court has reserved its ruling to render its opinion, Cllr. Johnson says no Supreme Court lawyer will say that they are frustrated and that the Supreme Court is delaying.He wonders if this is a calculated political ploy against him for somebody to gain their personal aggrandizement.
The lawyer clarifies that the story doesn’t represent him, and denies it entirely.Cllr. Johnson is providing legal service for Justice Ja’neh who lawmakers want to remove from the Supreme Court bench through impeachment.
He faces claims of alleged proved misconduct and abuse of judicial description, among other charges.The House of Representatives has drafted, passed and submitted to the Senate Justice Ja’neh’s bill of impeachment.
Ja’neh is challenging the action of the House at the Supreme Court, but the Court has not yet made its decision yet in the case after hearing arguments.Similarly, four Senators are asking the Supreme Court to stay the process because they believe it is done in violation of the Constitution, specifically Article 43.
By Winston W. Parley