The Clars Hope Foundation through its legal representation has filed a motion to quash the writ of subpoena Duces Tecum for what they consider as lack of subject matter jurisdiction and legal authority.
It can be recalled the Asset Recovery and property Retrieval Task Force filed a petition requesting the criminal court Ā’ to subpoena the management of Clars Hope Foundation to produce documents relating to the construction of the foundation in Marshall . The management through their legal team is expected to appeal before the court on Thursday January 23,2026.
Just hours to their appearance the Clars Hope Foundation filed a motion stating that no Action or Proceeding Is Pending Before the court. So there is no civil action, criminal proceeding, petition, or cause of action presently pending before Court against the Respondent.
‘’Under Liberian law, a subpoena whether ad testificandum or duces tecum is ancillary process and must issue in aid of a pending judicial proceeding. A court cannot exercise compulsory process in a vacuum, nor may it compel attendance or production of documents absent a live case or controversy properly before it.’’ The Petitioner said. Accordingly the motion stated that Subpoenas Are Issuable Only within the Context of a Pending Action. Adding that Section 14.1 of the Civil Procedure Law defines a subpoena as process commanding a person to attend, testify, or produce documents in an action at a specified time and place.
The motion further that Section 14.2 of the Civil Procedure Law authorizes issuance of subpoenas only by the court in which the action is brought. Similarly, Section 17.3 of the Criminal Procedure Law permits subpoenas “at the request of either the prosecuting attorney or the defendant”, clearly presupposing the existence of a criminal action already before the Court.Where no action exists, the court lacks jurisdiction to issue or enforce a subpoena, and any such writ is null and void ab initio. Further, Article 21(h) of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia provides that:
“..No person shall be compelled to furnish testimony or evidence against himself. And he shall be presumed innocent until contrary is proved beyond a reasonable doubt...”
They maintained that the subpoena duces tecum at issue compels the Respondent/petitioner to produce financial, donor, and institutional records, without the existence of any charge, claim, or adjudicatory proceeding. Compulsory production of documents outside the context of a lawful judicial proceeding constitutes coerced evidence gathering, in violation of the protections guaranteed under Article 21(h).
Furthermore Clars Hope Foundation lawyers argued that headed by Cllr Jonathan Massaquoi and Atty Walma Blaye Sampson said The Constitution does not permit the State or any of its instrumentalities to invoke judicial power as an investigative shortcut, absent due process and jurisdiction.
The motion concluded as saying’’WHEREFORE AND IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Respondent respectfully prays this Honorable Court to: QUASH AND SET ASIDE the Writ of Subpoena Duces Tecum issued against the Respondent for lack of jurisdiction, DISCHARGE the Respondent from any obligation to appear or produce documents pursuant to said writ; DECLARE that compulsory process may only issue upon the filing and pendency of a proper action before a court of competent jurisdiction; and GRANT any and all further relief this Honorable Court deems just, legal, and equitable.
