Associate Justice Jamesetta Howard Wolokolie, sitting in Chambers, has ordered the Executive Branch to reinstate Dr. Dougbeh Christopher Nyan as Director General of the National Public Health Institute of Liberia (NPHIL) or pay him compensation and benefits through the remainder of his statutory five-year tenure, ruling that President Joseph N. Boakai's decision to remove him was not supported by the investigative and due process steps required under the NPHIL Act of 2016.
In a ruling dated February 16, 2026, Justice Wolokolie granted Dr. Nyan's petition for a writ of prohibition, finding that while the President has broad constitutional authority to appoint and dismiss executive officials, that authority is restricted where the Legislature has created tenured positions and spelled out specific causes and procedures for removal. The Court held that NPHIL's enabling law does exactly that, meaning Dr. Nyan could not be lawfully removed without an investigation and an opportunity to be heard consistent with due process.
Dr. Nyan was appointed on August 1, 2024, under Section 4.1 of the NPHIL Act, which grants the Director General a five-year tenure, removable only for enumerated causes -- including being "found to be grossly inefficient" or engaging in acts "undesirable to public interest" -- and only after due process. The Court noted that the removal in this case was triggered by an NPHIL Board resolution dated September 12, 2025, recommending Dr. Nyan's immediate removal and the appointment of Dr. Sia Wata Camanor as interim head.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
The Board listed a range of administrative and governance concerns, including alleged failure to involve the Board in key decisions, weak coordination with the Ministry of Health, persistent travel without Board knowledge, communications to the President and Legislature without Board involvement, and "concerns raised by partners."
President Boakai acted on the Board's recommendation on September 17, 2025, terminating Dr. Nyan, prompting him to file a petition for prohibition on October 23, 2025. Dr. Nyan argued that he was removed without any formal investigation establishing cause, and without the procedural safeguards contemplated by the NPHIL Act and Article 20(a) of the Constitution, which protects individuals from being deprived of "privilege or any other right" without a hearing consistent with due process.
The Executive Branch, through the Ministry of Justice, asked the Court to dismiss the petition, arguing that prohibition should not be used to shield public officials from executive discipline, and that statutory tenure does not provide immunity from accountability.
The government claimed Dr. Nyan's leadership had produced administrative dysfunction, conflict with the Board, weak coordination with the health sector lead (the Ministry of Health), and conduct undermining public confidence. It also insisted that Dr. Nyan received sufficient administrative due process over time, including notice of concerns and opportunity to respond, even if the process did not resemble a judicial trial.
But Justice Wolokolie rejected the government's core factual premise -- that Dr. Nyan's removal was grounded in an investigation producing findings that satisfied the Act's "for cause" requirements. The ruling noted that the September 12, 2025, Board resolution itself, which the Court described as the basis for the President's action, did not reference any investigation at all.
The Justice said it was "troubling" that the grounds relied upon -- gross inefficiency and acts undesirable to the public interest -- were not informed by investigative findings, and she emphasized that when counsel for the government was asked during hearing to produce evidence that an investigation informed the Board resolution, they could not present any investigation report.
The government attached to its returns a report dated February 3, 2025, described as an inquiry committee report. The Court found it unpersuasive as the legal foundation for Dr. Nyan's September 2025 dismissal, concluding that the report had already been used to support an earlier disciplinary action -- the Board's February 2025 suspension of Dr. Nyan -- after which he was restored to his post.
Justice Wolokolie reasoned that resurrecting that earlier inquiry as the justification for a later termination effectively punished Dr. Nyan twice for the same conduct, describing the problem in "double jeopardy" terms and holding that the prior report had "served its purpose" and could not substitute for a fresh investigation into the later allegations that culminated in the Board's September 2025 resolution.
A key point for the Court was whether Dr. Nyan was afforded a meaningful opportunity to be heard before termination. The ruling pointed to a five-page letter Dr. Nyan wrote to President Boakai dated September 17, 2025 -- the same day he was removed -- which the Court interpreted as evidence that the President's office asked him to respond to the Board's resolution within 48 hours, but he was dismissed on the very day he submitted his response. The Court also held that the government did not specifically traverse portions of Dr. Nyan's pleading relating to this account, and under Liberia's pleading rules, allegations not specifically denied are deemed admitted.
In grounding its decision, the Court leaned heavily on constitutional due process protections and the Supreme Court's recent line of precedent protecting tenured officials from summary removal. Justice Wolokolie cited the Court's decision in Yealue et al. v. Executive Branch (March Term 2024), where the Supreme Court granted prohibition after tenured officials were removed without investigation and hearings, warning that removals of such officials must follow the legal procedures established by statute. The ruling also relied on Martin Sallie Kollie v. Executive Branch (October Term 2019), reaffirming that when a statute prescribes causes and methodology for removal, the President's dismissal power is not absolute.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Beyond reinstatement, the Court's ruling carries financial implications. Justice Wolokolie held that appointment to a tenured public office creates a contractual relationship between the official and the state, and that where an official is removed before the tenure expires for reasons other than "proven cause," the state may be liable for the benefits and emoluments that would have accrued. On that basis, the Court ordered that Dr. Nyan be "restated or be paid his just compensation as though he was reinstated for the period of service up to the end of his tenure."
The ruling leaves the Executive Branch with two clear options: reinstate Dr. Nyan to the NPHIL Director General position or compensate him through the remainder of the statutory term. It also signals, again, that in agencies where lawmakers have created protected tenure posts, boards and ministries must build removals on documented complaints, investigations, and hearings -- not broad assertions of dysfunction -- if government actions are to survive judicial scrutiny.
