By Socrates Smythe Saywon, Columnist
Liberia’s Office of the Ombudsman has recommended the immediate suspension of 42 lawmakers, including 12 senators and 29 representatives, for failing to declare their assets as mandated by Section 4.1 of the Code of Conduct. The timing and tone of this announcement by Cllr. Findley Karngar at the Ministry of Information press briefing on July 31, 2025, underscore the growing national appetite for accountability, but also raise fundamental questions about enforcement, political will, and selective transparency in a country still struggling with entrenched impunity.
At face value, the Ombudsman’s call to suspend these lawmakers without pay and redirect their salaries to “the public interest” appears bold, even commendable. In a nation where asset declaration laws have largely been toothless paperwork, Karngar’s position suggests a long-overdue institutional awakening. However, when peeled back, this move also reveals troubling inconsistencies, selective enforcement, and potential political motivations that cannot be overlooked.
First, the public deserves to know why only 12 senators were named while the identities of the 29 noncompliant representatives remain hidden. This selective exposure undermines the credibility of the Ombudsman’s office. Transparency must be uniform and unapologetic, as naming some and shielding others casts a shadow over the integrity of the entire exercise. The deliberate omission of nearly 70 percent of the culprits from public scrutiny dilutes the moral authority of the enforcement action and raises the specter of political favoritism.
Second, the recommendation for “immediate suspension” of sitting lawmakers, while legally grounded, is procedurally complex and politically fraught. The Liberian Constitution grants legislators immunity and outlines a separation of powers. Implementing such a suspension would require unprecedented cooperation from the very institution, the Legislature, whose members stand accused. Without clear legal backing or legislative buy-in, the Ombudsman’s call may remain symbolic at best and performative at worst.
What’s more, this development puts Speaker Richard Nagbe Koon at the center of a political storm. As the individual now in possession of the list of 29 unnamed representatives, Koon faces intense public and institutional pressure to act. His response, or lack thereof, will be a defining moment for the credibility of the House of Representatives. Will he uphold the law, or will political loyalties and institutional inertia continue to shield lawmakers from accountability?
It is also critical to question whether this sudden assertiveness by the Ombudsman is part of a broader political strategy in the Boakai administration. In a post-Weah political climate where anti-corruption rhetoric is being heavily leveraged, some may interpret this as a targeted attempt to weaken rival power centers within the Legislature. Former Speaker Alex Tyler’s inclusion, for example, adds weight to suspicions that political considerations might be woven into what is otherwise presented as a neutral enforcement measure.
That said, Liberia desperately needs more of these kinds of interventions. Asset declaration laws should not exist in theory alone. They are designed to prevent illicit wealth accumulation, expose conflicts of interest, and promote ethical governance. If Karngar’s pronouncement is to serve as more than a headline, it must be followed by systematic enforcement, public disclosure of all names, and legal proceedings where necessary.
Furthermore, civil society must rise to the occasion. Groups like CENTAL and the Liberia Accountability Network should not just applaud this move; they must demand full transparency, push for the public release of all 42 names, and call for legal reform that will make future asset declarations not only mandatory but also accessible and verifiable.
In conclusion, the Ombudsman’s action is both a bold stroke and a double-edged sword. It has sparked a necessary conversation about public ethics and the enforceability of Liberia’s governance laws. But unless the enforcement is even-handed, the legal framework is strengthened, and political will is demonstrated consistently, this moment risks becoming another instance of good intentions drowned in the murky waters of Liberian realpolitik.
Liberians are watching, not just the 42 lawmakers but the system that allowed them to go unchecked for so long.
Like this:
Like Loading…