When those entrusted with enforcing the law become the subject of repeated legal controversies, the foundations of public trust are placed in danger.
President Joseph Nyuma Boakai came to power promising a government anchored in the rule of law, accountability, transparency and respect for democratic institutions. Liberians expected a departure from the practices of previous administrations and a presidency that would protect the Constitution rather than treat it as an obstacle to political convenience.
But serious questions are now being raised about the conduct of his administration, particularly concerning respect for statutory tenure, public financial regulations, the management of state resources and the apparent absence of consequences when government institutions fail to comply with the law.
The rule of law is not a campaign slogan. It is not a political instrument to be applied against opponents and ignored when members of one’s own government are involved. It is the foundation upon which every legitimate government must operate.
And no president, minister, managing director or political appointee is above it.
THE SUPREME COURT ALREADY WARNED THIS GOVERNMENT
One of the clearest examples came in April 2024, when the Supreme Court ruled against the Executive Branch over its attempt to replace several officials occupying statutory tenure positions before their terms had expired.
The Court found that the government’s actions were not within the law, held that the affected officials’ due-process rights had been violated, and ordered the controversial nominations revoked.
The Court was particularly clear that statutory tenure protections must be respected and that the President cannot simply disregard the legal procedures governing the removal of officials.
This was not merely a political disagreement between former officials and the new administration. It was a judicial determination that the Executive Branch had acted outside the applicable legal requirements.
The message should have been unmistakable: the President’s constitutional appointment powers do not give him unlimited authority to disregard laws enacted by the Legislature.
Yet, in February 2026, another Supreme Court ruling ordered the reinstatement of National Public Health Institute of Liberia Director General Dr. Dougbeh Christopher Nyan after finding that his removal violated due process and the legal protections governing his tenure.
These judicial decisions should cause the President and his legal advisers to reflect seriously on how appointments, suspensions and removals are being handled within the government.
Why should the country repeatedly have to rely on the Supreme Court to remind the Executive Branch that the law must be respected?
PUBLIC MONEY IS NOT THE PROPERTY OF THE UP GOVERNMENT
The latest audit concerns involving public expenditure have further intensified the debate over the government’s commitment to the rule of law.
The General Auditing Commission reported that the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning facilitated approximately US$2.806 million in excess disbursements during fiscal year 2024 without legislative approval or an approved supplementary budget.
The GAC also questioned transactions amounting to approximately US$2.85 million for which adequate supporting documentation was not provided during the audit.
The Finance Ministry has offered an explanation, citing difficulties with archiving and retrieving documents and defending some expenditures as necessary. That response must be examined fairly, but it must also be supported by the relevant records and lawful authorizations.
The central question remains: who approved the additional spending, under what authority, and why was the required legislative process apparently not followed?
The national budget is an Act of the Legislature. It is not a private spending account belonging to the President or his ministers.
If government institutions can spend beyond approved appropriations without the required authorization, what meaning does legislative budget approval have?
Liberians cannot be expected to respect financial regulations while public institutions operate without demonstrating that they are following the same rules.
MILLIONS IN EXPECTED SOE DIVIDENDS — WHERE IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY?
Another troubling concern involves the failure of some state-owned enterprises to deliver the dividends projected in the national budget.
Government’s 2025 financial records, as reported in the Auditor General’s review, show that dividend receipts amounted to approximately US$1.335 million against a budget projection of US$14.074 million.
The National Port Authority was projected to contribute US$5.85 million but recorded no dividend payment. NaFAA was projected to contribute US$2 million but also recorded zero. The Liberia Petroleum Refining Company was projected to contribute US$5 million but recorded US$799,000.
This leaves a substantial revenue gap that the government owes the public an explanation about.
The Public Financial Management Act is clear about the responsibilities of state-owned enterprises. Section 46 provides for boards to establish dividend policies, requires expected dividends to be reflected in the national budget, and directs that declared dividends be deposited into the Consolidated Fund.
Section 47 also provides for administrative or criminal sanctions where provisions of the Act are infringed, depending on the nature of the violation.
However, there is an important distinction: a dividend projected in the national budget is not automatically a legally declared dividend. The financial position of each institution, its board decisions and the applicable legal requirements must be examined before declaring that an enterprise has violated the law.
That distinction does not excuse silence or weak oversight.
The Ministry of Finance and the Bureau of State Enterprises must explain which dividends were formally declared, which were legally due, what was actually paid, and whether any institution failed to comply with its statutory obligations.
If an enterprise has legally declared dividends and unlawfully withheld them, what action has been taken? If its board failed to meet its responsibilities, what consequences followed?
Why should public institutions enjoy the benefits of government ownership without being held accountable for their statutory responsibilities?
The people cannot continue to hear promises of revenue mobilization while millions of dollars expected from state-owned enterprises remain unexplained.
WHERE ARE THE SANCTIONS?
Perhaps the most disturbing feature of these recurring controversies is the public’s limited knowledge of what happens after audit findings and court decisions.
When officials violate financial regulations, who investigates them?
When government institutions fail to implement audit recommendations, who is held responsible?
When a state-owned enterprise fails to meet a legally established dividend obligation, what action does the government take?
When the Supreme Court rules against an action of the Executive Branch, what steps are taken to prevent the same problem from recurring?
A government that announces investigations but does not demonstrate corrective action risks turning accountability into a public relations exercise.
It is not enough for the President to order audits, establish committees or make public declarations against corruption. The real test is whether findings lead to corrective measures, administrative sanctions and prosecution where sufficient evidence establishes criminal wrongdoing.
The GAC must be allowed to perform its constitutional and statutory functions without interference. The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission must investigate credible allegations without political considerations. The Legislature must exercise meaningful oversight rather than remain silent when public money and statutory protections are at stake.
And the Executive Mansion must stop treating accountability as something that applies only to the previous administration.
BOAKAI MUST REMEMBER THE PROMISE THAT BROUGHT HIM TO POWER
President Boakai and the Unity Party did not inherit Liberia’s laws as optional guidelines. They inherited a constitutional republic in which every branch and every public official is bound by established legal procedures.
The President cannot demand respect for the law from ordinary citizens while his administration repeatedly finds itself before the courts over decisions that disregard statutory protections.
He cannot promise financial discipline while audit reports raise questions about expenditure beyond approved appropriations.
He cannot demand that state institutions generate revenue while failing to publicly demonstrate how institutions that fall short of legally established obligations are being held accountable.
And he cannot allow political loyalty to become a shield against administrative or legal consequences.
The President must understand that the authority of his office is strengthened, not weakened, when he respects the limits imposed by the Constitution and the laws of Liberia.
LIBERIANS MUST NOT REMAIN SILENT
Liberians have a responsibility to defend the Constitution and demand accountability from those who govern them.
This responsibility does not call for violence, destruction or lawlessness. It calls for peaceful civic engagement, public scrutiny, responsible journalism, lawful demonstrations, legislative oversight and the use of the courts to protect the rights of citizens.
The people must insist that public officials explain their decisions, that audit recommendations are implemented, and that those found responsible for proven violations face the consequences provided by law.
No political party owns Liberia. No president owns the national treasury. No minister or managing director is above the law.
The country belongs to its people, and public office is a responsibility entrusted to those elected and appointed to serve.
OUR POSITION IS CLEAR: THE LAW MUST APPLY TO EVERYONE.
President Boakai must stop the pattern of legal controversies surrounding his administration and demonstrate that his government respects the Constitution, the courts, the Legislature and the financial laws of the Republic.
The Unity Party government must understand that the rule of law cannot be selective, political or negotiable.
Liberians did not elect a government to replace one set of questionable practices with another. They elected leaders to protect the republic, strengthen its institutions and uphold the laws that govern every citizen.
If the government continues to ignore these concerns, the people have every democratic right to demand answers and insist on change through peaceful and lawful means.
The law must not bend to accommodate the President. The President must govern within the law.
That is the meaning of constitutional democracy. That is what Liberians deserve. And that is what this government must deliver.
See more Liberia News Network stories in Google Search by adding LNN as one of your Preferred Sources.
★ Add LNN as a Preferred Source