By Seltue Karweaye
Regardless of the developments that may occur during the remainder of his term, President Joseph Boakai’s decision to sign Executive Order 131 is a significant moment in Liberian history. This order establishes the Office of War and Economic Crimes Court, a crucial institution aimed at persecuting those who bear the greatest responsibility for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and rampant corruption that has plagued the Liberian political class for decades, transcending party lines and affiliations.
The announcement was met with widespread support from many Liberians, who view it as a long-overdue step toward accountability and justice. For many, this initiative represents hope for a future where the injustices of the past are recognized and redressed. The establishment of this court could serve as a signal that Liberia is ready to confront its history of war crimes and corruption, providing a pathway for victims to seek redress and for the nation to heal. However, there are significant concerns among some citizens and observers regarding the potential implications of this move. Critics fear that reopening discussions about past atrocities may reignite old tensions and divisions that were carefully managed and mitigated to secure peace after years of conflict. The memory of the civil wars, which left deep scars on the collective psyche of the nation, remains fresh for many, and the fear of revisiting such painful memories can evoke anxiety and resentment.
Furthermore, the prolonged lack of prosecution of war criminals—spanning over two decades—can largely be attributed to a persistent absence of political will among leaders. This indifference has often been influenced by individuals who once played active roles during the wars, many of whom continue to hold significant political power today. Their presence in government complicates the pursuit of justice, as it raises questions about the sincerity of leadership in promoting genuine accountability and reform. As Liberia stands at this crossroads, the hope is that the establishment of the Office of War and Economic Crimes Court will mark a turning point, not only in the quest for justice but also in fostering a culture of transparency and governance that prioritizes the rule of law over the interests of a privileged few.
Before issuing Executive Order 131, President Boakai took a decisive step by establishing the Office of Asset Recovery through Executive Order 121. This office was explicitly created to identify, recover, and safeguard stolen state assets while also holding accountable current and former officials implicated in corrupt practices. This crackdown on corruption began shortly after his inauguration in January, which initially sparked a sense of hope and optimism among the Liberian populace that Boakai had a concrete and practical plan to restore the country’s integrity and financial stability.
However, as the months have progressed, that initial excitement has given way to disappointment and disillusionment. The Boakai administration, once viewed as a beacon of potential change, now appears increasingly stagnant and ineffective. There are growing concerns that it has begun to mirror some of the troubling habits of previous governments. Specifically, the administration seems to lack a clear strategic direction, and there is an alarming deficiency in transparency and accountability. While President Boakai and high-ranking officials frequently emphasize the severity of Liberia’s economic challenges and repeatedly call for the public to adopt measures of financial restraint, there is a striking lack of commitment from them to participate in this austerity. The disconnect between their rhetoric and actions has deepened the public’s skepticism and frustration regarding the administration’s sincerity in tackling the issues at hand. Overall, the administration’s response has left many Liberians questioning its dedication to genuine reform and positive change in their country.
The controversy surrounding the revised 2024 budget, which totals an astounding $738.8 million, has sparked significant debate and unrest among ordinary Liberians. This budget was passed unusually quickly by the National Legislature, which is typically known for its slow, deliberative process. The speed of its approval seems to highlight a troubling double standard regarding governmental priorities in the country. One of the primary points of contention is the substantial allocation of funds for presidential activities, along with the audacious decision to provide sport utility vehicles (SUVs) for legislators. Each vehicle costs over $45,000, and with 103 lawmakers in total, these expenses strain the public purse. This starkly contrasts the economic reality for many citizens, particularly civil servants, who earn a minimum monthly wage of less than $150. The disparity between the spending on lawmakers and the financial struggles of average Liberians has fueled public outrage.
Compounding public frustration is the allocation of $13.2 million for Legislative support projects at a time when there have been mounting calls for accountability and transparency in government spending. Recently, the NEKOTEH Scholarship program, once praised as a $25 million initiative, has come under fire due to serious allegations of financial mismanagement. This program was designed to assist Liberian students in pursuing higher education in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields and Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the United States and Canada. However, the dissolution of this program has raised critical questions about the lack of transparency in government reporting.
Moreover, allegations of misconduct have emerged regarding Abdullai Kamara, the Acting Chair of the Liberia Telecommunications Authority (LTA). A report from the General Auditing Commission (GAC) revealed significant procurement law violations during Kamara’s time as CEO of TAMMA Corporation. The report disclosed that over L$262 million and US$450,000 are unaccounted for, suggesting serious financial irregularities. Despite these alarming findings and their implications, Kamara remains in his position, raising questions about accountability in leadership.
Similarly, Dorr Cooper, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry Inspector General, has also attracted controversy. He was exposed for attempting to fraudulently graduate from the University of Liberia. While the university acted to address this misconduct, Cooper continues to serve in his role without facing any legal consequences, further eroding public trust in the integrity of government officials under President Boakai-led administration.
The combination of these issues—extravagant spending on government officials, an indifferent approach to serious allegations of financial misconduct, and the lack of accountability for individuals in positions of power—creates a climate of frustration and disillusionment among the populace. As citizens grapple with these discrepancies, the call for reform and responsible governance grows louder.
The growing frustration with the current administration stems from three interconnected sources of discontent. First, there is significant outrage among the general public, who are increasingly angered by the stark contrast between the rescue mission principles the administration publicly professes and the extravagant lifestyle it appears to indulge in. Citizens feel that the administration’s practices do not align with the economic realities faced by the ordinary Liberian, leading to deepening resentment.
Second, members of the political opposition have heightened their scrutiny of the administration, finding new reasons to question its integrity and commitment to good governance. These opposition figures argue that there are inconsistencies in the administration’s policies and actions, raising doubts about the motivations behind certain decisions.
Finally, there are long-time supporters of Boakai, who, based on his extensive experience in public service, including over four decades in government roles and his record as Vice President, harbor faith in his ability to lead effectively. However, they express concerns that he has not surrounded himself with a sufficiently capable or diverse team. Critics in this category argue that Boakai’s habit of relying on individuals from his Unity Party (UP) or those with whom he has personal connections—both locally and abroad—has resulted in appointments that do not necessarily prioritize the best talent available.
The criticism directed at Boakai is not without merit. Outside of a select few well-respected figures such as Minister of Justice Cllr. N. Oswald Tweh, Foreign Minister Sara Beysolow Nyanti, and Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Dr. Emmanuel King Urey Yarkpawolo, the majority of individuals in Boakai’s relatively large administration seem to lack the exceptional expertise expected in government leadership. Many of these selections appear to have been motivated by political considerations rather than a commitment to excellence in governance. This situation is particularly disappointing given Liberia’s rich pool of human resources and the many talented Liberians excelling across various fields around the world.
The composition of Boakai’s cabinet raises concerns about its effectiveness and vision, with many observers arguing that it ranks among the least inspiring administrations since Liberia transitioned to democratic governance in 2006, following years of conflict. Furthermore, Boakai faces criticisms of being somewhat insular or provincial, akin to his immediate predecessor, George Weah. The predominance of officials from northwestern Liberia in key ministries, departments, and agencies has led to perceptions that the administration may not be fully representative of the nation as a whole. Weah’s administration was characterized by a greater number of officials from the southeastern region, further highlighting the regional imbalance in leadership representation within the past and current governments.
Although political and regional expediency can sometimes be justified, many people find the apparent lack of a clear direction from the current administration to be deeply troubling. One of the key distinctions that sets Boakai apart from his predecessors since post-conflict civilian rule began in Liberia in 2006 is that he has expressed a desire for the presidency from the outset. Given this ambition, it is surprising that he seems unprepared for the significant challenges that come with the role.
Despite being in office for nearly eleven months, much of which has been spent traveling abroad for various conferences and meetings aimed at attracting foreign investment to Liberia, there has been little tangible evidence of strategic planning or effective governance. His choices for ministerial positions have been met with mixed reactions, often oscillating between being uninspired and, at times, completely baffling those within the political sphere. This inconsistency raises questions about his leadership style and decision-making process.
Furthermore, Boakai has yet to lay out a clear and compelling vision for the country, which has fostered a growing sense of skepticism among the public. Many citizens, including those who initially supported his candidacy, are beginning to wonder whether his focus is more on positioning himself for a 2029 presidential run than on addressing the pressing issues currently facing Liberia. This perception is concerning, especially given the pressing socio-economic challenges, such as rampant inflation, crippling public debt, and widespread insecurity, that require immediate attention and effective policy responses.
While it is true that Boakai has had to navigate a difficult landscape fraught with inherited challenges, this context should not serve as an excuse for the administration’s apparent lack of a coherent plan. The public’s expectations for coherent governance are legitimate, especially when everyday Liberians grapple with significant socio-economic hardships. Therefore, the administration’s seeming disregard for the urgent needs of the populace, coupled with an obstinate approach to addressing these issues, only exacerbates public frustration and undermines confidence in the government’s leadership.
To be fair, the issue at hand extends well beyond Boakai himself. Across the African continent, there is a pervasive sense of frustration and disillusionment among the populace, who feel that those in power continue to lead extravagant lifestyles while everyday citizens struggle to meet their basic needs. This disparity raises significant concerns, as many citizens perceive democracy merely as a facade that allows leaders to systematically exploit national resources for their benefit, often without any sense of social responsibility or accountability.
This sentiment has been notably echoed in recent events across West and Central African nations, where military forces have intervened to overthrow elected governments.
Such actions have only intensified fears that democratic values are being undermined in favor of self-serving interests. Given this context, it would be a monumental tragedy if, during Boakai’s leadership, a similar combination of elite excess and indifference to the plight of the people were to jeopardize Liberia’s stability. Boakai must recognize that he cannot afford to let growing public dissatisfaction morph into a sense of resignation or apathy toward democracy.
Unfortunately, as time passes, the ranks of those who believe in his capacity to rescue, restore hope, and guide the nation toward a brighter future are thinning. If Boakai wishes to reclaim the trust of the populace and foster a renewed commitment to democratic ideals, he must act decisively and conscientiously. These are critical times, and the pressure to respond to the needs of the people is mounting. I rest my pen.
The post Article: A Disturbing Reality appeared first on Liberia news The New Dawn Liberia, premier resource for latest news.
