Ambulah Mamey, a noted policy expert, argues that the Act gives the new agency a dual role—both regulator and port operator—creating a glaring conflict of interest.
Monrovia – A newly proposed law to establish a regulatory agency for Liberia’s seaports is drawing intense criticism from policy experts who warn it will inflate the cost of doing business, create governance confusion, and tarnish the country’s maritime reputation.
By Gerald C. Koinyeneh, [email protected]
The proposed Liberia Sea and Land Port Regulatory Act, which recently passed the Senate and is now before the House of Representatives for concurrence, has been derided as a “dangerous law” by critics. Ambulah Mamey, a noted policy expert, argues that the Act gives the new agency a dual role—both regulator and port operator—creating a glaring conflict of interest. “It is like appointing a referee who is also a player in the same game,” Mamey said in an open policy memo addressed to the Speaker and Members of the House.
A key point of contention is Section 48 of the proposed Act. The provision authorizes the new agency to “acquire, establish, and improve port or harbor facilities and operate and maintain such port or harbor facilities” within available appropriations. Mamey contends that this authority directly conflicts with Liberia’s best practices, which require a clear separation between regulatory and commercial functions to avoid conflicts of interest and ensure accountability. “The Senate is making the proposed Port Regulator both a referee and a player in the seaport sector. This is shocking because the same Senate is currently holding hearings to prevent the Liberia Petroleum Refinery Company from acting in both roles in the petroleum sector,” he noted.
Historically, reforms in Liberia’s state-owned enterprises have aimed to separate regulatory oversight from commercial activities. For instance, while the Liberia Telecommunications Authority regulates the telecom sector, LIBTELCO handles service provision; similarly, the Liberia Petroleum Regulatory Authority (LPRA) oversees the sector while NOCAL manages commercial operations; and the Liberia Energy Regulatory Agency (LERC) regulates, leaving the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC) to handle commercial activities. Critics argue that this proven model is at risk under the new Act.
Mamey’s memo further highlights that the proposed law significantly overlaps with more than five key functions of the Liberia Maritime Authority (LiMA). Responsibilities such as enforcing the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Convention on Dangerous Goods, implementing various IMO conventions, setting maritime training standards, and enforcing maritime insurance regulations are already under LiMA’s purview. The duplication, Mamey warns, will confuse both domestic stakeholders and international maritime bodies trying to determine ultimate authority in Liberia.
Another major concern is the fiscal impact of the proposed Act. Section 306 outlines a funding mechanism that relies on a mix of national budget allocations, additional port user fees, and a mandatory 10% levy on revenue collected by port operators. “This fiscal model will increase the cost of importing goods, further straining an economy heavily dependent on imports,” Mamey explained. For ordinary Liberians, higher import costs mean increased prices for basic commodities.
Mamey also pointed to a matrix of fourteen African countries—including Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Sierra Leone, and Senegal—that maintain regulatory functions within maritime authorities while delegating commercial operations to separate port authorities. In South Africa, for example, the Transnet National Port Authority exclusively manages commercial and operational functions, ensuring both efficiency and effective oversight. The World Bank’s Port Reform Toolkit similarly advises against excessive regulation, emphasizing the need for independent oversight to foster competition and avoid bureaucratic bottlenecks that stifle innovation.
In his memo, Mamey urged the Legislature to discontinue the creation of redundant institutions and instead focus on strengthening existing bodies. “Reforms should be about efficiency, not adding unnecessary layers of bureaucracy that conflict with the principles of good governance,” he stated. He recommended updating the existing Act of the National Port Authority (NPA) to modernize its governance structure and align it with global best practices. Additionally, he called for expedited action on the abandoned Single Window Initiative, which promises to streamline transactions at the seaports, making them faster, easier, and less costly for port users.
As the proposed law moves through the legislative process, lawmakers face a critical decision: whether to maintain the current regulatory framework that separates oversight from commercial operations or to risk the potential pitfalls of an unbundled system that could burden both the economy and Liberia’s maritime reputation.
