President Joseph Boakai’s April 24, 2025 address on the Supreme Court’s ruling concerning the legislative impasse strikes a tone of constitutional reverence, but beneath the surface lies a troubling pattern of executive deflection and subtle defiance. While the President acknowledges the Court’s decision, his insistence that the problem in the House of Representatives remains unresolved—despite a clear judicial ruling—signals a reluctance to accept the binding authority of the nation’s highest court. Rather than implementing the ruling, President Boakai couches his hesitancy in broad, vague language about “consultations” and “finding a constitutionally sound path forward,” which effectively delays resolution and undermines the finality of the Court’s interpretation.
It is no secret that the crisis within the House of Representatives has been entangled with executive interests from the beginning. Credible reports have linked key members of the Executive branch to bribery scandals emanating from the Ministry of Transport and the Liberia Water and Sewer Corporation. These institutions, both under the purview of the Executive, are alleged to have provided funds used for bribery aimed at influencing the composition of House leadership and legislative decisions. Specifically, allegations suggest that these entities were involved in channeling monies for bribery, a case that was reported to the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) but remains unresolved to date. Despite these serious allegations, the Executive has remained conflicted, if not complicit, in the ongoing drama.
President Boakai’s reference to “three separate but coordinate branches of government” is ironic given the very actions of his administration appear to be breaching that separation. The Supreme Court has ruled on what constitutes a quorum in the Legislature—effectively providing a legal basis for ending the impasse. But instead of aligning with this judgment, the President chooses to frame the situation as still fluid and requiring further deliberation. This is a strategic delay tactics, masking defiance behind diplomatic language. This approach undermines judicial authority and sends a dangerous signal.
Moreover, invoking acts of arson and vandalism as reasons for national concern—though undoubtedly serious—is a diversion from the Executive’s own culpability in fostering the unstable environment that allowed such acts to occur. The emphasis on law and order rings hollow when those in power appear unwilling to hold their own to the same standards of accountability they expect from ordinary citizens.
The lack of transparency in addressing these allegations publicly raises concerns about the administration’s role in the crisis. The Executive’s failure to distance itself from these activities and its reluctance to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling suggest a deep-seated conflict of interest.
The President’s call for unity, peace, and patriotism, while noble in tone, lacks credibility when juxtaposed against the backdrop of selective governance and apparent interference. True unity cannot be built on compromised institutions and evasive leadership. The people of Liberia deserve more than rhetorical appeals—they deserve transparent, decisive, and just leadership that respects the constitutional boundaries of power and the rulings of its judiciary.
If President Boakai is serious about moving Liberia forward, he must begin by fully implementing the Supreme Court’s decision, distancing his administration from partisan entanglements, and holding accountable those within the Executive suspected of manipulating the legislative process. Anything short of this only deepens public mistrust and risks further damage to Liberia’s fragile democracy.
