Monrovia-Liberia – John Stewart, a former Commissioner of Liberia’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), has added his voice to the growing criticism of granting autonomy to outstation ports. In a recent Facebook post, he labeled the port autonomy bill as “obnoxious and self-serving,” accusing Pro-Tempore Karnga-Lawrence and Senator Darius Dillon of prioritizing their personal interests and political ambitions. Stewart’s remarks highlight the perception that the bill is more about political maneuvering than addressing the nation’s developmental needs.
The Liberian Senate’s recent passage of a bill to establish an Independent Seaport and Inland Ports Regulatory Authority has ignited fierce debate. Critics have targeted Senate Pro-Tempore Nyonblee Karnga-Lawrence for prioritizing personal political interests over national stability. The legislation, which decentralizes seaport management, has been hailed by supporters as transformative but condemned by detractors as a “recipe for chaos.”
The bill’s passage on November 19, 2024, has led to accusations that Pro-Tempore Karnga-Lawrence is politicizing Liberia’s port management system to gain control of the Buchanan Port. Critics argue this could serve as an economic base for her rumored 2029 presidential ambitions. Observers note that Liberia’s move to decentralize its seaport operations is a stark departure from regional best practices, as countries like Ghana, Nigeria, and Côte d’Ivoire maintain centralized systems that ensure financial stability and strategic oversight.
David F. Williams, a former Managing Director of the National Port Authority (NPA), has been among the most outspoken critics of the Senate’s decision. Williams described the bill as economically counterproductive and contrary to global port industry practices. He warned that introducing multiple autonomous port authorities would lead to inefficiency, fragmentation, and financial instability. According to him, smaller ports, which are not commercially viable on their own, rely on the NPA’s support, and autonomy would likely lead to operational collapse.
Other experts have echoed Williams’s sentiments, cautioning that decentralization could weaken Liberia’s national security. They argue that autonomous port management could lead to fragmented oversight, creating vulnerabilities to smuggling, unauthorized entry, and regulatory non-compliance. Analysts also warned that granting autonomy to regional ports could set a dangerous precedent, encouraging other sectors, such as border management, to seek similar autonomy, thereby undermining the central Government’s authority.
Civil society groups and port workers have strongly opposed the bill, with many accusing Pro-Tempore Karnga-Lawrence of advancing personal interests over national priorities. The NPA United Workers Association criticized her for politicizing the country’s port infrastructure. In a statement, the workers called on her to focus on strengthening the centralized system instead of pursuing autonomy. Tracy Lal Kpehe, speaking on behalf of the group, argued that decentralization would destabilize Liberia’s port infrastructure, diminish service quality, and create unnecessary burdens on the Executive branch of Government.
Critics have also questioned the bill’s economic implications. They point out that smaller ports, particularly those in less commercially viable locations, could face economic shortfalls without the NPA’s financial backing. The NPA currently absorbs liabilities associated with these ports, and autonomy could lead to unsustainable debts or even closures. The move has raised fears that Liberia could lose significant economic ground, as autonomous ports might create redundancies rather than efficiencies, disrupting the nation’s trade ecosystem.
Madam Grace RK Guar, a prominent social justice advocate, acknowledged that establishing an independent regulatory body could potentially enhance transparency and accountability in port operations. However, she cautioned against the inherent risks of poor governance and corruption. Guar argued that while decentralization could drive regional development, it must be accompanied by stringent oversight to avoid exacerbating existing challenges.
The debate has also brought attention to the broader implications for Liberia’s governance and economic growth. Critics argue that fragmented port management would weaken the country’s ability to attract foreign investment. A centralized system, though not without flaws, provides a unified approach that ensures financial and operational stability. Many argue that the risks associated with decentralization far outweigh its potential benefits.
The controversy has deepened public skepticism about the motives behind the bill’s passage. Many see it as an unnecessary distraction that prioritizes individual political interests over national development. Analysts argue that Pro-Tempore Karnga-Lawrence’s insistence on pushing the legislation raises serious questions about her leadership and priorities.
Port workers, who stand to be directly affected by the bill, have called for a reassessment of the Senate’s approach. They urged the Government to prioritize reforms within the existing centralized structure, historically providing strategic oversight and financial stability. The workers emphasized the need for collaboration to ensure that the NPA remains a key driver of Liberia’s economic development.
Despite these widespread criticisms, the Senate remains steadfast in its push for the bill. The move has drawn condemnation from civil society groups, experts, and ordinary citizens, who view it as a step in the wrong direction. Many believe the legislation could undermine the nation’s progress and destabilize its economy.
