Liberian Democracy

In a republican form of government, power rests with the people who elect their leaders to represent their interests and remove same (leaders) if the people’s happiness and safety so require (Liberia Constitution 1985). Even though Liberia is a republic, the Legislature is dormant, thereby shifting domineering power to the Executive, headed by the President. Historically, the Republic of Liberia did not experience intense presidential dominance from the date of the country’s independence until the ascendancy of William V.S. Tubman to the presidency in 1943. Tubman established himself as the “father” of the state and head of all its institutions. This was possible because he was the first president to have brought in and signed several mining concessional agreements with foreign businesses and investors. Tubman accrued enormous wealth from those concessions thus making him the most influential statesman in the country then. The then international and economic system, nepotism and one party system gave him too much power to rule autocratically. Succeeding presidents to Tubman continued the autocracy of the presidency owing to weak, many a time inept, inexperienced and impoverished legislators. Although the presidential cult in Liberia germinated during the Tubman era, legislators themselves are predominantly responsible for the domineering presidency in the state. Many a time, majority of Liberia’s legislators are either illiterate or semi-literate, and or ill informed about public policy making. They more often than not lack thorough understanding of their duties and responsibilities, least to talk about the intricacies occasioning the issue of checks and balances in a republican form of governance, the operation of national government, understanding of the international socioeconomic, political and diplomatic dynamics and legislative techniques. Sometimes the few literate or “educated” ones come to the legislature as inexperienced and impoverished individuals thereby making them gullible to financial gains leading to the dollarization of legislative processes through receipt of bribes and huge lobby fees. These bribes and extravagant lobby fees dictate the enactment of laws against the national interest of the state and the general population. The executive collects revenues, stores and expends them. Hence gullible and indigent legislators become subservient to the Head of State who proffers money to woo legislative support in times of making critical political decisions some of which are against the national interest of the state and its people. The legislators sometimes neglect the use of their constitutional power to approve the scrupulous use of the country’s resources during national budget formulation processes. They place emphasis on their amenities and benefits in the national budget as opposed to allocating substantive resources to pertinent national development priorities. Affecting the state and its people. The Chief Executive in many instances uses money and other emoluments to convince them pursue presidential agenda rather than an all-inclusive agenda agreed by all branches of the government and the people. Another factor responsible for presidential dominance is the people’s failure to elect competent and well knowledgeable persons to the legislature. Similarly, the public fails in holding legislators accountable. Generally the elections of lawmakers in Liberia have been influenced by persons, parties, emotions and sometimes tribalism, instead of issues based on public policies and national interest. Additionally, majority of the citizens do not have access to the correct civic and voter education that would allow them vote for the rightful candidates. This can be blamed on the civil society and the national government. First, the civil society sometimes lacks the will power and resources to adequately educate the citizens on electoral matters. Some civil society agents advocate and gain public recognition that would later lead them to top political positions in which they entrench the very elitism they advocated against. Second, the government deliberately down plays civic and voter education fearing that this would empower citizens to gain insights in the operations, rights and obligations, duties and responsibilities of government, thereby providing critique of the political system. As a result of the foregoing, constituents blindly elect representatives and senators based either on kinship, campaign finances, fraternity, political parties, and or just on mere popularity, thereby begging the question of who is really fit to serve in such capacity. A combination of the aforementioned factors results into the formulation of policies that victimize, marginalize and neglect the rights holders (citizens or electorates). Legislators enact laws that serve the interest of the elites rather than the mass population of the citizens. However, this trend of a powerful presidency can be reversed if legislators become independent in their thought, actions, deeds, and when they are well abreast of their constitutional duties and responsibilities, and check the other two branches of government in the true spirit and intent of the Liberian Constitution. Equally, lawmakers need the requisite knowledge and experience to be effective and efficient. They need to have the know how to formulating pro-poor policies entrenched by and anchored on Human Rights Principles and Results Based Management. Finally, if the government and civil society, as duty bearers, empower the electorate they may likely elect the appropriate legislators who will enact laws for the common good of the people, be forthright with their duties, and exhibit the independence of the “first branch of government”. The constituents themselves need to rise up to the call to demand that their representatives to do the right things or remove those (legislators) through the ballot box if they fail to so do.