For months, there have been claims and counterclaims about the alleged alteration of the 2024 National Budget. The assertion was first made by Margibi County District #5 Representative Clarence Gahr.
Rep. Gahr had noticed a change in the reporting procedure of spending entitles from the original budget signed and forwarded to the Executive Mansion. The original document indicated that "Each spending entity for which appropriation has been made in the budget should submit a quarterly performance report to the national Legislature through a specified and reporting template by the Public Accounts Committee. Instead, it was altered to direct the reports to the Legislative Budget Office.
This sparked concern for further probe into the entire saga, which discovered several other alterations that led to decreased and increased appropriations for spending entities outside of what had been signed and submitted to the Executive Mansion for the President's approval.
So, the mere fact that these discoveries were coming from the House of Representatives itself and the leadership of the House's determination to get to the bottom of the issue shout the allegation to the rooftop.
Ostensively, this is because the allegation casts doubt over the ruling Unity Party's declared war against corruption. The allegation that some individuals within the administration, allegedly from the Ministry of Finance, colluded with some individuals within the National Legislature to alter the National Budget for their own selfish gains speaks volumes about the Boakai regime's commitment to fighting corruption.
Thus, the constitution of a Specialized Committee to investigate the allegation on August 17, 2024, was welcomed by all well-meaning Liberians, with the expectations that the alleged culprits would not only be brought to book but a stiffer punishment leading to prosecution would serve as a deterrent.
What did the investigating committee find?
The Committee found out that after the budget was sent to the Senate for Concurrence and sent back to the House for onward transmission to the Executive Mansion, and a receipt obtained from the Executive Mansion indicating that the National Budget had been received, the Engrossing Clerk received a call from the Engrossing Clerk of the Senate informing her that his boss, Senate Secretary Nyabolor Segbeh wanted the Budget recalled from the Executive Mansion due to error.
The Deputy Chief clerk authorized the House's Engrossing Clerk to retrieve the Budget from the Executive Mansion without informing the chief clerk. Despite warning from the Engrossing Clerk to the Deputy Chief Clerk expressing concerns that the process was unorthodox, the Deputy Chief Clerk maintained that the Budget be withdrawn from the Executive Mansion.
After the Budget was withdrawn and sent to the Senate, whatever correction was made was unknown to the leadership of the House of Representatives. The Deputy Chief Clerk attached the signature or attestation page of House Speaker Fonati Kofa, who was by this time out of the country, to the new version from the Senate. This was done unknowingly to the leadership of the House and his immediate boss, the Chief Clerk.
The altered budget contains millions of United States dollars that were not initially captured, and there was a decrease and increase in some appropriations that had been inserted outside the knowledge of the House leadership.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
This practice appears not to be new within the corridors of the Legislature primarily due to the procedures through which these final financial documents are transmitted.
Why is the recommendation so weak?
Instead of recommending the immediate arrest and prosecution of those involved in committing such crimes, including officials allegedly from the Ministry of Finance Development Planning with solid ties to the Senate and all other persons involved in the alteration, the Committee recommended, among other things, that the relevant staff be subjected to disciplinary measures.
The recommendation is not definite, and therefore, staff involved could walk away from dismissal and prosecution. Such an alteration may not be new, thereby needing a stiffer punishment to set an example.
