Tuesday's second clarification by Deputy Information Minister for Public Affairs Daniel Sando regarding the controversial Foya project in Lofa County was meant to settle a storm of public speculation, yet it has only fanned the flames of distrust, skepticism, and outright frustration among Liberians.
NEARLY SEVEN months after his initial explanation, and following a string of contradictory statements from at least three other senior government officials, Deputy Minister Sando's attempt to clarify the facts falls short of the standards of accountability and governance that citizens rightly demand.
AT THE CENTER of public discontent is not only the content of Deputy Minister Sando's explanation but the sheer delay in its delivery and the inconsistent narrative that has accompanied the project from its earliest stages. For close to a year, Liberians watched a substantial structure rise in Foya District under heavy security, with restricted access, foreign labor, and minimal official information. During this period, government voices were neither unified nor transparent. Instead, citizens were presented with a patchwork of half-truths, denials, and conflicting accounts that created a vacuum for rumors, assumptions, and public speculation.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
DEPUTY MINISTER SANDO, as one of the earliest officials to address the project, bears a significant share of responsibility. When reports first linked the Foya construction to the Mano River Union, he firmly dismissed the suggestion, citing checks with MRU sources in Freetown and a review of the organization's website. While factually rebutting the MRU connection, Deputy Minister Sando neglected the most fundamental questions about what exactly was being constructed, who authorized it, and how was it financed? That absence of basic transparency left citizens to fill in the blanks themselves, eroding public confidence and laying the groundwork for suspicion.
MONTHS LATER, Deputy Minister Sando returned with what he described as a 'detailed and comprehensive account', identifying the facility as the Mano River Union Center for Regional Peace and Development. According to him, the center is intended to host regional and international dialogues on peace, security, governance, and economic integration. The facility reportedly features a five-hundred-seat conference hall, nine accommodation units, spans seven acres of land, and carries an estimated price tag of 6.1 million United States dollars, funded through a mix of national, regional, global, and private contributions. While more thorough than his previous statement, Deputy Minister Sando's explanation cannot erase the damage caused by months of inconsistent messaging and evasions.
THE SECOND CLARIFICATION is particularly problematic because it follows a string of public contradictions from other officials. The Presidential Press Secretary insisted the structure is a government-owned facility for the Office of the President. The Minister of State for Presidential Affairs claimed complete ignorance of any construction at Foya.
THE PUBLIC WORKS MINISTER cited security considerations and claimed limited knowledge of the project. In any government with functional oversight and a commitment to accountability, such discord over a multi-million-dollar project would be intolerable. For a government that rose to power on promises of transparency and ethical governance, the episode is damning.
LIBERIANS ARE JUSTIFIED in their criticism, not just of Deputy Minister Sando, but of the institutional culture that permits multiple clarifications instead of upfront, consistent disclosure. Transparency is not a privilege to be dispensed at convenience. It is not acceptable for explanations to arrive only after public pressure, investigative journalism, and citizen agitation force the hand of officials. When communication is reactive, piecemeal, and delayed, it ceases to be transparency and instead becomes a veneer over what many will perceive as obfuscation or cover-up.
THE ARGUMENT THAT security concerns justified secrecy does little to assuage public skepticism. Citizens are not requesting access to sensitive blueprints or security protocols. They demand basic information: the ownership of the project, its purpose, the sources and amounts of funding, and whether legal and procedural requirements were followed.
THESE ARE not state secrets -- they are fundamental to good governance, especially in a democracy that preaches accountability. Months of ambiguity, punctuated by conflicting statements, insult the intelligence of Liberians and weaken institutional credibility.
THE CURRENT OUTRAGE is compounded by the legacy of political promises. While in opposition, the Unity Party vocally criticized former President George Weah and the Congress for Democratic Change for allegedly misusing public funds to build private condominiums. The party consistently called for transparency, accountability, and fiscal discipline, arguing that the Liberian people had a right to know how public money was spent. That moral stance now casts a long shadow over the Boakai administration. Citizens perceive an undeniable hypocrisy when a government that once championed openness now appears to hide behind secrecy, contradictions, and delayed explanations.
LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL issues also linger. For a project of this magnitude, Liberians are entitled to evidence of proper legislative appropriation, compliance with Public Procurement and Concessions Commission procedures, and clear reporting in national budget documents. So far, such documentation has not been publicly presented. Every new clarification raises more questions than it answers, feeding the perception of opacity rather than resolving it.
EVEN SUPPORTERS of the administration, particularly in Lofa County, concede that delayed explanations and secrecy erode confidence. While some argue that the facility could bring long-overdue development to a historically neglected region, development cannot be legitimate or sustainable if it is cloaked in secrecy. Projects built without transparent processes, irrespective of intent or utility, undermine public trust and political credibility.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
THE FOYA PROJECT, initially seen as a debate over a single building, has now become a broader national conversation about governance, transparency, and trust. Sando's second clarification, coming months after the first and following a trail of public contradictions, underscores a persistent pattern: the government communicates fully only when forced, explains reluctantly under pressure, and offers repeated clarifications instead of proactive, clear, and timely information.
LIBERIANS' ANGER is therefore justified. Their frustration is not merely with the delay but with a system that treats transparency as negotiable, not foundational. If the Boakai administration is serious about breaking from the culture of opacity it once criticized, it must recognize that credibility cannot be restored with repeated statements or last-minute explanations.
Trust is earned through consistent, timely, and honest communication, institutional coherence, and respect for the public's right to know. Until these principles are applied, every new clarification will serve only to confirm what many already suspect that transparency delayed is transparency denied.
