Published: January 5, 2026
MONROVIA -- The Liberian Senate has again approved far-reaching legislation to dismantle the National Port Authority and overhaul the country's maritime governance framework, maintaining key provisions President Joseph Nyuma Boakai vetoed after warning that lawmakers ignored fundamental legal, structural, and constitutional flaws that could destabilize port operations and weaken executive authority.
Although the president raised several key concerns in his veto, the Senate Joint Committee comprising the Transport and Judiciary Committees told the plenary, prior to re-passage, that his main issues were with the bill's nomenclature and table of contents.
Grand Bassa County Senator and President Pro-Tempore Nyonblee Karnga-Lawrence introduced the Bill.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Montserrado County Senator H. Saah Joseph heads the transport committee, while Sinoe County Senator Augustine Chea heads the Judiciary Committee.
In formally returning the bills to the Legislature, Boakai invoked Article 35 of the Constitution, saying he acted "by virtue of the authority in me vested" and urging lawmakers to "kindly take another look to correct all the necessary loopholes in the interest of the country and its people." He stressed that the two measures, the Liberia Sea and Inland Ports Regulatory Act of 2024 and the Liberia Sea and Inland Ports Decentralization and Modernization Act of 2024, are inseparable, warning that "one cannot stand alone without the other," because autonomous ports would require a legally sound and clearly defined regulator.
Despite that admonition, the Senate re-passed legislation that critics say leaves intact the same provisions the president cited in his veto, prompting accusations that lawmakers are effectively neutralizing the constitutional role of the presidency by re-enacting substantially similar laws without addressing their defects.
Attorney General's warning and executive exclusion
Boakai's veto followed a detailed legal opinion dated July 14, 2025, authored by Justice Minister and Attorney General Oswald Tweh, which examined both bills in depth and cautioned that while the Legislature has the power to make and repeal laws, the proposed restructuring carried serious risks if enacted without executive collaboration.
The Attorney General wrote that the bills represent one of the most sweeping reorganizations of Liberia's maritime sector since independence and therefore required "careful examination of their constitutional foundations, practical implications, and alignment with established governance principles." He warned that the proposed Liberia Sea and Inland Ports Regulatory Agency would be granted authority to approve tariffs and fees, regulate port operations, oversee maritime safety and security, implement international conventions and, at the same time, develop and operate ports.
"The convergence of these three distinctive functions, maritime regulation, port operation regulation, and port operations, does not align with recent trends in the separation of regulatory functions from operational functions," the Attorney General cautioned, noting that such consolidation introduces conflicts of interest and undermines regulatory independence.
Equally troubling, the opinion said, was the Legislature's decision to exclude the Executive from the legislative process. While acknowledging that the Constitution does not require executive consultation before legislation is passed, Tweh warned that acting unilaterally on reforms of such magnitude "foregoes the benefit of executive expertise and institutional knowledge" and risks creating laws that are legally sound but practically unworkable.
"When the Legislature acts unilaterally on matters of such magnitude, seeking to dissolve a major government agency and create multiple new entities, it creates a peculiar situation where the Executive must administer a system it had no role in designing," the opinion stated, warning of "inefficiencies, administrative confusion, and suboptimal outcomes."
The Attorney General further stated that the Legislature's action "carries profound political implications that extend beyond the immediate maritime restructuring," warning that the exclusion of the Executive from such a major decision "establishes a precedent for unilateral legislative action that could fundamentally alter the dynamics of interbranch relations in Liberia's democratic system." He noted that when the Legislature proceeds with "major governmental restructuring without executive consultation, it signals a shift toward a more adversarial relationship between the branches."
He cautioned that this precedent could have lasting consequences, arguing that it "could encourage future Legislatures to bypass executive consultation on other significant matters, gradually eroding the collaborative approach that has characterized Liberian governance." He further warned that the cumulative effect could leave "each branch operating in isolation rather than in the cooperative manner that typically produces the most effective governance outcomes," adding that such actions risk "creating public confusion about governmental priorities and effectiveness, potentially undermining confidence in democratic institutions."
Those warnings, the president said, were not heeded.
Overlap with the Liberia Maritime Authority
At the core of Boakai's veto is the concern that the proposed regulatory act would significantly erode the statutory mandate of the Liberia Maritime Authority, an executive agency historically responsible for vessel safety, maritime security, seafarer standards and enforcement of international maritime conventions.
In his veto message, Boakai said he was advised by the Attorney General that the bill's general powers are "both broad and far-reaching" and overlap extensively with the Maritime Authority's functions. He warned that, if signed into law, the act would render the Maritime Authority "partially redundant," leaving it with little more than ship registration, a function that has largely been outsourced.
The veto letter cited specific provisions empowering the new ports regulator to enforce maritime safety rules, oversee vessel inspections, prescribe port security standards, implement International Maritime Organization conventions and even acquire, establish and operate port facilities -- powers traditionally exercised by separate bodies.
By transferring these authorities wholesale, Boakai said, the legislation risks creating regulatory confusion, weakening compliance with international obligations and disrupting established governance frameworks.
Dissolving the National Port Authority
The decentralization and modernization bill contentiously seeks to repeal the National Port Authority and replace it with four autonomous seaports, Monrovia, Buchanan, Greenville and Harper, each endowed with extensive financial and administrative independence.
Under the proposed framework, the ports would "independently manage, operate, maintain, develop, and construct within their territorial limits," receive all funds for services rendered and exercise "sole and complete control," while coordinating with other government departments.
Boakai objected that the bill provides inadequate transition provisions for dissolving an authority with extensive assets, liabilities, long-term contracts, and a sizable workforce. He warned that abruptly dissolving the NPA and leaving transition decisions to a small working group could lead to chaos and legal disputes.
"The NPA has outstanding contractual obligations as an ongoing business concern," the president wrote, cautioning that sudden cancellation or reassignment of contracts could violate Article 25 of the Constitution, which protects contractual obligations. He said the proposed six-month transition period was insufficient and urged a longer, more structured process involving executive oversight.
He also questioned the bill's internal consistency, noting that it refers to inland ports in its title but makes no substantive provision for them, a defect he said could require repeated amendments and create future confusion.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
A constitutional clash over the veto
The Senate's decision to re-pass the bills without addressing those objections has reframed the debate as a constitutional test of Article 35, which grants the president authority to approve or disapprove legislation before it becomes law.
Critics argue that while the Legislature has the power to override a veto through constitutional procedures, re-enacting materially similar legislation without curing defects undermines the spirit of the veto and destabilizes the balance of power.
A statement issued by Unity Party USA/Canada accused lawmakers of treating the veto as "a request for editorial revision rather than a constitutional warning," arguing that selective re-passage of the bills ignores the president's stated objections and weakens executive authority.
The group described the legislative maneuver as "removal by legislative indirection," contending that by restructuring port governance, the bills effectively displace presidential appointees and executive supervision without due process or executive concurrence.
It further warned that ports are "national gateways" central to customs administration, revenue collection, immigration control and national security, and that fragmenting their governance risks weakening coordination and accountability.
Allegations of secrecy and sidelined stakeholders
Fueling controversy are claims that key executive and economic stakeholders were sidelined not only before passage but also after the veto, despite the president's call for renewed consultations.
The Liberian Investigator gathered that senior officials in the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, the Liberia Revenue Authority and the National Port Authority were not formally invited to review or comment on revised drafts.
"The factors driving the Senate to restructure the maritime sector in secret and without the involvement of the Executive remain unknown but are troubling," a source familiar with the development said.
