Liberia's downstream petroleum sector is once again at the center of legislative attention as Montserrado County Senator Abraham Darius Dillon has submitted a proposed Act seeking sweeping amendments to the legal framework governing the Liberia Petroleum Refining Company (LPRC).
The proposed instrument, dated February 23, 2026, calls for the amendment and repeal of provisions of the 1989 Act that granted the LPRC exclusive rights to regulate, import, store, distribute, and commercialize petroleum and petroleum-related products in Liberia.
The move comes roughly one year after Grand Kru County Senator and President Pro Tempore Emeritus Albert Tugbe Chie publicly identified what he described as "critical flaws" in the structure of the petroleum sub-sector, urging the unbundling of overlapping functions within the LPRC.
Together, the two interventions signal growing bipartisan recognition in the Senate that the current petroleum governance model may be outdated, conflicted, and inconsistent with modern regulatory best practices.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
The lawmakers termed LPRC as a national company without a clear statutory anchoring.
In his communication to Plenary, Senator Dillon noted that since 1978, the LPRC has operated as a government-owned entity under Articles of Incorporation, engaging in both regulatory oversight and commercial operations.
However, he expressed concern that the entity lacks a clear and modern statutory framework defining its governance structure, responsibilities, and limitations.
"To date, there is no statutory authority for the proper governance of this relevant and needed state-owned entity," Dillon stated.
Citing Article 89 of Liberia's 1986 Constitution--which empowers the Legislature to enact laws establishing autonomous public corporations--Dillon argued that the time has come to place the LPRC on firmer legal footing.
The proposed Act, if passed, would effectively repeal or amend aspects of the 1989 law that entrenched LPRC's exclusive authority over downstream petroleum activities.
At issue is not merely exclusivity -- but the concentration of regulatory and commercial powers in a single institution.
The "Referee and Player" Problem
Senator Albert T. Chie, in a January 20, 2025, communication to the Senate, framed the structural problem succinctly, "The LPRC is acting as both referee and player in the management of the sub-sector," he said.
Chie questioned how the company could license importers while simultaneously competing as an importer itself.
"How can the LPRC set prices through the monthly petroleum prices circular for importers when it is also an importer?" he asked.
His concern centers on institutional conflict of interest -- a scenario in which the same entity writes the rules, enforces compliance, and competes in the market.
Chie warned that such overlapping roles create "an uneven playing field that can be a significant barrier to the growth of the private sector, the efficient delivery of high-quality and affordable energy services to the population, and just revenue intake to the government."
Chie's position draws heavily from Liberia's 2009 National Energy Policy, which recommended the unbundling of functions across the energy sector.
That policy called for separating policy formulation, regulatory oversight, and commercial operations.
Reforms were subsequently implemented in the electricity and upstream petroleum sectors.
In the power sector, regulatory oversight was transferred to the Liberia Electricity Regulatory Commission (LERC), while the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC) retained commercial functions.
Similarly, in the upstream petroleum sector, oversight was assigned to the Liberia Petroleum Regulatory Authority (LPRA), while the National Oil Company of Liberia (NOCAL) continued as a commercial operator.
"But in the downstream petroleum sector," Chie noted, "the reform recommended by the National Energy Policy of 2009 has not taken place."
As a result, LPRC remains both regulator and operator -- a model increasingly viewed as inconsistent with international best practice.
What Dillon's Legislative Instrument Could Change
Senator Dillon's proposed Act appears to operationalize the reform philosophy articulated by Chie.
While full details of the draft law are yet to be debated publicly, its objectives suggest repealing LPRC's statutory monopoly over downstream petroleum activities, defining clearer governance and accountability structures, aligning the downstream sector with constitutional and policy standards, and potentially paving the way for institutional unbundling
If structured effectively, the reform could possibly enhance market competition by removing exclusivity and separating regulatory functions could create a more level playing field for private importers and distributors; Strengthen transparency through a distinct regulatory body or clearer oversight framework could reduce perceptions of bias in licensing and pricing decisions; Improve revenue accountability as a clearer institutional roles could enhance state revenue tracking and compliance monitoring, and boost investor confidence as international investors often prefer regulatory environments where rule-makers are separate from market competitors.
However, reforms also carry risks. Transitioning institutional mandates requires careful sequencing to avoid regulatory gaps, supply disruptions, or governance confusion.
Senator Chie had proposed two potential outcomes of a national discourse--unbundle the LPRC, limiting it to commercial operations while assigning regulatory authority elsewhere or transform LPRC into a purely regulatory authority and divest it of commercial functions.
Both approaches aim to eliminate the "referee and player" dilemma.
Dillon's proposal aligns closely with this thinking -- signaling continuity rather than contradiction between the two lawmakers' positions.
Chie had urged that Senate Committees on Public Corporations, Energy, Hydrocarbon & Environment, and Judiciary lead public hearings and review both the 1978 corporate charter and the 1989 Act granting exclusive rights.
With Dillon's submission now before Plenary, that review process appears poised to begin in earnest.
The country's downstream petroleum sector is central to the national economy. Fuel pricing affects transportation, electricity generation, food costs, and industrial activity. Any inefficiency or structural distortion within the sector reverberates across the broader economic landscape.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Reform advocates argue that a more transparent and competitive system could lead to more predictable pricing mechanisms, reduced regulatory bottlenecks, stronger private-sector participation, and enhanced public trust.
Critics, however, caution that dismantling a long-standing structure without robust safeguards could introduce uncertainty.
As the proposed Act prepares for second reading and committee review, observers see the moment as potentially historic for the country's energy governance.
For over four decades, the LPRC has functioned under overlapping mandates rooted in legacy legislation. Dillon's legislative initiative, reinforced by Chie's earlier critique, represents the most comprehensive attempt in years to recalibrate the downstream petroleum framework.
Whether the Senate ultimately opts for unbundling, restructuring, or a hybrid reform model, the debate signals a broader shift toward institutional modernization and accountability.
At stake is more than corporate governance -- it is the architecture of Liberia's energy economy and the confidence of both citizens and investors in how it is managed.
As discussions begin next week, lawmakers face a defining question: can Liberia's petroleum sector evolve from a concentrated model of control into a transparent, competitive, and policy-aligned system fit for a modern economy?
