A proposal to amend Liberia's landmark Kamara Abdullah Kamara Press Freedom Act has reignited a national debate over the delicate balance between protecting freedom of expression and regulating harmful speech in the digital age.
The amendment, introduced by Nyahn G. Flomo, a member of the Liberian House of Representatives representing Nimba County District #2 and veteran media practitioner, seeks to create a new offense under the law targeting gender-based online abuse and harassment.
While supporters argue that the measure is necessary to curb rising online hostility and protect women and girls from digital harassment, critics warn that altering the law could undermine one of the country's most celebrated democratic reforms.
Among the most prominent voices opposing the amendment is Peter Quaqua, former president of the Press Union of Liberia, who says the proposal risks reversing the spirit and intent of the historic legislation.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
The Kamara Abdullah Kamara Press Freedom Act, often referred to as the KAK Act, was enacted in 2019 as a major step toward strengthening democratic governance and protecting journalists in Liberia.
Named after the late veteran journalist Kamara Abdullah Kamara, who was also former President of the PUL, the law repealed several controversial provisions of Liberia's penal code that criminalized speech offenses, including criminal libel against the president, sedition, and criminal malevolence.
For decades, these provisions had been used by governments to prosecute journalists, silence critics, and discourage investigative reporting.
The repeal was widely hailed by international media freedom advocates as a milestone for Liberia, aligning the country with continental advocacy efforts such as the Declaration of Table Mountain, which called on African governments to abolish criminal defamation laws and protect press freedom.
Liberia formally endorsed the declaration in 2012.
"The philosophy behind the KAK Act is simple," Quaqua noted in his commentary. "Disputes arising from speech--especially criticism of public officials--should be addressed through civil remedies rather than criminal prosecution."
Protecting Citizens from Digital Abuse
Representative Nyahn G. Flomo, however, argues that while Liberia has made significant progress in protecting press freedom, the country still lacks sufficient legal tools to address harmful online behavior.
The amendment would add a new provision criminalizing gender-based online abuse and harassment, potentially allowing courts to impose fines or prison sentences on offenders.
According to Flomo, the bill is motivated by increasing concerns over the use of social media to launch vulgar and abusive attacks, particularly against women.
"While Liberia has made commendable strides in protecting press freedom, a gap remains in protecting the dignity of our citizens, particularly women and girls, from the unique harms of online gender-based attacks," Flomo said.
He insists that the amendment is not intended to undermine free expression but rather to establish limits where speech crosses into abuse.
"The amendment does not seek to stifle legitimate press freedom, political speech, or fair comment," he said. "It simply sets boundaries where freedom is abused to inflict harm."
Flomo also pointed to comments from former president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, who has previously argued that societies must maintain standards for public discourse to prevent damaging misinformation and abusive language.
Quaqua's Warning: A Slippery Legal Slope
For Peter Quaqua, however, the amendment risks undermining the fundamental purpose of the KAK Act.
He argues that introducing criminal provisions into a law specifically designed to remove criminal penalties for speech would create legal contradictions and weaken the reform.
"Any legislative effort that reintroduces criminal liability for expression would be counterproductive," Quaqua said.
According to him, vague definitions of offensive online speech could expose journalists, activists, and political commentators to prosecution.
This concern is especially relevant in the country's highly polarized political environment, where social media platforms have become central arenas for political debate.
"When broadly defined, criminalizing online insults could easily be misused to suppress legitimate criticism," Quaqua warned.
The debate over the amendment is unfolding in the aftermath of a controversial ruling by the Supreme Court, which sentenced social media personality Justin Oldpa Yeazehn to six months imprisonment for insulting the mother of the Chief Justice online.
The ruling sparked national debate.
Supporters argued that the judiciary must protect its dignity and authority. Critics, however, said the punishment contradicted the spirit of the KAK Act and risked creating a chilling effect on public discourse.
Quaqua believes the proposed amendment could further entrench this trend.
"The Court's action admittedly punished an unruly character," he wrote, "but it has also left behind a troubling chilling effect on freedom of expression."
Alternative Legal Pathways
While acknowledging the seriousness of online harassment, Quaqua argues that amending the KAK Act is the wrong legislative approach.
Instead, he suggests that lawmakers consider alternative frameworks, such as standalone digital safety legislation or amendments to cybercrime laws.
"There are more appropriate legal pathways," he said. "Addressing online abuse through specialized legislation would tackle the problem without undermining the integrity of the KAK Act."
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
He also referenced Liberia's international commitments under instruments such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Maputo Protocol on the Rights of Women in Africa, noting that these frameworks encourage protection against gender-based violence but do not necessarily require criminalizing speech within press freedom laws.
The Liberian House of Representatives has referred the amendment to its Joint Committee on Judiciary and Information & Broadcasting, which has been tasked with reviewing the proposal and reporting back within two weeks.
The outcome of that review could shape the future of free expression in Liberia.
If the amendment passes, many believe it could alter the country's reputation as one of Africa's leading reformers on press freedom.
"If adopted," Quaqua warned, "the amendment could dent Liberia's standing on global press freedom indices and create legal uncertainty about the boundaries of protected speech."
For many observers, the debate ultimately reflects a broader democratic challenge: how to protect citizens from harmful speech in an era of digital communication while preserving the robust freedoms necessary for an open society.
As stakeholders weigh that balance, the fate of the KAK Act may once again become a defining moment in the country's evolving democratic journey.
