A Civil society coalition has warned that the prolonged inaction on War and Economic Crimes Court (WECC) and National Anti-Corruption Court (NACC) is deepening impunity and testing the country's credibility ahead of the UN Security Council presidency.
The National Civil Society Consortium for Transitional Justice has called on the President Joseph Nyuma Boakai's administration to move decisively on the establishment of the proposed WECC and the NACC, warning that prolonged delays are increasingly undermining access to justice, accountability and public confidence in national institutions.
The consortium, in a statement issued Tuesday, September 8, said the government's failure to secure the necessary legislation, funding and operational framework for the two specialized courts risks prolonging a culture of impunity at a time when Liberia is seeking to strengthen its standing as a champion of peace, human rights and international security.
The issue has gained added significance as the country prepares to assume the presidency of the United Nations Security Council in December 2026.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
The central concern, for the CSOs, is not simply the establishment of two new institutions. It is whether Liberia can translate its long-standing promises on transitional justice and good governance into functioning mechanisms capable of delivering justice to victims, prosecuting serious economic crimes and restoring confidence in the rule of law.
"Justice delayed is justice denied. And justice denied is a recipe for human rights violations, impunity, violence, poverty and underdevelopment," the consortium declared.
Nearly three years after the 55th National Legislature approved a Joint Resolution in April 2024 supporting the establishment of a War and Economic Crimes Court, the coalition says Liberia remains without the enabling legislation required to formally establish and operationalize the institution.
Although the government has taken some steps--including establishing the Office for the Establishment of the War and Economic Crimes Court--the CSOs argue that administrative preparations cannot substitute for legislation, financing and an operational court.
The existence of an office tasked with preparing for the court may demonstrate political recognition of the issue, but without legislation establishing its legal mandate, jurisdiction, procedures and financing, the mechanism cannot begin delivering the justice victims have awaited for years.
The consortium is therefore demanding that the Executive and Legislature move beyond consultations and planning toward measurable action.
It wants the two bills passed, adequate funding provided and both institutions made operational and independent.
Victims Still Waiting
The strongest argument advanced by the consortium concerns the people at the center of the transitional justice debate--victims and survivors of the civil wars.
The conflicts left a legacy of killings, sexual violence, displacement, destruction of property, loss of livelihoods and other serious violations. Women and girls were particularly affected by conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence.
For many survivors, the absence of a specialized court means that the passage of time has not necessarily translated into justice.
The consortium argues that continued inaction denies victims not only accountability, but also the possibility of truth, recognition, remedy and guarantees that similar abuses will not be repeated.
This makes the proposed WECC more than a criminal justice institution. In the view of the CSOs, it is an important component of the broader reconciliation process.
The coalition also connects the court directly to the country's obligations under the Women, Peace and Security agenda, particularly the principles associated with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325.
A credible court, it argues, must therefore be victim-centered and gender-responsive, ensuring that survivors are treated as rights-holders rather than merely witnesses in criminal proceedings.
The second major concern raised by the consortium is Liberia's proposed NACC.
Here, the argument shifts from historical crimes to the continuing governance and development challenges facing the country.
The CSOs contend that corruption and misuse of public resources weaken democratic institutions, reduce public trust and divert resources away from essential services.
The consequences, they argue, are ultimately felt by ordinary citizens through inadequate health care, education, electricity and other public services.
This gives the proposed Anti-Corruption Court an economic as well as legal significance.
A functioning institution capable of fairly and independently prosecuting corruption cases could, in principle, strengthen deterrence and improve accountability for the management of public resources.
But the CSOs also emphasize that simply creating another court will not solve Liberia's corruption problem.
For such an institution to be credible, it must have sufficient resources, operational independence, qualified personnel, transparent procedures and the ability to operate without political interference.
The timing of the coalition's warning is particularly important.
Liberia is preparing to assume the presidency of the UN Security Council in December, giving the country an opportunity to speak on international peace, security, human rights, civilian protection, anti-corruption and the Women, Peace and Security agenda.
The civil society coalition believes that Liberia's international role creates an additional responsibility to demonstrate those principles domestically.
Liberia's election to the Security Council reflects international confidence in the country's transition from conflict toward peace and democratic governance, the consortium noted.
But that confidence, the groups argue, must be supported by domestic action.
The contradiction would be difficult to ignore if Liberia were to advocate internationally for accountability and protection of civilians while victims of its own civil wars continue waiting for a credible justice mechanism.
The CSOs are therefore challenging the government to use its Security Council presidency not simply as a diplomatic achievement, but as an opportunity to demonstrate leadership by example.
The consortium is calling on President Boakai to engage directly with the leadership and members of the Senate and House of Representatives to facilitate passage of the two pieces of legislation.
It is also urging lawmakers to prioritize the bills rather than allowing them to remain caught in prolonged consultation.
The coalition acknowledges the importance of legislators engaging their constituencies, but cautions against allowing constituency consultations to become an open-ended justification for legislative delay.
Its position is straightforward: consultation should improve legislation, not indefinitely postpone it.
The groups are also demanding that the 2027 National Budget contain sufficient allocations for both institutions.
That demand highlights another critical dimension of the debate.
Passing legislation without providing the money required to establish courts, recruit personnel, protect witnesses, support victims, conduct investigations and maintain independent operations could produce institutions that exist legally but remain ineffective in practice.
The challenge is, therefore, bigger than establishing two institutions on paper. The credibility of the proposed courts will ultimately depend on whether they can operate independently and impartially.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
The consortium wants both institutions to comply with constitutional and international standards, including judicial independence, equality before the law, due process, fair-trial guarantees, protection of victims and witnesses, and meaningful victim participation.
That is particularly important because specialized courts dealing with war crimes and corruption are inherently sensitive.
They may involve politically influential individuals, powerful economic interests and cases dating back many years. Their legitimacy will depend on demonstrating that prosecution is based on evidence and law rather than political affiliation or personal interests.
The proposed WECC has been debated for years. Victims and civil society organizations have repeatedly called for action. The NACC, meanwhile, is being presented as part of a broader effort to strengthen accountability and protect public resources.
The CSOs now argue that another period of delay would carry costs beyond the legal system.
It could further frustrate victims, weaken public confidence, reinforce perceptions of impunity and undermine Liberia's efforts to present itself internationally as a responsible actor on peace and security.
The consortium is calling on the United Nations, European Union, United States Government and other international partners to continue supporting Liberia's accountability efforts and encourage the government to adequately finance both courts.
It is also urging the Office for the Establishment of the War and Economic Crimes Court to strengthen coordination with the Executive, Legislature, Judiciary and international partners.
Ultimately, the coalition's message is that Liberia cannot indefinitely separate its international aspirations from its domestic responsibilities, and that was louder in the consortium's final appeal was blunt, "The Boakai administration must act now!"
