MONROVIA – As Liberia grapples with the implications of a newly enacted port decentralization law, concerns are mounting over not just the policy itself but the manner in which it was crafted and passed. While the push for reform and institutional autonomy has been widely welcomed as necessary for modernization and economic growth, questions persist about process, consultation, and adherence to democratic norms. Into this debate steps Musa Hassan Bility, political leader of the Citizens Movement for Change (CMC), who has publicly endorsed the broader reform agenda while issuing a sharp rebuke of what he describes as a reckless and poorly managed legislative approach. His critique focuses less on the goal of decentralization and more on the absence of planning, stakeholder engagement, and institutional coordination that, he warns, could destabilize a critical national sector. THE ANALYST’S Anthony Q. Jiffan, Jr reports
Political Leader of the Citizens Movement for Change (CMC), Musa Hassan Bility, has commended the broader national conversation on reform while sharply criticizing what he described as an “unprofessional and irresponsible” approach by the Legislature in decentralizing Liberia’s ports.
Appearing recently on OK FM, Mr. Bility criticized the port decentralization law, stressing that while reform and port autonomy are necessary for national development, the process adopted by lawmakers threatens institutional stability and undermines good governance.
“Let me be very clear: I am not opposed to reform, and I am not opposed to granting ports a level of operational independence,” Bility said. “In fact, ports around the country should enjoy a reasonable degree of autonomy. However, the way this port decentralization process is being carried out is deeply flawed, unprofessional, and irresponsible.”
Experience-Based Criticism
Grounding his arguments in professional experience, Bility emphasized that his position was not based on politics but on technical knowledge of port administration. He disclosed that he has served at senior levels of management and has previously appointed three managing directors, giving him first-hand insight into how ports are governed and managed.
According to him, Liberia’s ports already function within an established professional structure, where port managers and management teams are empowered to make significant operational decisions.
“That system exists,” he noted. “The question, therefore, is not whether reform is needed, but how reform is done.”
Absence of Planning and Consultation
Bility raised serious concerns about the lack of planning surrounding the decentralization effort. He questioned the absence of a master plan, a transition framework, and a phased implementation strategy.
“If you intend to make such a major change, where is the master plan? Where is the transition framework? How do you phase it in?” he asked. “You do not simply wake up and impose sweeping structural changes without consultation, without hearings, and without a clear roadmap. That is not how serious governance works.”
He warned that reforms implemented without proper groundwork often create more problems than solutions, especially in critical sectors such as ports, which serve as lifelines of the national economy.
Legislative Process Under Fire
A major portion of Bility’s criticism was directed at the House of Representatives, which he accused of passing the port decentralization bill without due diligence.
“What is most troubling is that the House of Representatives passed this bill without meaningful debate, without public hearings, and without expert input,” he said. “No engagement with stakeholders. No arguments. No committee report. Nothing. That is shameful.”
He argued that such legislative shortcuts weaken democratic institutions and erode public confidence in the lawmaking process.
Ignoring Presidential Concerns
Bility also took issue with the Legislature’s handling of the President’s line-item veto of the bill. He stressed that a presidential veto, especially one accompanied by specific concerns, is a constitutional signal that demands serious review and correction.
“A line-item veto is not something to be ignored,” he said. “It signals serious issues that must be addressed.”
According to Bility, the Legislature failed in its duty by overriding the veto without addressing any of the President’s stated objections.
“There was no proper mechanism followed. No collaboration with the Ministry of Justice. No inter-branch engagement. No attempt at intergovernmental cooperation,” he added. “That is reckless lawmaking.”
Missed Opportunity for Best Practices
The CMC leader outlined what he believes should have been the proper course of action: returning the bill to committee, conducting public hearings, and consulting both local and international experts.
He suggested that lawmakers could have studied port governance models in neighboring countries such as Sierra Leone and Ghana, where decentralization has been approached through structured reforms and stakeholder engagement.
“That is how laws are made in a serious country,” Bility asserted.
Reform Requires Time and Transition
While acknowledging that the intent behind the bill may be positive, Bility warned that good intentions alone cannot substitute for sound policy design.
“Reform requires planning, transition, and time,” he said.
He interpreted the President’s concerns as evidence that the Executive is not opposed to port autonomy in principle, but rather to what he described as legislative interference in executive functions without coordination.
A Broader Governance Crisis
Bility concluded by situating the port decentralization controversy within a wider governance challenge facing Liberia. He lamented what he sees as the Legislature’s abandonment of its oversight responsibilities and a growing culture of careless lawmaking.
“This entire process reflects a deeper problem within our Legislature,” he said. “Oversight has been abandoned. Lawmaking has become careless. The Legislature is embarrassing itself and, by extension, the country.”
He warned that without a Legislature committed to debate, consultation, and accountability, Liberia’s democratic system would continue to struggle.
“Liberia does not just need new laws; it needs serious institutional reform,” Bility emphasized. “What we are witnessing is not governance; it is chaos.”
CMC’s Position
Reaffirming the stance of the Citizens Movement for Change, Bility stated that his political movement supports reform carried out with professionalism, accountability, and respect for democratic norms.
“The Citizens Movement for Change stands for reform done the right way,” he declared. “Liberia deserves better.”