MONROVIA – The controversy surrounding the removal of Dr. Dougbeh Chris Nyan as Director General of NPHIL has deepened, with the former DG accusing the Board of leveling unsubstantiated allegations against him. In a strongly-worded letter to President Joseph Boakai, Dr. Nyan has hit back at allegations that led to his removal, calling them ‘baseless’ and ‘lacking evidence’. He said NPHIL Board’s allegations, which led to his ouster, were fabricated to damage his reputation and hinder the organization’s progress. The Analyst reports.
Former Director General of the National Public Health Institute of Liberia (NPHIL), Dr. Dougbeh Chris Nyan, has responded to his removal from office by President Joseph Boakai, alleging that the decision was based on unsubstantiated allegations.
In a letter to President Boakai, Dr. Nyan addressed the 11 counts of allegations leveled against him by the NPHIL Board, providing evidence to refute each claim.
He described the allegations as “broad, vague, lack[ing] specifics, lack[ing] evidence, and functionally inaccurate”.
Dr. Nyan emphasized his commitment to serving Liberia with transparency, accountability, sincerity, and integrity, and expressed his desire to continue doing so without hindrance.
He attributed the allegations to a conspiracy to damage his reputation and hinder the organization’s progress.
The former NPHIL DG’s response highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in public service, and raises questions about the motivations behind his removal.
Dr. Dougbeh Chris Nyan was relieved of his duties as Director General of NPHIL for administrative reasons, along with his deputy, Dr. Adams K. Lincoln. Dr. Sia Wata Camanor has been appointed Interim Director General (Officer-in-Charge) of NPHIL.
See BELOW for Full text of Dr. Dougbeh Chris Nyan’s letter to president Joseph.
National Public Health Institute of Liberia
Preventing and Controlling Public Health Threats
NPHIL/RL/DCN-DGI365b-1/25
17th September 2025
H.E. Joseph Nyuma Boakai, Sr.
President of the Republic of Liberia
Executive Mansion
Monrovia, Liberia
Dear Mr. President:
With compliments of Patriotism, I herewith acknowledge receipt of the communication (Ref: SAS/AM-1/MOS/041/2025/RL) from the Minister of States Designate which instructs me to respond to the NPHIL Board’s resolution within 48 hours. The communication is addressed to me as the Director General of the National Public Health Institute of Liberia (NPHIL), accompanied by NPHIL Board Resolution containing a slew of allegations against me with no evidence provided, and to which my response is respectfully submitted below, All of the eleven (11) counts of the Board’s request for my “removal” are unconstitutional and do not satisfy Section 4.4 (ii) of the NPHIL Act of 20 16 (please see attached evidence-Appendix-1: NPHIL Act of 2016), as als0 countered by the evidence provided by my responses below,
First, I would like to sincerely thank you, Your Excellency, for allowing me to respond to these allegations with evidence that supports my responses. I returned home to serve my country in a technical, scientific, biomedical, and public health role-to help build the scientific capacity of Liberia and not to be involved in unhealthy political theatrics. These past 12 months have afforded me that opportunity, and our entire NPHIL Family and I are doing even more to improve and elevate public health in Liberia. The NPHIL is now: designated as a Regional Center of Excellence by the Africa-CDC.
Secondly, I recognize he board’s work and respect the law that established the NPHIL as well as governs its functions (the NPHIL Act of 2016). This law also assigns essential responsibilities and vital functions to the Director General of the NPHIL in a legally protected tenure capacity in the day-to-day running of the entity, I appreciate this relationship which is a vital part of the organization’s operations, but which should be characterize by respect, sincerity, integrity, and honesty (not by constant administrative intimidation of the supervised and conspiracy).
However, based on my review of the Board’s actions and its resolutions, I will say that, had the Board written to me directly with these concerns, instead of relying on the President’s intervention, I would have provided a response supported by evidence to clarify any concerns. Nonetheless, since it has now reached your desk, I am obliged to respond to the Board’s allegations which are broad, vague, lack specifics, lack evidence, and functionally inaccurate.
I. Concerning count one (1) of the Board’s resolutions regarding the “lack of pre-decisional involvement of the Board in critical decisions affecting the NPHIL,” It is unfortunate that the resolution did not specify which “critical decisions” and lacks the evidence to substantiate its claim. I mention this, because I have maintained regular contact with the Board, through the Chair, regarding every major decision related to NPHIL. For example, when some NPHIL personnels stole government vehicles belonging to the NPHIL, we investigated and duly informed the Board about our findings and actions in a formal report (please see attached evidence – Appendix-l).
Also, decisions madc in my capacity as Dircctor General are usually reportcd to the Board, as outlined in Section 4.3 (b), through formal reports according to the quarters. The most recent report was submitted (please sce attached evidence – Appendix-III same report submitted to the Mansion).
Thus, it is puzzling to me that the board would base its request for my removal on the “lack of pre-decisional involvement,” when I have essentially reported all activities to the board as required by my role as Director General and have fulfílled my duties accordingly. Hence, I will kindly appreciate specificiy in matters such as these from the Board, because with the above evidence provided, I have not reneged on my role and functions as Director General of the NPHIL as far as decision making and the involvement of the Board are concerned.
2. Responding to count two (2) of the Board’s resolution relative to the allegation of the “lack of interagency coordination and collaboration,” again, the Board will have to be specific with this allegation, because NPHIL has done everything possible to work with every agency it has business with. Mr. President, please refer to the few attached communications for ease of reference and to provide evidence in this matter (Lead Paint Regulation with Environmental Protection Agency; MOU with University of Liberia for Ph.D. programme: Mpox Vaccination Launch with Ministry of Health; Laboratory Coordination with Ministry of Agriculture Veterinary Lab; pending MOU; Research and Response with Ministry of Defense, etc, etc.). We have even sought the intervention of the Board Chair in instances where we faced some particularly challenges. (Please see attached evidence – Appendix-IV).
3. Reacting to count three (3) of the resolution regarding “lack of coordination between NPHIL and the Ministry of Health (MoH),” the NPHIL has performed its role in coordination with the Minister of Health and have reached out constantly, including visiting the Minister’s office for meetings. On numerous occasions, I contacted via texts, emails, and phone calls (please see attached evidence – Appendix-V). On the contrary, the MoH has created parallel structures at the MoH to conduct NPHIL’S work; (e.g. creation of the Department Environmental and Occupational Health at the MoH). The NPHIL has brought these to the attention of the Board which has yet to address our concerns (please see attached evidence – Appendix-VI… letter to the Board).
4. Referencing counts four (4) and five (5) of the Board’s resolution, the statements contained therein mentioned “non-adherence to the Board-related tenets of the NPHIL ACT,” and the *”non-regard for the statutory functions of the Board.” In this instance, the Board is not specific,
provides no evidence, and is vague. The NPHIL Act outlines eleven (11) statutory functions of the Board. I would appreciate clarification on which specific “tenets” were not adhered to or which function was not regarded, as that would enable me to respond appropriately to the board.
On the contrary, the board has come in violation of the Act by conducting meetings that intentionally exchudes the Director General of the NPHIL who is the Secretary to the Board. I only come to know of such mectings when the Chairnan, Dr. Stephen Kennedy submitted requests îor payment of “Board sitting fees” for said meetings. Such meetings, including the recent one from which this very board resolution emanated, were held to my exclusion. Although these meetings are “Ad-hoc Meetings” and should not be compensated for, the Board usually rcqucsts and presses the NPHIL for sitting fccs, which is a violation of Act. (please see attached evidence – Appendix-VII … exclusion from meetings and sitting fees request for Adhoc Meeting).
5. In count six (6) of the resolution, the Board claimed that I travel without their knowledge, and such allegation is also false and inaccurate. There exist exchanges between the Chair and me relative to his knowledge of my travel (please see attached evidence – Appendix-VII). email and texts).
Furthermore, Section 4.9 (b) of the NPHIL Act specifically requires that the Deputy Director General for Technical Services to “act in the absence of the Director General.” And section 4.10 (a) of the same act clearly states that the Deputy Director General for Administration “acts as Director General in the absence of both the Director General and the Deputy Director General of Technical Services.” This is automatic and requires no extra authorization. Nevertheless, I do communicate my travels/departure and leave the Deputy Director General for Technical Services in place (please see attached evidence – Appendix-IX). .. HR memos and email).
Mr. President, from the above-cited provisions, it is crystal clear that the NPHIL Act is specific on who replaces the Director General in the absence and the succession. It is only in the absence of the three heads of the entity that the Director General can appoint a proxy to act in his stead while away. Mr. President, I can assure you that my deputies and I have never left this country at the same time.
Furthermore, with due courtesy, I have always informed the Chairman of the Board either through a phone call message about my departure from the country and he has always wish me well in my representation of the country. Please see attached evidence – Appendix-X … texts, memo, and email of travel notification).
Let me also establish that all travels I go on are official (never private since I took office in August 2024). These travels are for scientific workshops and largely sponsored by the Africa CDC, and ECOWAS-WAHO, among others. If the board insists that l did not, then let the board provide evidence to substantiate their claim. Otherwise, these allegations are tantamount to an orchestrated conspiracy against.
6. Responding to counts seven (7) and eight (8) of the Board’s resolution, the board claims I lack coordination and collaboration in the sector. This allegation is also very broad, general, lacks specifics, and with no evidence. On the contrary, please see few examples of the extend of NPHIL’s inter-sectorial collaborations and progress in just one year: Lead Paint Regulation with Environmental Protection Agency; MOU with University of Liberia for Ph.D. programme; Mpox Vaccination Launch with Ministry of Health; Laboratory Coordination with with Ministry Ministry of Agriculture Veterinary Lab: pending MOU and Research and Response activities of Defense, etc, etc.).
Regarding the board’s accusation that as Director-General, I communicate with the President and the Legislature without the knowledge of the Board, the Board provides no evidence as to any harm this has caused to my daily function, the President’s work, or to that of the NPHIL. Importantly, the NPHIL Act of 2016 does not probit the Director General of NPHIL from communicating with the President of the Republic of Liberia and responding to summons ‘invitations/citations from the Legislature and the President’s cabinet meetings (please see attached evidence – Appendix-III … see evidence of citations).
Mr. President, as an entity responsible for emergency outbreaks-responses in the sector, will it not constitute a disrespect should I refuse a call from the President’s office on short notice to present on outbreak status at the cabinet meeting (where I presented recently)?
Mr. President, these and many of the counts demonstrate that the allegations against me are fabricated to damage my reputation and hinder the organization’s progress.
7. Addressing count nine (9) of the Board’s resolution dubbed concerns raised by the Partner” I will kindly state the following. Mr. President, it is interesting to note that the Partners as well as the Health Committees of the House and Senate are part of the Incident Management System (IMS), which I lead as Chairman by law and International Health Regulation. The IMS meeting is a bi-weekly gathering where we and partners discuss the progress, evaluate growing challenges in the public health sector, and advance potential solutions. There exists a harmonious collaboration with partners and no one has raised any problems. The IMS is the jdeal technical scientific forum where we interact with each other. Hence, what is the issue that any “partner” has and did not raise in the IMS meeting to this date, but would rather complain to the Board? Once again, I would appreciate were the board to provide any evidence to this effect with specifics and details.
Mr. President, this is again a baseless accusation by the board that is aimed at damaging my hard-earned reputation. All I desire is to do the work of the Liberian people unhindered. Is that too much to ask for? Why are they fighting me?
8. Responding to count ten (10) of the resolution on submission of budget, it saddens me to know that the board would allege this without first raising its concern with the entity. I took Over the NPHIL in August 2024 at the time the budget year has passed. Hence, there was no budget hearing. When the Ministry of Finance requested all agencies to prepared their budget for Fiscal Year 2025, the NPHIL complied and we submitted the draft-budget to the board on January 24, 2025 and the board approved the budget submitted for 2025 (please see attached evidence- Appendix-XI… see attached budget notification). Hence, with this evidence, for the statement of the Board that it was unaware of the budget submission is inaccurate and misleading to the office of the President.
Regarding count I 1 of the board’s resolution concerning the entity’s media activities, NPHIL’s public affairs are overseen by the Division of Communications and Government Relations.
This department is explicitly referenced in the Human Resource Management Policy of 2022, which was approved by the board. The policy’s Organogram shows that this departnent operates under the Deputy Director General for Administration and is specifically responsible for NPHIL’s public affairs. Aside from the board’s desire to micromanage the department’s aftairs, I believe it is effectively fulfilling its assigned responsibilities. NPHIL like all other government agencies have media presence similar to e-Mansion, press conferences, ata Cxplanation, and rumor or misinformation-control through which disease prevention and public health awareness are communicated to the public throughout the country.
Therefore, claiming that I handle the affairs of NPHIL in the media is misleading and untrue, as the board itself established this department. The department is doing a great job in showcasing NPHIL’s work and providing the public with accurate and sufficient information about NPHIL’s operations. In science, providing accurate and timely information helps reduce public tension during an outbreak or suspected outbreak.
Therefore, Mr. President, I ardently plead that you kindly review the documentation attached as evidence supporting my responses to the board. Mr. President, I only wish to serve my country with transparency, accountability, sincerity and integrity; without those qualities, systemic failure may occur, reflecting poorly on your administration.
Respectfully.
Dougbeh Chris Nyan, M.D.
Director General
Chairman/National Mpox IMS