MONROVIA – A roach runs from chicken and ends up in the frying pan. That’s the scenario reportedly being orchestrated by some lawmakers who are attempting to amend the Local Government Act of 2018. Amongst other things, the Act was conceived and legislated to decentralize and share political and economic powers with rural Liberians, as to thereby reduce critical decision-making which had kept the hinterland of the country on the mere periphery of the national dinner table, and has led to mass poverty and underdevelopment. While the Act is yet to come into full effect, there are some legislators who are proposing amendments so that the domineering powers taken away from the Central Government would be given to county caucuses in Monrovia. This news has drawn the anger of mainstream civil society members of the country who are now demanding a withdrawal of such a proposal. THE ANALYST reports.
Amendment of the Local Government Act of 2018 proposed by Grand Gedeh County District Representative, Jeremiah Sokan and reportedly getting traction within the House of Representatives has backfired, as major civil society organizations in the country are demanding rescindment.
The Naymote Partners for Democratic Development, Center for Transparency and Accountability in Liberia (CENTAL), Women NGO Secretariat of Liberia (WONGOSOL) and the Center for Democratic Governance (CDG) say they are deeply concerned about the introduction of a bill to amend the Local Government Act of 2018 and undermine the viability of County Councils.
The non-state actors say they are deeply disturbed by the news about that bill which is reportedly introduced in the House of Representatives to amend Section 2.2 (e) & (f) of the LGA.
The quoted the progenitor of the bill, Grand Gedeh County District #1 Representative, Jeremiah Sokan, as arguing that sections of the law including 2.2 (e) which gives authority to the members of the county councils to approve the annual county budget and 2.2 (f) which authorizes the council to approve development plans and its implementation interferes with legislative oversight powers and must be repealed.
Accordingly, the bill has since been forwarded to the House’s Committees on Good Governance, Ways Means and Finance, Internal Affairs and Judiciary for review.
The groups said in press statement that while they acknowledge some shortcomings of some members of the council councils, including lack of adequate capacity to thoroughly query different budget line items, “we argue that reinstating the Legislative caucus in playing controlling roles local development affairs cannot be a viable alternative for three reasons.”
Giving the historicity of the Act, the NGOs said Liberia’s governance system has been largely centralized, with local people having little or no say in decisions that affect their livelihoods, something that primarily led to the timely passage of the Local Government Act (LGA) into law in 2018 under the administration of former president George M. Weah.
“The law represents an important attempt at decentralization by re-configuring local government structures and providing them with powers hitherto not granted. Of worthy mention is the County Council, whose makeup includes representatives of women, youth, and people living with disabilities, chiefs, elders, and civil society,” the group said. “Amongst others, the County Council has the power to approve county development plans, budgets, reports, as well as pass ordinances for the county.”
According to them, such an inclusive structure is essential for gender equity, as it ensures that everyone, most specially women and persons with disabilities have voices in decision-making processes at the local level, an important step in addressing the historical marginalization of women in governance.
Countering Reasons for Amendment
Proponents of the proposal to amend the law argued that that the powers of the County Council interfere with legislative oversight powers and usurp the power of the legislature to approve budgets for the counties, but the NGO partners strongly disagree, because all monies apportioned by the County Councils to development projects meet Legislative approval.
Allocations to counties, including County Social Development Funds, are contained in the national budgets approved by the Legislature, said the groups, and the budget, as approved by the Legislature, also contains specific policy statements on revenue sharing formulas with the counties.
They asked: “How then can one argue that the Legislature does not approve or has no oversight? Or should the Legislature, after approving the budget, be concerned with approving every granular expenditure related thereto? An affirmative answer would require the Legislature to act similarly for other budget line items. Could we reasonably expect the Legislature to approve every travel by the President and other officials of government when funding have already been allocated to those travels?
“Could we expect the legislature to hold sessions to approve budgets of each activity of legislative committees when committee allotments have been approved with the passing of the national budget? We think not. The collaborating CSOs see no justification for the Legislature, including Committees and County Legislative Caucuses to be involved with approving how county level structures make allotment to development projects, when similar ‘oversight’ will not be extended to other line items in the national budget, as it is clearly impracticable.”
Said the groups further: “Also, the Legislature must designate which licenses and operating permits can be ordered issued by Councils, and must set the ceiling for honorarium payments to Council members. It also has the responsibility to transfer administration and collection of property taxes and business license fees to the counties. The range of rates for each category of annual business or operating license fees are also to be established by the Legislature. The Legislature is also to receive reports of the National Local Government Fiscal Board.”
Another argument raised by the non-state actors is that there is no evidence that members of Legislative Caucuses are better placed to approve County plans and budgets than County Council members.
The NGOs recalled that outcomes associated with the involvement of legislative caucuses in county social development funds are not pleasant at all.
In most cases, they said, corruption and mismanagement characterized the use of development funds.
They asserted that proponents of caucus inclusion overlook recent history when they declaim County Councils. Allegations of inefficiencies and collusion that now arise in relation to Councils arose similarly under the old development regime having the caucus as the driving force.
“Hence, if anything, efforts to address any malaise beginning to rear its head in the current local government structure should involve improvement of the Councils and addressing impunity rather than finding a cure where it does not exist,” they said, and added: “It is argued that County Council members lack relevant educational credentials to deal with matters as weighty as county plans and budgets.
“This argument seems plausible at first since the LGA only requires a Council member to speak in the local language or read and write English. But does any educational qualification exist for members of the Legislature? In fact, many legislators have had humble educational beginnings and their lack of solid credentials did not write them off. Why, then, should the very people who elected Legislators without credentials be barred from participating in local governance due to want of educational credentials? It must be stated, however, that foreseeing the situation that capacity issues might exist, the framers of the law provided that every County Council should have a Support Office comprising a lawyer and an administrative officer to support the Council in such matters.”
The civil society organizations also contend that the independence and effectiveness of County Councils cannot be remedied by the introduction of the Caucus, but through capacity building and accountability mechanisms, stressing that it has also been suggested that members elected to the County Council are susceptible to influence of the county administration and therefore lack the independence envisaged under the new law.
They counter-argued: “The vulnerability, it is argued, stems from limited educational and financial capacity, and that perquisites provided by county authorities could get Council members to approve budgets and reports without scrutiny. To address this problem, it is said that Legislators should assume the approval role since legislators clearly carry higher stature than county authorities.
“To be clear, in many cases under the former CSDF regime, the active presence of legislators in the local development process overshadowed and intimidated local participation. Citizens often could not speak out and insist on their viewpoints in county sittings presided over by the Legislative caucus. In the end, most projects conformed to the wishes of legislators rather than delegates at the sittings. There were reports that delegates were manipulated since they were selected by the lawmakers or district commissioners in the first place. The LGA’s introduction of stakeholder group representation on the Councils, thus, is a break with the past.”
Under the current arrangement, they said, stakeholder groups such as civil society, persons with disabilities, women, youths, chiefs, and elders, select their representatives to the Council, although certain positions in these stakeholder groups qualify the holder for automatic representation on the Council.
This provision in their view supports Liberia’s commitments under the Revised National Gender Policy and the Liberia National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security, stressing, “We emphasize the need for full enforcement of these provisions to safeguard the gains made in women’s representation in local governance structures.”
“We welcome the observation that early signs of manipulation are showing despite the new setup. Nonetheless, we hold the view that at the thrust of this challenge lies not just limited capacity and experience, but the seeming absence of stakeholder groups from the matrix. Citizens, acting independently or through stakeholder groups, must hold their representatives on the Council accountable and, if need be, remove them through processes laid down by the LGA.”
The NGOs also said sensitization would be crucial to raise citizens’ awareness in this regard; Council members engaging in corruption and other misconduct should be investigated and prosecuted.
“The Legislature also needs to act quickly to perform its responsibilities under the LGA as they are critical, if the local government must work. It is almost two years since Councils were setup but honorarium ceilings have not been determined by the Legislature in appreciation of their services. Support staff required to be recruited as civil servants are yet to be assigned in many instances. The Civil Service Agency (CSA) and other relevant ministries and agencies must act accordingly.”
The way forward
On the way forward, the CSOs, said: “The foregoing provides ample reasons why the LGA must be left undisturbed. Attention must be placed on the full implementation of the law, including through capacity building initiatives and broad-based citizen engagement. Anything to the contrary would render the LGA meaningless, frustrate years of efforts spent in promoting decentralization, and reverse progress made so far.
“Giving lawmakers’ oversight of budget and development approval as recommended could lead to centralized control, political interference, or misalignment with community needs. It could weaken transparency and grassroots participation in local governance processes, sideline local voices and priorities thus making average Liberian, especially those in rural communities, to have less influence over how development funds are allocated in their own county. It is, therefore, prudent that we all rally our support for full implementation of the LGA in its current form. Indeed, it would be unfair to draw conclusions about the suitability of the current arrangement when deliberate efforts to get the law operational are hard to come by. Government, civil society, donor partners, and citizens themselves must stand up if decentralization must become a reality in Liberia.
“From a gender lens, any attempt to alter the existing framework risks dismantling hard-won spaces for women’s leadership and community participation. We urge all stakeholders to recognize that decentralization is not only about efficient governance, but also about ensuring that women’s voices are not silenced at the grassroots level.
“We, therefore, call for the withdrawal of the bill and for energies and resources to be redirected to supporting an effective and efficient local government structures across the country.”
Comments are closed.