The Integrity of Anti-Corruption Institutions: The Case of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission

Our perspectives on the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission Members Removal Bill (Discussions) before the Liberian National Legislature (House of Representatives).


By Austin S Fallah -fallahas@yahoo.com, contributing writer


“Without strong watchdog institutions, impunity becomes the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built.” — Transparency International.

“Integrity is doing the right thing even when no one is watching.” — C.S. Lewis.

“Integrity, transparency, and the fight against corruption have to be part of the culture.” — Voices for Transparency.

“We must weed out corruption and build a strong system of justice that the people can trust.” — Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

“In a corrupt society, those who have integrity are seen as troublemakers.” — Anonymous.

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” — Lord Acton.

“The President is at liberty, both in law and conscience, to be as big a man as he can.” — Theodore Roosevelt (referencing executive power).

“A president can not defend a nation if he is not held accountable to its laws.” — Contemporary Quotations.

“The power of the presidency comes from the trust of the American people. A president is responsible for their own actions and the actions of their administration.” — Ronald Reagan.

“The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power.” — BrainyQuote.

“If you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” — Abraham Lincoln.

“It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it.” — Aung San Suu Kyi
Combined Themes: Accountability and Integrity.

“We must be honest with ourselves: fish rots from the head. If we are serious about fighting corruption, it must start from the very top — including State House.” — Justin Muturi.

“The only thing necessary for corruption to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” — Edmund Burke.

“Power attracts the corruptible.” — David Brin.

BY: – Dr. Anthony Fallah Swaray – Non-Profit Expert and Intellectual Advocate for a Unified, Corruption-Free and Prosperous Liberia: swarayster@gmail.com:

-Hon. Edward Wesee – Public Policy and Leadership Expert. An Advocate for Socio-Economic Justice for All Liberians, and Corrupt Free Liberia: wesee65@yahoo.com:

-Austin S Fallah – A True Son of the Planet Earth Soil: fallahas@yahoo.com:

Corruption is recognized globally as a significant impediment to development, governance, and national security.

To combat this vampire-hyenas-money-dignity-eating and persistent menace, countries have instituted various mechanisms, including the establishment of Anti-Corruption Commissions (ACCs).

These bodies are designed to foster transparency, accountability, and integrity within government institutions.

However, as the integrity of these commissions hinges on the ethical conduct of their members, the question arises: Should members of an Anti-Corruption Commission be removed if found engaging in criminal activities that undermine the commission’s integrity?

Additionally, does the President, who appoints members of such commissions, have the authority to dismiss them upon discovering constitutional violations, corruption, or actions detrimental to national security?

In this disquisition, we will explore these questions within the framework of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), drawing insights from national laws and international practices.

The Role and Authority of the President:

The President of Liberia has significant authority to appoint and dismiss officials.

As outlined in the Liberian Constitution, particularly in Article 54, the President possesses the power to appoint members of various commissions, including the LACC, with the advice and consent of the Senate.

This article also suggests that if a member appointed by the President engages in actions that jeopardize the integrity of the office or the nation, it is both logical and prudent for the President to have the authority to remove such individual(s).

Internationally, this power is not unique to Liberia. Many nations operate under similar protocols, reinforcing the essential principle that leaders must uphold the moral and ethical standards of their governments.

For instance, in the United States, the President can dismiss appointed officials who fail to uphold their responsibilities or engage in misconduct.

The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC): Foundation and Power:

Established by an Act of the Liberian Legislature in 2008, the LACC was formed as part of Liberia’s strategy to combat systemic corruption that had permeated government institutions.

The LACC’s mandate is to ensure transparency in public dealings and to investigate claims of corruption across various sectors. Over the years, however, the efficacy and credibility of the LACC have been called into question, particularly concerning the conduct of its own members.

In 2010, the LACC was amended, further expanding its authority to investigate, prevent, and prosecute corruption.

However, despite these enhanced powers, instances of member misconduct have emerged, underscoring the need for stringent measures to uphold the commission’s credibility.

Precedents for Removal Among Anti-Corruption Officials Globally:

The removal of anti-corruption officials is not an alien phenomenon. Cases from several countries highlight how effective governance necessitates accountability at all levels.

For instance, in 2013, South Africa’s ANC’s Public Protector, Thuli Madonsela, exposed numerous cases of corruption within the government, leading to the eventual dismissal of certain implicated officials.

Although Madonsela was not directly dismissed, her findings led to intense scrutiny and subsequent administrative reshuffles.

Similarly, in 2018, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) faced significant challenges when inquiries revealed corruption scandals involving high-ranking officials.

The government had to remove several political figures to restore public faith in the MACC and its operation.

Such historical precedents substantiate the argument that removing officials involved in corruption is critical to preserving the integrity of anti-corruption bodies.

The Ethical Obligation of Commission Members:

The expectation of ethical conduct is paramount among anti-corruption officials.

Commission members must embody integrity and professionalism as they pursue their mandate to combat corruption.

When these individuals engage in unethical conduct, it not only tarnishes their reputation but also hampers the commission’s overarching purpose.

As the Liberian context shows, internal corruption within the LACC presents a vivid example akin to “vampires” or “hyenas”—predatory behaviors within structures designed to protect the populace against predation.

A recent illustration involves the exposure of various members of the LACC being implicated in corrupt practices themselves.

Such findings bolster the argument that the commission cannot retain individuals who betray the very mission they are sworn to uphold.

The presence of members who undermine their organizations similarly raises the question: Can an anti-corruption body effectively combat corruption when its members are either instruments of corruption or complicit in corrupt activities?

Legal Framework for Dismissal:

The legal framework surrounding the operations of the LACC provides specific guidelines and justifications for dismissing members.

The LACC Act includes provisions outlining grounds for removal based on constitutional violations or corrupt practices.

This ensures that the body retains the authority to act against members whose actions contradict the principles of good and accountable governance.

Despite these legal provisions, practical application remains key.

For instance, removing a member may require an investigation and subsequent confirmation of misconduct.

This procedural delay could undermine public confidence in anti-corruption efforts, as timely action is imperative to restore faith in institutional integrity.

International Treaties and the Duty to Combat Corruption:

Various international treaties further support the legal and ethical framework within state-level anti-corruption measures.

The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) sets out obligations for member states to implement measures to prevent corruption and promote transparency in public services.

The Convention emphasizes the importance of appointing independent bodies to tackle corruption, a principle that resonates with the establishment of the LACC.

Moreover, the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption urges member states to strengthen their national efforts to eradicate corruption securely, reiterating the imperative for leaders to maintain an unwavering commitment to integrity within governance structures.

The credibility of anti-corruption institutions like the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission rests upon the integrity of their members.

The removal of members implicated in corruption or unethical behavior is not only justified but necessary to preserve public trust and the commission’s effectiveness.

The authority vested in the President to appoint and dismiss officials serves as a critical safeguard against corruption, enshrined in both the Liberian Constitution and international law.

As Liberia continues to confront the challenges posed by corruption, it must also affirm its commitment to ethical governance by ensuring that anti-corruption officials embody the change they seek to promote.

The act of removing “vampires” and “hyenas” from within their ranks symbolizes a broader strategy for advancing national cohesion and security against the perennial threat posed by corruption.

Thus, the fight against corruption is not merely about punishing wrongdoers; itt is about fostering a culture of integrity within all levels of governance.

Without decisive action to remove those who undermine such efforts, the dream of a transparent and accountable Liberian society will remain elusive.

The post The Integrity of Anti-Corruption Institutions: The Case of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission appeared first on FrontPageAfrica.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *