By Staff Writer
Liberia’s investment climate and legal credibility are once again under scrutiny, as unfolding developments around major concession agreements raise fundamental questions about the country’s commitment to the rule of law.
When the presidential bid was launched years ago, it emphasized a widely embraced commitment to upholding the rule of law, an expectation that remains strong among many at home and abroad.
It was on this basis, perhaps, that the five-year ARREST (Agriculture, Roads, Rule of Law, Sanitation, and Tourism) Agenda for Inclusive Development (AAID)—covering the period 2025–2029—was introduced as a national development plan.
The second ‘R’ stands for Rule of law. And if this is one that should be upheld, then the government needs to look into that direction.
Over the years, from the past regimes, Liberia has been seen to some level as a country that does not respect the sanity of concession agreements. The United Sates Department Report on Liberia painted a gloomy picture of doing business in Liberia. The report highlighted that “While the 2010 Investment Act protects profits, investors face weak judicial processes and challenges in enforcing contracts”.
For instance, Liberia Traffic Management (LTMI) / MDMC dispute: A $50 million concession agreement signed in 2018 for traffic management was ignored when the administration subsequently signed a conflicting deal with a different company (MDMC) in 2020, leading to legal and concessional breaches. The Justice Minister in his Legal Opinion on the LTMI Concession stated that “Without speaking to the veracity of this claim, I am of the certain legal opinion that such defect, if existed, was cured by the ratification. The ratification made the Concession a law, and it its origin did not comply with the preexisting law like the PPCA, the effect of the Sct to ratify the Concession made that defect nominal.. if the decision was totally wrong or slightly wrong… the ratification has cured it.”
The Minister further stated that “The potential flaws during the formative stage of the Concession are now ‘water under the bridge’ and as such, the Concession must be respected.. the contention of the improprieties surrounding the initiation of the Concession will not operate against the effectiveness of the Concession at this point.” Following the Minister’s Legal Opinion and with Legislature’s involvement, The LTMI Concession, was respected and today, the agreement is in full swing.
What is at stake?
Another dangerous Concession Agreement debacle is in the offing and needs to be averted. It centers on TIA/LTA Agreement signed into law by the President and printed into handbills by the Authority of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The LTA and TIA entered into a contract in 2018 and in 2022, the Contract was transitioned into a Concession, ratified by the Legisture, signed into Law by the president, and printed into Handbills by Ministry of Foreign Affairs; thus making the Concession a lawful legal instrument.
In 2024, the Ministry of Justice, following a request from the LTA to investigate the TIA Concession, issued a Legal Opinion on the Concession, after it’s investigative findings. In it’s Legal Opinion, The Justice Ministry “confirms the validity of the former 2018 Contract and the July 14, Amended and Restated Agreement replacement”. The Opinion also stated that “In the absence of a specific Judicial determination to the contrary, the 2022 Concession is Agreement is presumed to be legal, valid, and enforceable”.
In November 2025, an Executive Order was issued suspending the operations of TIA and a request was submitted to the Legislature for the de-ratification of the TIA Concession. The two Houses of the Legislature subsequently conducted public hearings with relevant stakeholders. Following these proceedings, the Lower House voted in favor of de-ratification of the TIA Concession, while the Senate voted for the renegotiation of the Concession by the parties to address the Government’s concerns. In its report, the Senate cited constitutional provisions, including Article 25 of the Constitution, which prohibits the impairment of contractual rights.
Following the stalemate in the two Houses’ position on the President’s request, a Joint Conference Committee was constituted. A Joint Conference Committee is constituted by Law where there’s a disagreement in decisions/actions taken or to be taken by the Legislature. The decision from the Joint Conference Committee becomes the final and binding decision of the Legislature.
In the TIA case, a Joint Conference Committee was constituted comprising of seven members from each House. The Committee, met, deliberated and did a report recommending fherenegotiation of the TIA Concession, as opposed to the de-ratification. The Committee, in it’s report, made several recommendations to the Executive, including a) the lifting of the suspension placed on TIA’s operations, and b) The Government must cease any attempt to initiate or approve a new contract for the same services while the TIA/LTA agreement remains valid. Doing so violates constitutional and statutory protections, undermines Legislative authority, and exposes the Republic to international claims and reputational risks, exposing it to further erosion in its investment climate.
Despite these recommendations, and while the implementation of the Legislature’s recommendations are awaiting the Executive’s implementation, reports have surfaced suggesting that the LTA, under the leadership of Clarence Massaquoi, have entered into a new agreement with Numtel Liberia JV NumbaseLLC to replace TIA.
If confirmed, such a move would raise serious legal and constitutional concerns, including, Violation of an existing ratified concession, Undermining legislative authority, and Exposure to international arbitration and reputational damage. Lawmakers, including Albert Chie, Amara Konneh, and Darius Dillon, have reportedly expressed strong preference for renegotiation—arguing it is the most balanced and lawful path forward. They stated that the signing of a parallel contract, when the ratified TIA Concession remains valid, binding and enforceable, raises serious concerns about the rule of law and the respect for the sanctity of contracts as enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Liberia.
Several other Lawmakers spoken to stated that if the Government can engage the LTMI that has similar Concession Agreement as TIA for renegotiation, it’s only fair and for the respect of the rule of law and sanctity of contracts, for the Government to engage with TIA for the renogiation of terms and clauses in the TIA Concession that the Government has issues with. They stated that just as LTMI has a legal and binding Concession that is being respected by the Executive, TIA also has a legal and binding Concession that the Government should respect with work with.
Observers point out that Liberia has historically favored renegotiation over cancellation in handling concession disputes. Major agreements involving companies such as, Arcelor Mittal, Firestone, and most recently under the current Administration CTN, MedTech, and Liberia Traffic Management, Inc. (LTMI) Agreements have all been successfully renegotiated rather than terminated. This precedent raises a critical question:
Why should the TIA concession be treated differently?
The Way Forward
As the Executive considers the Legislature’s recommendations, stakeholders are urging restraint, consistency, and respect for constitutional protections.
In a country striving to attract investment and strengthen governance, the sanctity of contracts is not just a legal obligation, it is a cornerstone of national credibility.
The coming weeks may prove decisive in determining whether Liberia upholds that standard—or risks repeating the very patterns it seeks to overcome.
