The New Election Law: Implementing McGill’s Mandate?

On February 28, 2021, the Hot Pepper published a story, headlined, “No Deal—NEC Boss Tells Min. McGill”. In that story, the paper reported that the Chairperson of the National Elections Commission (NEC), Davidetta Browne-Lansanah, had accused President George M. Weah of sending Minister McGill to her to do a staff shake-up to make way for CDC die-hard partisans in key, strategic NEC positions and, in return, her court case would fade away; otherwise, she could expect to find herself in court in less than two weeks for corruption allegations levied against her by the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC).

   According to the story, Browne-Lansanah said she categorically rejected the deal and told McGill that she will neither compromise the electoral process in Liberia nor compromise her integrity for personal benefit. She further stated that no member of her staff has been errant to warrant termination, and that she would not oblige. According to her, if McGill and Weah desire to make such unwarranted changes at the NEC, they should go ahead and do it themselves.

   One of the Commissioners of the NEC, Floyd Oxley Sayor, was said to have informed President Weah that Browne-Lansanah was not cooperating with the scheme of making him a second-term President, and would likely be an obstructionist if nothing is done at this time.

   However, on the same day of the publication of the story, Browne-Lansannah hurriedly organized a press conference to denigrate the image of the Hot Pepper, describing the publication as false and misleading. She said she read the story that morning with “dismay and utmost disgust”, claiming that “at no time did I give any interview or made such baseless statement to any international, local media or group”.

NEC Chairperson, Davidetta Browne-Lansannah

   But barely six months after the Hot Pepper’s publication, a new version of the Election Reform Law has been sent by the Executive to the National Legislature, requiring that election magistrates of the 15 fifteen counties relinquish their positions upon the passage of the act.

   On Friday, August 19, 2022, the Liberian Senate voted for some prepositions within the New Elections Law, taking into consideration Section 7.3(2) and Section 2.24(a) to maintain the Application and Registration fees and removed all Magistrates from all 15 counties of the New Elections Law (1986), as amended in 2014.

   The Senate, through majority vote, agreed to maintain the Application and Registration Fees of Aspirants and Candidates under Section 7.3(2), which amount to the Liberian dollars equivalent of the following: President, US$2,500; Vice President, US$1,500; Senator, US$750; and Representatives, US$500.

   Meanwhile, the Senate also passed Section 2.24(a) which states, “90-days after the passage of this Act, all Elections Magistrates in all 15 counties must be removed and positions considered vacant.”

   This Section also gives right to those removed Magistrates to re-apply.

   The new amendments are heavily sponsored by Representative Richard Koon and the House’s Committee on Election and Inauguration, headed by Representative Matthew Zarzar of Sinoe County.

Montserrado County’s district #11 Representative, Richard N. Koon

   Section 2.24 (a), which requires all election magistrates to relinquish their positions, appears like the reincarnation of the McGill mandate—to create room for hardcore loyalists of the regime at the NEC to protect the interest of President Weah and the Coalition for Democratic Change.

   Privileged information attained by the Hot Pepper suggests that Browne-Lansannah is coerced to dance to the tone of the CDC administration in order to escape the days in court with the LACC.

   Browne-Lansannah is apparently being blackmailed to succumb to the changes being made in the law and, since she has stood her ground not to implement the mandate, the Executive has taken responsibility of amending the Election Law in its favor.

   As an election stakeholder, whether the NEC boss consented to the amendment or not, many may see her administration as not standing for the interest of the people and protecting the sanctity of the institution; rather, a lame duck that is being blackmailed by the regime to orchestrate its gamesmanship at the NEC due to her alleged corrupt behavior that she is trying hard to recreate.

    Howbeit, Section 2.24(a) of the new Election Reform Law has not gone without notice, as some members of the House and Senate have began to express their disapproval for the new law.

   One of such persons is the Deputy Speaker of the House, Cllr. J. Fonati Koffa, who argued that the version of the law passed by the lower House did not incorporate the section calling for election magistrates relinquishing their positions. But now that the Senate has passed it with that clause, which will require the law to be sent to a conference committee for concurrence, he vowed to resist it to the fullest.

    Senator Jonathan BoyCharles Sogbie has also expressed his descent on Section 2.24 (a) of the New Elections Law, which states, “ninety days after the passage of this act, all election magistrates in the fifteen counties should consider their position vacant.”

   Senator Sogbie said this does not have a good uptake for political parties and the Liberian people, because it suggests that this administration will want to take people of like-minds—people from the CDC—to be election commissioners. “Even if that is not the case, it doesn’t augur well at this time, especially while we are entering electoral period.

   “We stated our point on the record, but unfortunately we had to go into vote, which is the democratic process, and the majority took the day. I wanted to be on the record—that this has the propensity to bring serious chaos, and I am not sure whether or not political parties will agree to this provision. And what is not even clear is that they are stating that the magistrates who will be removed have the right to reapply,” he wondered.

   He wondered why are they being removed in the first place if they have the right to reapply. “Something must be wrong: if they are not qualified then you remove them; if they are qualified and you don’t want someone to be complacent in a particular position, then you switch them. But to remove all of them with the right to reapply suggests something fishy,” he stated.

Comments (0)
Add Comment