The actions of the Boakai administration regarding the Central Bank of Liberia (CBL) audit and the subsequent settlement with former Governor Aloysius Tarlue expose a troubling narrative of political convenience over genuine accountability. What should have been a transparent pursuit of justice has instead become a glaring example of the administration’s penchant for rhetorical grandstanding at the expense of integrity.
The government accused Tarlue of severe financial mismanagement, citing a General Auditing Commission (GAC) report that painted a damning picture of operations at the CBL. Allegations of exceeding expenditure limits by $19.31 million and non-compliance with critical financial management laws were enough to warrant his indefinite suspension. Yet, after months of bold accusations, no prosecution has followed. Instead, the administration entered into a confidential settlement, paying Tarlue over $374,000 to resign quietly and walk away.
This move raises an uncomfortable question: if the evidence against Tarlue was so overwhelming, why did the government choose a settlement over prosecution? The answer, it seems, lies in the realm of political maneuvering rather than the pursuit of justice. By offering Tarlue a golden handshake, the Boakai administration has inadvertently revealed the hollow nature of its anti-corruption rhetoric.
Tarlue, it appears, was a convenient scapegoat. Accused and suspended without due process, he became the centerpiece of a public relations campaign designed to showcase the administration’s alleged commitment to fighting corruption. But when it came time to present the evidence in court, the government retreated. This retreat is not a sign of mercy or compromise; it is an indictment of the administration’s lack of substance behind its accusations.
In the absence of a trial, the allegations against Tarlue remain unproven. He was suspended, vilified, and ultimately pushed out of office under a cloud of suspicion that the government chose not to substantiate. This is not justice; it is political theater. The settlement—a staggering $374,000 of taxpayers’ money—is less an admission of wrongdoing by Tarlue and more an indication of the administration’s unwillingness or inability to back its claims with facts.
This case reveals a troubling trend within the Boakai administration. Institutions like the GAC, ostensibly guardians of transparency and accountability, risk being weaponized as tools of political expediency. By using audits and investigations to discredit officials, the government creates an illusion of reform while avoiding the hard work of prosecuting genuine corruption.
Tarlue’s case is not an isolated incident. Similar patterns have emerged in other institutions, such as the Liberia Telecommunications Authority, where accusations and suspensions have paved the way for political loyalists to assume key positions. These actions raise serious concerns about the administration’s priorities. Is the fight against corruption truly about justice, or is it a convenient excuse to consolidate power?
President Boakai, who rose to office on promises of transparency and accountability, must now confront the reality of his administration’s failings. The public deserves to know why Tarlue was accused so publicly yet allowed to leave so quietly. They deserve to know why taxpayer money was used to silence a man the government claimed had violated the law. Most importantly, they deserve a government that pursues justice with integrity, not one that uses it as a rhetorical shield.
The Liberian people deserve answers, not settlements. They deserve leaders who prioritize their welfare over political games. And they deserve a justice system that works for them, not against them. The Boakai administration must decide whether it will honor its promises or continue down a path of disillusionment and distrust.
In the end, this administration will be judged not by the accusations it makes but by the accountability it delivers. So far, the results are deeply disappointing.
Discussion about this post