By: Abraham K Morris Sr.
Nimba County District Seven Representative, Musa Hassan Bility, has formally declared that he will not vote in favor of the ratification of ArcelorMittal Liberia’s (AML) proposed Mineral Development Agreement (MDA) Amendment No. 3, raising serious legal, fiscal, and governance concerns about the deal as currently structured.
In a full press statement released recently, Rep. Bility made it clear that his position is not anti-investment.
He acknowledged Liberia’s urgent need for foreign direct investment, job creation, rail expansion, port modernization, and productive capital.
However, he drew a firm line in the sand: investment must be lawful, transparent, enforceable, and designed to deliver measurable, long-term benefits to the Liberian people.
According to him, the proposed amendment fails that test.
At the center of his objection is the length and rigidity of the agreement. The amendment would extend AML’s concession until December 20, 2050, with provisions that allow for further extensions. Bility warned that this effectively locks Liberia into a generational contract, weakening the country’s leverage and tying the hands of future governments.
He also raised alarms over fiscal provisions that would, beginning in 2031, replace statutory Class A Mining License fees with a fixed annual payment of US$500,000. Bility argued that this “in lieu of” arrangement undermines Liberia’s legal and revenue framework, exposes the country to long-term revenue losses, and sets a dangerous precedent for other concessions seeking similar treatment.
Another major concern highlighted is the control and use of national rail and port infrastructure. Bility stressed that these assets are strategic national corridors, not private accessories to a single company’s operations.
He warned that the amendment risks turning critical infrastructure into a private chokepoint, without sufficient guarantees for independent regulation, transparent tariffs, or nondiscriminatory access that could support broader economic development.
On community benefits, Rep. Bility said the amendment’s language on social infrastructure and community development lacks enforceability. He described it as a “donation model” rather than a binding obligation, noting that remedies for nonperformance are weak and fail to adequately protect affected communities.
He further cautioned that agreements of this scale carry long-term implications for land rights, governance, transparency, and public accountability. In his view, the amendment does not sufficiently align with constitutional responsibilities or Liberia’s legal standards.
While rejecting the amendment in its current form, Rep. Bility outlined what he described as minimum conditions for any agreement that truly serves the national interest. These include placing rail and port infrastructure under a clear regulatory framework with strong government oversight; aligning all fees and rents with existing Liberian statutes; strengthening performance obligations and penalties; making community commitments legally binding with escrow-backed funding and independent audits; and introducing periodic public interest and fiscal reviews to allow adjustments based on economic conditions and national priorities.
Rep. Bility reaffirmed that Liberia’s natural resources belong to the Liberian people, emphasizing that the Legislature’s role is not to rubber-stamp agreements, but to ensure that any ratified deal is lawful, transparent, enforceable, and genuinely beneficial to the nation.
The statement has signaled a potentially significant debate within the 55th Legislature as lawmakers weigh the future of one of Liberia’s most consequential concession agreements.