Medtech Scientific Liberia Limited, a Dubai-based company operating as a Special Purpose Vehicle, has become embroiled in controversy surrounding its revenue collection contract with the Liberian government. The company, responsible for collecting revenue on imported goods and services, remits only 20% to the government while retaining the remaining 80%. This arrangement, initially established under the Weah administration through a 10-year contract, has drawn significant criticism for alleged violations of Liberia’s Public Procurement and Concession Commission (PPCC) and Public Financial Management (PFM) laws. Concerns persist regarding the transparency and legality of the deal, with allegations of unofficial diversion of government funds. While the contract was already a subject of debate, Medtech’s operations appear to have gained traction under the Boakai administration following a Senate hearing with opaque outcomes.
Despite holding an 80% share of collected revenue, Medtech has reportedly failed to deliver on its promised system development. Adding to the mounting suspicion, the company has engaged in a contentious exchange with the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA). The FIA launched an investigation into Medtech based on allegations of wrongdoing, requesting information regarding the company’s operations. Medtech, while denying the allegations, challenged the FIA’s jurisdiction to investigate extortion and corruption, asserting the agency lacked both authority and credibility.
The FIA, in response, emphasized its legal mandate under the FIA Act of 2021, reiterating its power to request information and conduct investigations into predicate offenses for money laundering, terrorism, and proliferation financing, which include corruption and extortion. The agency demanded Medtech provide a comprehensive customer database including details of consignees, goods, and charges levied. The FIA warned of administrative and criminal sanctions against Medtech and its General Manager, Atty. Oliver Rogers, should they fail to comply, characterizing their refusal as obstruction of justice.
Medtech’s defense hinges on its contractual relationship with the Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA). The company argues that any alleged overcharges should be addressed by the LRA, as the governing authority. Medtech contends that customers should direct their complaints to the LRA if there are discrepancies or delays in accepting corrected charges approved by the authority. This deflects responsibility from Medtech, placing the onus on the LRA to resolve customer grievances.
This ongoing dispute raises fundamental questions about Medtech’s operational practices and its relationship with the Liberian government. The 80/20 revenue split in Medtech’s favor has raised eyebrows from the outset, especially considering the alleged lack of transparency and potential legal breaches. The company’s failure to fulfill its system development commitments further fuels skepticism about its intentions and overall performance.
The clash with the FIA exacerbates concerns surrounding Medtech’s accountability. By challenging the FIA’s authority, Medtech appears to be attempting to shield itself from scrutiny. The company’s insistence that the LRA is the appropriate avenue for customer complaints seems to be a strategic maneuver to avoid directly addressing the allegations of overcharging and extortion. Ultimately, this complex situation underscores the need for a thorough investigation to determine the legality and transparency of Medtech’s operations and its financial dealings with the Liberian government. The outcome of this investigation will have significant implications for Liberia’s financial integrity and public trust in its institutions.
