By Shallon S. Gonlor | shallonsgonlor@gmail.com
NIMBA COUNTY, Liberia — Former Nimba County Electoral District #2 Representative, Prince O.S. Tokpah, has responded to public criticism over his decision to convert a health facility into a private revenue stream, asserting that he has the right to utilize his property as he deems fit.
Tokpah argues that his actions are lawful and that he should not be restricted from using his property for personal gain.
The former lawmaker’s swift rebuttal came in response to widespread criticism from citizens and residents of his district, who condemned his decision to convert a public clinic into a rental apartment as a blatant ‘betrayal of public trust.’
The community expressed outrage, describing the move as selfish and prioritizing personal gain over the welfare of the people he once represented. Critics argued that the clinic was a vital resource for the community, providing essential healthcare services to those in need, and that its conversion would exacerbate existing healthcare disparities.
The backlash underscores the growing distrust between the public and their elected officials, highlighting the need for transparency and accountability in governance.
The Prince O.S. Tokpah Clinic, once a vital resource for the community and students of the Prince O.S. Tokpah Academy, has been converted into rental housing for a corporate subcontractor, sparking widespread outrage.
The clinic, which adjoined the academy, has been repurposed into residential units now occupied by MTS, a subcontractor for ArcelorMittal Liberia.
This decision, made after Tokpah lost his re-election bid in 2023, has left students feeling vulnerable and abandoned, questioning the former lawmaker’s commitment to their welfare. The move has also raised concerns about the prioritization of personal interests over community needs, further eroding trust in leadership.
However, in response to the criticism, Prince O.S. Tokpah maintained that the facility was built using his personal resources, and therefore, he has the right to decide how it is used to benefit himself and his family.
He argued that since parents of students attending his school are not paying for medical services, he is not obligated to provide free treatment to the students.
Tokpah’s stance has sparked a heated debate about the role of private institutions in providing essential services to the community. While some argue that private property owners have the right to utilize their assets as they see fit, others contend that certain facilities, such as healthcare services, are fundamental human rights that should not be compromised for personal gain.
The controversy highlights the complex relationship between private enterprise and public needs, particularly in contexts where community resources are limited.
Prince O.S. Tokpah defended his decision to convert the health facility into housing units, citing the financial burden of maintaining a healthcare facility, particularly for a privately-owned institution. He emphasized that running a health facility is a costly endeavor, and the community has not been forthcoming in supporting the endeavor.
Tokpah argued that without sufficient support, he cannot sustain the financial strain of providing basic health services, leaving him with no choice but to repurpose the facility into rental housing.
In a parting remark, Tokpah stated that he is no longer interested in politics and urged the public to focus on positivity and development rather than negativity. He emphasized that confrontational approaches are counterproductive and hinder individual well-being and prosperity.
Tokpah’s comments suggest a desire to distance himself from the public controversy and refocus on his personal and business interests. However, the community’s response likely depend on whether they view his actions as a pragmatic decision or a betrayal of their trust.
