Monrovia –A viral claim that lawmakers received US$30,000 each for “legislative engagements and Public Accessibility” from the 2022 national budget have spread in the media – both social media and mainstream. However, some lawmakers have claimed that there is no such allocation in the national budget for the Legislature.
Quick Check By: Varney Kelvin Sirleaf | LVL Fact Checker
Speaking via mobile phone on the Thursday’s (July 14th) edition of the OK Morning Rush Senators Saah Joseph of Montserrado County and Senator Jeremiah Koung of Nimba County claimed that there is no money in the Liberian Senate 2022 national budget for legislative engagement and public accessibility.
When we reviewed the respective allocations for the House of Representatives and the Liberian Senate in the approved 2022 National Budget for Fiscal, we did not see any budget line “Engagement and Public Accessibility”.
However, we further checked on Page 3 of the instrument and under National Legislature, we found a budget line item with Code 0563 showing an allocation of US$3,600,000 (3.6 million) for “engagements and accessibility project”.
This budget line is allocated to the upper and lower houses of the Legislature.
Based on a simple review of the budget, we conclude that US$3.5 million is allocated in the 2022 National budget for the Legislature for “Legislative engagements and public accessibility”. We find this claim by the two senators to be incorrect.
This fact check report only verifies the claim about the allocation of US$3.6 million in the 2022 Approved National Budget. This report doesn’t seek to verify if lawmakers received money as claimed by many.
You may contact us to fact check any claim or information relative to Liberia. Contact us on:
Factcheck.email@example.com or WhatsApp: +231880986778
The claim is rigorous and the content is demonstrably true.
The statement is correct, although it needs clarification additional information or context.
Evidence publicly available neither proves nor disproves the claim. More research is needed.
The statement contains correct data, but ignores very important elements or is mixed with incorrect data giving a different, inaccurate or false impression.
The claim is inaccurate according to the best evidence publicly available at this time.
Upon further investigation of the claim, a different conclusion was determined leading to the removal of the initial determination.
A rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable comment that is somewhat likely to make you leave a discussion or give up on sharing your perspective. Based on algorithmic detection of issues around toxicity, obscenity, threats, insults, and hate speech;