The current debate surrounding the Liberia Association of Pennsylvania (LAP) and its August 15, 2026 election should cause all of us to reflect on a larger question: What kind of organization do we want LAP to become?
Rev. Solomon M. Muin recently argued that LAP has become too “position-driven” rather than “people-driven.” His point deserves serious consideration. When an organization becomes consumed by who will be president, chairman, or another officer, elections can overshadow the real purpose of the organization—bringing Liberians together, supporting our community, raising resources, preserving our culture, and creating opportunities for future generations.
That concern is especially relevant today. Jamesetta M. Henries and other concerned members have called for the scheduled August 15 election to proceed, while also raising allegations about efforts to have it canceled. Because those claims remain allegations, they should not be treated as facts. The Board should follow LAP’s constitution and bylaws, communicate transparently, and ensure that whatever decision is made protects the credibility and unity of the organization.
For me, however, today’s disagreement also brings back painful memories from approximately ten years ago, when I served as Secretary General of LAP.
At that time, LAP faced another serious leadership crisis. President Christopher Selekpoh, Board Chairman Murphy Gibson, Alascal Wisner and, to some extent, then-ULAA President Showoh Kamara were aligned in opposition to a recommendation presented by Dr. Jallah after numerous efforts and meetings aimed at resolving the dispute.
Dr. Jallah recommended an interim leadership arrangement that would guide LAP until elections could be held. Selekpoh and those supporting his position rejected that recommendation and did not relinquish leadership even though our two-year term of office had expired.
Whatever arguments existed on either side at the time, the consequences were damaging. LAP became deeply divided, relationships deteriorated, and an organization that should have been bringing Liberians together was pushed dangerously close to what I would describe as its deathbed.
We cannot repeat that history.
This is why Rev. Muin’s proposal deserves discussion. He suggests establishing a biannual LAP Convention that would bring together county associations, community organizations, women, youth, professionals, religious leaders and other stakeholders. Elections could still occur, but they would become one part of a larger gathering centered on community development, fundraising, accountability, cultural celebration and a shared vision for Liberians in Pennsylvania.
The strength of many county associations should also teach LAP something. People remain involved when they feel connected to a purpose larger than an election.
Today should therefore not be about Selekpoh, Foley, Johnson, Muin, Gibson, Wisner, Kamara or any other individual. It should be about LAP.
Those of us who lived through the previous conflict have a responsibility not merely to reopen old wounds, but to use that experience to prevent new ones.
Let the constitution and bylaws guide the process. Let disagreements be resolved through dialogue rather than personal battles. Let elections be transparent and peaceful. And when an election ends, let campaigning end with it so that Liberians can return to the greater work of building their community.
LAP does not need another winner and loser.
LAP needs reconciliation, participation, financial strength, institutional stability and, above all, unity.
Positions are temporary. The Liberian community in Pennsylvania will remain long after today’s leaders are gone.