“We’ll Bribe WAEC”: When a School’s Alleged Answer Betrays Its Mission

Opinion by J K K Peah

A student asks her school to participate in an online program designed to help candidates prepare for the West African Examinations Council examinations. She wants an opportunity to learn, improve her chances, and help her classmates succeed.

According to an account shared with this writer, the response she received from the principal of a Seventh-day Adventist school in Paynesville, Liberia, was deeply disturbing: “We’ll bribe WAEC.”

This account has not been independently verified. The principal’s response and the school’s explanation must be sought before any final judgment about the incident. Nothing in the account establishes that a bribe was offered, paid, or accepted by any WAEC official. Nevertheless, the allegation raises a question Liberia cannot afford to dismiss: What happens to a nation when a student seeks preparation and an educator allegedly offers corruption?

If accurately reported, that response represents a profound betrayal of educational responsibility. A principal’s duty is to organize teaching, support students, identify weaknesses, and create conditions in which honest effort can succeed. An assurance that influence or money will secure examination results teaches a destructive lesson: knowledge is optional when the system can supposedly be manipulated.

The student’s initiative deserves recognition. She saw an opportunity and brought it to someone with the authority to consider it. The proposed program might have required assessment for quality, cost, accessibility, and suitability. A responsible school could accept it, decline it with reasons, or offer another credible preparation plan. Whatever the decision, the student deserved an answer rooted in her education.

For a Christian school, the alleged statement carries an additional moral weight. Christian education makes a promise about character as well as academic achievement. Parents entrust their children to such institutions expecting honesty, responsibility, and respect for others to shape daily school life.

Those values must be visible when examination pressure arrives. A school cannot credibly teach integrity in worship and suggest that dishonesty will resolve its academic challenges. Students notice what adults do when their stated principles become inconvenient.

Consider the lesson a young person could take from such an exchange. She asks how to prepare; an authority figure allegedly tells her preparation is unnecessary because the outcome can be purchased. That message can weaken her confidence in effort, fairness, and the value of her own abilities.

It also insults students who study diligently. Every candidate who spends long hours learning deserves an examination process in which achievement reflects performance. Teachers who work conscientiously deserve the same assurance. Claims that results can be bought undermine trust in their labor, even when those claims are unproven.

We must also resist using one allegation to condemn an entire denomination or every educator in Liberia. Many teachers and faith-based institutions serve students with dedication under difficult conditions. Their work is another reason to insist on a fair, credible examination of this account. Responsible institutions protect their mission by confronting possible misconduct.

The appropriate response begins with establishing what happened. The student should be heard without intimidation or retaliation. The principal should have a meaningful opportunity to respond. Any available messages, recordings, witnesses, or other relevant evidence should be assessed carefully and fairly.

School authorities and the relevant Adventist education leadership should determine whether the reported exchange occurred and whether students have adequate examination preparation. If credible evidence suggests attempted examination interference, it should reach the appropriate examination and education authorities for investigation.

An inquiry should produce more than a defensive statement. Students need a clear preparation plan: effective teaching, revision sessions, practice examinations, feedback, and help with subjects in which they are struggling. Accountability matters, and so does correcting the educational failure that an alleged promise of bribery would conceal.

This incident, if substantiated, would reflect a wider danger: adults teaching young people to expect shortcuts from institutions that should cultivate competence. Liberia’s development depends on people who can perform the responsibilities their qualifications represent. A certificate cannot substitute for the knowledge a future nurse, engineer, teacher, or public servant will need.

The student in this account was asking for something reasonable—the opportunity to prepare. Her initiative should have been encouraged. Liberia needs young people willing to pursue learning and adults willing to support them.

If the allegation is substantiated, the school’s leadership must answer for both the statement and the example it set. If it is inaccurate, the facts should establish that clearly. Either outcome requires a serious response grounded in evidence.

A school’s promise to its students should be simple: We will teach you, help you prepare, and stand behind your honest effort. That is the promise Liberia’s children deserve.