ON THE IMPROPRIETIES AND INEFFICIENCIES OF THE CENTRAL BANK OF LIBERIA
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
There is nothing more relevant and imperative to ensuring transparency and accountability in any given economy than a strong and credible financial system under the supervisions of a policy driven institution. The current post-crisis economy of Liberia, ruined and poorly managed cannot progressively compete in the global economy in the absence of efficient financial institutions properly controlled by a central bank. In 1999, the National Bank of Liberia became the Central Bank of Liberia with broad functions and new managerial system with its purpose of directing the monetary policies of the Government of Liberia and playing supervisory role over financial institutions in the country.
As our country gradually recovers, the need for a strong economic system need not be overemphasized, and the driving forces behind a strong national economic system are the financial institutions in the private sector and the financial agencies and bureaus in the public sector including the Central Bank, the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Planning and Ministry of Commerce. The public sector agencies need to be strengthened and efficient in order to be able to control the system. Unfortunately, it seems that the bureaucracies of the agencies of government in both the fiscal and monetary sectors are still weak despite the impressions of experts from abroad.
Amongst all of these institutions, the Central Bank seems to be the most vulnerable and ineffective agency in the public financial domain. The ineffectiveness of the Central Bank of Liberia to respond to burning fiscal and monetary issues and its inability to control and regulate the financial system is deepening the wounds of our fragile economy: the uncontrolled price system spurred by a fluctuating foreign exchange market and a dual currency situation that has made the local currency to depreciate in value; extensively, these conditions are gravely affecting the livelihoods of low income earners and widening the poverty pool in the country, amongst a plethora of problems the Central Bank faces.
Beside its inability to initiate and implement vibrant fiscal and monetary policies that will build hope in customers for commercial banks, the trend the Central Bank has taken and its weak system makes it difficult if not impossible for one to trust the local system for major financial transactions. Corruption cases are routinely reported from the Central Bank. One wonders as to whether the Central Bank top officials including its Governor and his deputy do care to follow the laid down procedures governing the nation’s cardinal banking institution.
The poor services at the regulatory bank coupled with the lack of internal control have exposed the entire country to criminal operatives who regularly infiltrate the system and rob the country of millions of dollars. The situation is so serious that it has the potential to undo whatever measures is being put in place to guard against corruption and by extension defeat the very purpose of President Sirleaf’s anti-corruption crusade.
It is interesting to note that the Central Bank is still performing functions of commercial bank by serving individuals through bank tellers. Civil Servant salaries and other local transactions should be left with commercial banks. It is widely believed that the numerous scandals at the Central Bank sometimes spring from its preoccupation with lot of local transactions which it seems incapable to control. When a civil servant attempts to take thirty minutes of his or her working time to encash a single salary cheque at the Central Bank, he or she is likely to spend not less than two hours in queues, or if unfortunate, spend the whole day without a result.
These and many more are sufficient to tell that the bank needs massive reforms in all of its operations. The recent transfer of over USD 1,000, 000 from the CBL to a local commercial bank, ECOBANK appears to be the tip of the iceberg or signs of maby more things to come, and this scandal based on the mystery associated with it, need to be handled thoroughly if we are to get to the bottom of the crime, the criminals and their networks. Our investigation so far has raised more questions than answers. All reports and analyses suggest that the transfer of that amount from the national treasury to a private account was well organized, calculated, and effectuated with ease, and also suggests that a single criminal with all the wisdoms of an evil-genius cannot singularly succeed in such a high level deal. This must be a big deal with big hands, and the forger of the president’s signature must have just been used as a crime-carrier. However it may be, it remains a mystery and a complicated case. It does not stop remaining a mystery, it shows or exposes the reckless abandon at the CBL management in handling our postwar banking system in a terrain with growing crime rates. It stretches to a length of telling how deep-seated is corruption in the present regime, and the way it will end will tell how effective or serious this regime is in mitigating corruption. The said amount which is over one million US dollars was just about to be distributed among four to five persons, while thousands of people died of hunger, preventable diseases, and at the same time while thousands of children remain out of school.
Three cardinal issues are central to the success of every post-conflict nation, namely, security, respect for human rights and a sound economic management system. Of all the three items mentioned, economic management is of paramount importance since the other two cannot become a reality in the absence of a credible banking control system which does not only ensure the allocation and the use of the state resources, but the one that would ensure that a proper mechanism is put into place to regulate the circulation and transfer of the state fund/resources for whatever purposes. Perhaps the presence of GEMAP and the other control measures put in place by this Administration attest to this.
Regrettably, however, the news emanating from the two principal financial and banking institutions, the CBL and the Ministry of Finance is less than satisfactory. Employees of the two institutions apparently take undue advantages of the recklessness of administrators and go ahead with duplicating and recycling checques, something that cost the country millions of dollars. There must be an established chain in these issues because cheques missing at the Ministry of Finance can be encashed at the Central Bank of Liberia, and checques encashed at the CBL usually come from the MOF. This syndicate has to be uncovered to save the public resources from landing in unauthorized private pockets. In the one million dollars case, had it not been for divine intervention and for professionals at the commercial bank in exposing crime of this magnitude, the issue of that huge sum of money would be left as history to be discussed at public lectures and the criminals left to parade the streets as witnessed here in the past, a situation the current regime claims to be against.
There are more than one hundred more questions to answer around this one million dollar transfer, but we will not delve into listing them. The mystery surrounding it goes beyond the understanding of financial and banking experts, but what is clear and irrefutable is that mass corruption exists at the top level of the CBL and the MOF. All transactions in credible institutions are well documented with all necessary details, and requests are never made without stated purposes. Sadly, the purported letter that ordered the transfer of the money from the CBL did not state the purpose for which the money was requested. What a travesty of banking management procedures. Moreover the failure of the CBL to institute a signature verification system to validate signatures in transactions is unfortunate and speaks of professional limitations and inadequacies at the level of management. The most glaring of all the inadequacies is to ignore the presidential directives which set the financial regulatory framework for the bank in Executive Order Number Three (NO. 3). Whether it was a clever attempt to rob the process by intentionally ignoring this framework is another spider story whose explanations can only be found in traditional African tales.
-In The Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, The Pen Shall Never Run Dry-
Monday, June 8, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
THE POLITICIZATION OF THE MANDINGO COMMUNITY: INTERNAL IDENTIY CRISIS; ELITISM VS GRASSROOTISM; WHO YIELDS THE DIVIDENDS?
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
Ethnicity is a critical point of rally in political situations, particularly in Africa where ethnic politics has dominated at the expense of nationalism. Liberian politics is a good tool for experimentation of the test of ethnicity in African politics to be used in any political laboratory. The first ethnic group to dominate the politics and socio-economy of Liberia was the minority group of settlers referred to as the Americo-Liberians. In the 1980s emerged a group of indigenous African tribes who succeeded in violently overthrowing the Americo-Liberian hegemony that ruled for over a century.
The new class consisting of indegionous tribes could not unite on a front of pursuing a real political and economic agenda or ideology that could direct political and economic actions for the country, but soon sank into feuds stirred by ethnic alignments. Finally, the leader of the juntas and his tribe succeeded in the fight and his ethnic group succeeded in taking control of the state. What came after were raids, and attempted genocides on rival tribes. The attempt by the NPFL to physically eliminate certain tribes in the early 1990S by a declared genocide tells the rest of the story.
Varying dimensions of ethnic politics are all over Africa: Rwanda saw the Hutu-Tutsi horror. South Africa remains governed by black African tribes with no prospects for white minorities. Sudan is nearly divided into two states of Arab North and Black African South. Liberia presents a different typology because Americo-Liberians since 1980 are becoming assimilated into African tribes that neighbor their settlements. Additionally, no tribe in Liberia is so dominant to secure an electoral victory independently.
Electoral processes in Liberia, like the last one conducted in 2005, can further give sufficient evidence of the ethnicization of Liberian politics. In 2005, every tribe that had a popular candidate foresaw a chance to win the presidency. Like the Bassa saw a president in Brumskine, The Kru did in Weah, the Vai in Sherman, the Gola in Johnson-Sirleaf. The Mandingo was a visible monkey-range resulting from inner conflicts and the declaration of a lifetime loyalty by one of its organizations for candidate Johnson-Sirleaf. But the Western Mandingo went the other way and supported their son, G.V. Kromah as was demonstrated by the overwhelming success of his party in Lofa County.
These tribal dimensions of politics in Africa lay the basis for which politicians hide behind ethnic groups in pursuing their hidden agendas like the Krahns and Mandingoes saw their liberators in the 1990s. Since the civil war ended, lessons from the politicization of tribes as thought by the war has been well learnt by other tribes. The only ethnic organization that committed its members to a political party, and in the name of all its kinsmen, was the National Mandingo Caucus. This declaration of lifetime loyalty by the Caucus to the candidate of the Unity Party, according to observers, portrayed a loathsome betrayal to those who led liberation struggles when the tribe was nearly wiped out by attempted genocide. This is not however the issue. This premise has been set to give a brief look at the essence of tribes in African politics vis-à-vis the adverse political consequences (mostly persecution) that follow when a tribe falls on the wrong side of the coin.
With what Liberian Mandingoes went through before reaching this far, their professed role in the 2005 elections that was widely criticized and seeing as an internally divided tribe, and the way forward as some local organizations like the elite-based Mandingo Caucus ( NMC) and the so-called grassroots-based Concerned Mandingo Society are working toward are central to this article.
It is with no doubt that this writer declares that the Liberian Mandingoes are most often criticized and reduced to non-citizen status by other Liberians. This has been experienced all over the country, and in many cases they are referred to as foreigners - Guineans or Malians. The driving force behind this resentment has not been established, but several factors may be assumed to be stirring such unfounded hatred against the Mandingo tribe in Liberia.
First, there is plausibility in concluding that Mandingoes in Liberia are despised for their uncompromising religious belief in Islam. The Mandingo tribe has demonstrated a strong belief and commitment to Islam, and with all the challenges of the society, it has been difficult for them to be converted to other faiths. Therefore, as Islam is resented by non-Muslims, the Mandingoes are as well resented. To some extent, some people in Liberia have come to make Islam synonymous with Mandingo, and that whosoever is a Muslim, is a Mandingo.
Second, another reason behind the public resentment of the Mandingo tribe could be on the basis of sheer jealousy as a result of the economic and commercial strides made by Mandingoes in the country. Currently there is a reported dominance of certain local trade industries by the Mandingoes – transportation, motor garage, petroleum industry, etc.
The above are just cited as sources of external hatred for the Mandingo community which are baseless and unfounded. This needs not to bother the community. What the community needs is to push forward in unison with purpose and objective.
The most important thing is the internal dispute and sometimes negative classifications that occur within the Mandingo community, and this is where the outsiders see as leakages in their attempts to demeaning the Mandingoes in Liberia: there is a complete disunity amongst Liberian Mandingoes, and the Mandingo ethnic group is the only ethnic group so far seeing in Liberia with a well established elite organization riding and collecting political olive branches using the name of the entire tribe.
The most controversial and what by chance made the National Mandingo Caucus popular in Liberia was its declaration of the vote of the Mandingoes for candidate Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf in the 2005 presidential elections. So many reactions have been written to that effect, and debates have opened and closed on that matter. But the mere fact that such declaration of support by a club of less than twenty men in the name of thousands of innocent people nursing souls of persecutions simply because of the same tribe was a social disservice and complete misrepresentation tantamount to an act of quisling. No one has a moral ground to question a club of less than twenty for their personal political opinions, but to be brave and use the name of an ethnic group in a country where political persecutions are targeted at tribes on the bases of their proximity to presidents or politicians was a mournful and dreadful political error.
Most of the arguments against the caucus at the time can now have sufficient evidence to prove that the few guys used the tribe as canon fodder to obtain positions and business contracts in the government of the candidate they supported. The following are true and indubitable: Most of them are holding positions in the current government; some of them have government contracts; the Caucus has not been heard since 2005; it has made no representation for the Mandingo community anywhere since they attained their objective of entering government and winning contracts; it cannot boast of a roster with fifty registered members.
If this had happened and the community remains loosely connected or its source of unification for purpose remains undefined, then there is a need to revitalize, reform, remake, or design some institutional mechanism that will give leadership direction to the entire Mandingo nation in the Liberian state. The Mandingo nation in Liberia stretches across the territorial landscape of the country. It is one of the few tribes that adapt and settle nearly in all parts of the country. This ubiquity of the tribe in the country which is primarily due to the meaningful trade and commercial activities of its members should be seen as a solid point of rally and strength, not as a point of division as it is unfortunately happening. It is regrettable to observe that people most often refer to others as Lofa Mandingo, Bong County Mandingo, Nimba Mandingo, Monrovia Mandingo, and sometimes Gbonyiaka or Konyianka.
On the other hand, there is a considerable number of people of Mandingo origin who are currently identified with other tribes like the Vai, the Gbandi, The Gio, Manos, Kpelle, etc. Some of these resulted from intermarriages. And some people who are by nature and origin Mandingo are currently identified with tribes in settlements where their grandparents settled during commercial or Islamic missionary activities. These people are most often seen differently by other Mandingoes and sometimes face serious identity crisis as a result of resentments in their settlements and even the tribe (Mandingo) of their origin. The Vais, for example, would refer to people in their settlements-The Kannehs, Nyeis, Kromahs, etc- as Mandingoes, and the Mandingoes would refer to them as Vai. The Massaley’s and Dukuly’s, like the ones from Gbarpolu and Bomi County would be called Mandingoes by the Kpelle, and the Mandingoes would call them Kpelles. There are many other cases of identity crisis for people who are originally of the Mandingo tribe.
These references are made in attempts to question the true identity of people. But what happens in the final analysis is that it further divides the community and opens spaces of distrusts amongst members of the Mandingo tribe.
The tribe is numerically large and economically potent to make significant impacts in the country that no one can question or detest. But making positive impacts can only be achievable with a untied community fronting a common cause. Descriptions in the forms of the regional or dialectical differences in the community are only tantamount to weakening the strength of the community.
I n the midst of these challenges, the current social and political discrepancies that exist in the community with two organizations claiming supremacy or control, further frustrate the prospects of uniting the Mandingo nation in Liberia despite its unique culture, religious commonality and economic viability of its members. These two organizations, the National Mandingo Caucus of Liberia (the elites) and the Concerned Mandingo Society of Liberia or COMASL (the so-called grassrooters) are struggling daily to terminate the existence of each other. The COMASL which has membership in various Mandingo dominated communities pays political loyalty to the perceived liberators of the Mandingoes, but it did so in 2005 by actions left with the discretion of its members, while the Caucus openly declared its loyalty to the candidate of the Unity Party (perceived to be a supporter of the movement that attempted a genocide against the Mandingoes). The dividends from politically auctioning the Mandingo community in 2005 is currently being enjoyed by the Caucus, and it is on the basis of its political propinquity to the status quo and the financial muscles of its members that the caucus is claiming absolute supremacy and it is now inviting all Mandingoes to a national convention with attempts to also merge the COMASL into the structure and objectives of its organization either overtly or covertly. COMASL on the other hand claims supremacy on the basis of its nearness to the people and ability to spontaneously mobilize the people at any given time.
The struggle between the two groups is creating more distrusts in the community as Caucus members and COMASL members are usually engaged in destructive criticisms, but none can actually boast of a meaningful social benefit to the people for the past two years. Does the community actually need them, or does the community really need an umbrella organization? The essence of their existence shall only be determined by the Mandingo community if indeed they are engaged into meaningful programs that yield benefits to the community, or if they actually provide true leadership to the people.
As the Caucus convention nears, it is prudent to find common grounds and allow for the emergence of more Mandingo organizations in the country that must compute with development activities, but not to compute for supremacy only to impress upon others that it has full control which lends it the authority to determine which political movement the Mandingo community should support when national elections nears.
We expect to see from all Mandingo organizations in the country efficient systems of governance, social service programs, cultural activities to unite the people, and empowerment programs that will help the community to continue making meaningful contributions to the development of the country.
The Gbarnga convention, as called by the National Mandingo Caucus, must not be left with the tradition of the caucus, but must see as a priority the need to serve the community with a sense and commitment void of cynicism and cronyism. This convention must be able to carve out ways of intervening and addressing some of the problems face by the Mandingo people in Liberia, including the looming land disputes, and if possible the mandate and function of the caucus must be clearly defined, so as to make public its function and essence of existence. In this way, one would easily know which organization is specialized in social services, development activities, cultural affairs, or political activism and mobilization in the community.
Finally we expect to sharpen lot of contradictions in Gbarnga, and to perforate some of the balloons of impression-making and impersonation. But above all, we hope that the Gbarnga convention will be successful and will provide for a new beginning.
See you in Gbarnga.
Ethnicity is a critical point of rally in political situations, particularly in Africa where ethnic politics has dominated at the expense of nationalism. Liberian politics is a good tool for experimentation of the test of ethnicity in African politics to be used in any political laboratory. The first ethnic group to dominate the politics and socio-economy of Liberia was the minority group of settlers referred to as the Americo-Liberians. In the 1980s emerged a group of indigenous African tribes who succeeded in violently overthrowing the Americo-Liberian hegemony that ruled for over a century.
The new class consisting of indegionous tribes could not unite on a front of pursuing a real political and economic agenda or ideology that could direct political and economic actions for the country, but soon sank into feuds stirred by ethnic alignments. Finally, the leader of the juntas and his tribe succeeded in the fight and his ethnic group succeeded in taking control of the state. What came after were raids, and attempted genocides on rival tribes. The attempt by the NPFL to physically eliminate certain tribes in the early 1990S by a declared genocide tells the rest of the story.
Varying dimensions of ethnic politics are all over Africa: Rwanda saw the Hutu-Tutsi horror. South Africa remains governed by black African tribes with no prospects for white minorities. Sudan is nearly divided into two states of Arab North and Black African South. Liberia presents a different typology because Americo-Liberians since 1980 are becoming assimilated into African tribes that neighbor their settlements. Additionally, no tribe in Liberia is so dominant to secure an electoral victory independently.
Electoral processes in Liberia, like the last one conducted in 2005, can further give sufficient evidence of the ethnicization of Liberian politics. In 2005, every tribe that had a popular candidate foresaw a chance to win the presidency. Like the Bassa saw a president in Brumskine, The Kru did in Weah, the Vai in Sherman, the Gola in Johnson-Sirleaf. The Mandingo was a visible monkey-range resulting from inner conflicts and the declaration of a lifetime loyalty by one of its organizations for candidate Johnson-Sirleaf. But the Western Mandingo went the other way and supported their son, G.V. Kromah as was demonstrated by the overwhelming success of his party in Lofa County.
These tribal dimensions of politics in Africa lay the basis for which politicians hide behind ethnic groups in pursuing their hidden agendas like the Krahns and Mandingoes saw their liberators in the 1990s. Since the civil war ended, lessons from the politicization of tribes as thought by the war has been well learnt by other tribes. The only ethnic organization that committed its members to a political party, and in the name of all its kinsmen, was the National Mandingo Caucus. This declaration of lifetime loyalty by the Caucus to the candidate of the Unity Party, according to observers, portrayed a loathsome betrayal to those who led liberation struggles when the tribe was nearly wiped out by attempted genocide. This is not however the issue. This premise has been set to give a brief look at the essence of tribes in African politics vis-à-vis the adverse political consequences (mostly persecution) that follow when a tribe falls on the wrong side of the coin.
With what Liberian Mandingoes went through before reaching this far, their professed role in the 2005 elections that was widely criticized and seeing as an internally divided tribe, and the way forward as some local organizations like the elite-based Mandingo Caucus ( NMC) and the so-called grassroots-based Concerned Mandingo Society are working toward are central to this article.
It is with no doubt that this writer declares that the Liberian Mandingoes are most often criticized and reduced to non-citizen status by other Liberians. This has been experienced all over the country, and in many cases they are referred to as foreigners - Guineans or Malians. The driving force behind this resentment has not been established, but several factors may be assumed to be stirring such unfounded hatred against the Mandingo tribe in Liberia.
First, there is plausibility in concluding that Mandingoes in Liberia are despised for their uncompromising religious belief in Islam. The Mandingo tribe has demonstrated a strong belief and commitment to Islam, and with all the challenges of the society, it has been difficult for them to be converted to other faiths. Therefore, as Islam is resented by non-Muslims, the Mandingoes are as well resented. To some extent, some people in Liberia have come to make Islam synonymous with Mandingo, and that whosoever is a Muslim, is a Mandingo.
Second, another reason behind the public resentment of the Mandingo tribe could be on the basis of sheer jealousy as a result of the economic and commercial strides made by Mandingoes in the country. Currently there is a reported dominance of certain local trade industries by the Mandingoes – transportation, motor garage, petroleum industry, etc.
The above are just cited as sources of external hatred for the Mandingo community which are baseless and unfounded. This needs not to bother the community. What the community needs is to push forward in unison with purpose and objective.
The most important thing is the internal dispute and sometimes negative classifications that occur within the Mandingo community, and this is where the outsiders see as leakages in their attempts to demeaning the Mandingoes in Liberia: there is a complete disunity amongst Liberian Mandingoes, and the Mandingo ethnic group is the only ethnic group so far seeing in Liberia with a well established elite organization riding and collecting political olive branches using the name of the entire tribe.
The most controversial and what by chance made the National Mandingo Caucus popular in Liberia was its declaration of the vote of the Mandingoes for candidate Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf in the 2005 presidential elections. So many reactions have been written to that effect, and debates have opened and closed on that matter. But the mere fact that such declaration of support by a club of less than twenty men in the name of thousands of innocent people nursing souls of persecutions simply because of the same tribe was a social disservice and complete misrepresentation tantamount to an act of quisling. No one has a moral ground to question a club of less than twenty for their personal political opinions, but to be brave and use the name of an ethnic group in a country where political persecutions are targeted at tribes on the bases of their proximity to presidents or politicians was a mournful and dreadful political error.
Most of the arguments against the caucus at the time can now have sufficient evidence to prove that the few guys used the tribe as canon fodder to obtain positions and business contracts in the government of the candidate they supported. The following are true and indubitable: Most of them are holding positions in the current government; some of them have government contracts; the Caucus has not been heard since 2005; it has made no representation for the Mandingo community anywhere since they attained their objective of entering government and winning contracts; it cannot boast of a roster with fifty registered members.
If this had happened and the community remains loosely connected or its source of unification for purpose remains undefined, then there is a need to revitalize, reform, remake, or design some institutional mechanism that will give leadership direction to the entire Mandingo nation in the Liberian state. The Mandingo nation in Liberia stretches across the territorial landscape of the country. It is one of the few tribes that adapt and settle nearly in all parts of the country. This ubiquity of the tribe in the country which is primarily due to the meaningful trade and commercial activities of its members should be seen as a solid point of rally and strength, not as a point of division as it is unfortunately happening. It is regrettable to observe that people most often refer to others as Lofa Mandingo, Bong County Mandingo, Nimba Mandingo, Monrovia Mandingo, and sometimes Gbonyiaka or Konyianka.
On the other hand, there is a considerable number of people of Mandingo origin who are currently identified with other tribes like the Vai, the Gbandi, The Gio, Manos, Kpelle, etc. Some of these resulted from intermarriages. And some people who are by nature and origin Mandingo are currently identified with tribes in settlements where their grandparents settled during commercial or Islamic missionary activities. These people are most often seen differently by other Mandingoes and sometimes face serious identity crisis as a result of resentments in their settlements and even the tribe (Mandingo) of their origin. The Vais, for example, would refer to people in their settlements-The Kannehs, Nyeis, Kromahs, etc- as Mandingoes, and the Mandingoes would refer to them as Vai. The Massaley’s and Dukuly’s, like the ones from Gbarpolu and Bomi County would be called Mandingoes by the Kpelle, and the Mandingoes would call them Kpelles. There are many other cases of identity crisis for people who are originally of the Mandingo tribe.
These references are made in attempts to question the true identity of people. But what happens in the final analysis is that it further divides the community and opens spaces of distrusts amongst members of the Mandingo tribe.
The tribe is numerically large and economically potent to make significant impacts in the country that no one can question or detest. But making positive impacts can only be achievable with a untied community fronting a common cause. Descriptions in the forms of the regional or dialectical differences in the community are only tantamount to weakening the strength of the community.
I n the midst of these challenges, the current social and political discrepancies that exist in the community with two organizations claiming supremacy or control, further frustrate the prospects of uniting the Mandingo nation in Liberia despite its unique culture, religious commonality and economic viability of its members. These two organizations, the National Mandingo Caucus of Liberia (the elites) and the Concerned Mandingo Society of Liberia or COMASL (the so-called grassrooters) are struggling daily to terminate the existence of each other. The COMASL which has membership in various Mandingo dominated communities pays political loyalty to the perceived liberators of the Mandingoes, but it did so in 2005 by actions left with the discretion of its members, while the Caucus openly declared its loyalty to the candidate of the Unity Party (perceived to be a supporter of the movement that attempted a genocide against the Mandingoes). The dividends from politically auctioning the Mandingo community in 2005 is currently being enjoyed by the Caucus, and it is on the basis of its political propinquity to the status quo and the financial muscles of its members that the caucus is claiming absolute supremacy and it is now inviting all Mandingoes to a national convention with attempts to also merge the COMASL into the structure and objectives of its organization either overtly or covertly. COMASL on the other hand claims supremacy on the basis of its nearness to the people and ability to spontaneously mobilize the people at any given time.
The struggle between the two groups is creating more distrusts in the community as Caucus members and COMASL members are usually engaged in destructive criticisms, but none can actually boast of a meaningful social benefit to the people for the past two years. Does the community actually need them, or does the community really need an umbrella organization? The essence of their existence shall only be determined by the Mandingo community if indeed they are engaged into meaningful programs that yield benefits to the community, or if they actually provide true leadership to the people.
As the Caucus convention nears, it is prudent to find common grounds and allow for the emergence of more Mandingo organizations in the country that must compute with development activities, but not to compute for supremacy only to impress upon others that it has full control which lends it the authority to determine which political movement the Mandingo community should support when national elections nears.
We expect to see from all Mandingo organizations in the country efficient systems of governance, social service programs, cultural activities to unite the people, and empowerment programs that will help the community to continue making meaningful contributions to the development of the country.
The Gbarnga convention, as called by the National Mandingo Caucus, must not be left with the tradition of the caucus, but must see as a priority the need to serve the community with a sense and commitment void of cynicism and cronyism. This convention must be able to carve out ways of intervening and addressing some of the problems face by the Mandingo people in Liberia, including the looming land disputes, and if possible the mandate and function of the caucus must be clearly defined, so as to make public its function and essence of existence. In this way, one would easily know which organization is specialized in social services, development activities, cultural affairs, or political activism and mobilization in the community.
Finally we expect to sharpen lot of contradictions in Gbarnga, and to perforate some of the balloons of impression-making and impersonation. But above all, we hope that the Gbarnga convention will be successful and will provide for a new beginning.
See you in Gbarnga.
Friday, May 1, 2009
CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN XI
ADDRESSING POVERTY IN LIBERIA
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
In attempts to discuss chronic poverty and living standards in a country with abundant resources and favorable climate for agricultural activities – considerable amount of rainfall and sunshine - this edition of the series will assess the meaning of poverty in the Liberian context and its impacts in the rural and urban settings. Intermittently, the writer will attempt to provide recommendations through the analysis.
Finding suitable meaning to poverty in Liberia and its implications in both rural and urban communities will put us in better positions to determine why poverty exists in Liberia, who is poor, and why; and who is rich and how. At present, Liberia is one of the world’s poorest countries, and its people are positioned on a line of disadvantaged in measuring human and social developments – poor maternal health, high level of illiteracy, high level of teenage pregnancy, and prevalence of diseases (TB, Malaria, diarrhea, etc). The country also lags behind in the achievement of the UN Millennium Development goals. These developments, regularly blamed on the 14 year civil wars, are prevailing in a nation rich in rubber, timber, iron ore, gold and diamond, and a vast virgin forest, and a virgin tourism industry. This article does not dismiss the current progress and prospects that lie ahead; its focus is to discuss poverty as it is in Liberia. It is however optimistic that the nation will rise and surmount the problems posed by chronic poverty, but believes that this can only be achieved with a people –centered and visionary leadership.
According to Ted K. Bradshaw, poverty in its most general sense is the lack of necessities. On the basis of shared values of humanity, basic food, shelter, medical care, security and freedom are necessary for the growth and sustainability of an ideal life. When a family, like most Liberian families cannot send their children to school; cannot afford better meals, and lacks economic security and protection from threats and harms, that family is considered poor. Socially, families in such conditions stand the risks of being torn apart badly, and real family life with values become relatively absent. In most instances the children lose confidence in their parents thereby breeding terrible attitudes of indiscipline which soon become burdens on society at large. This is how crimes, illiteracy, prostitution, teenage pregnancy and many social ills are borne in Liberia. In 2005 Save The Children – UK reported that 90 percent of high school girls from a survey conducted in Monrovia survived on prostitution. Recent reports from Gbarpolu and Lofa counties indicate that teenage pregnancy is on the increase. The two counties are in rural Liberia that hosts 73 percent of the country’s poorest (Liberia PRS). If one is to interpret the facial expressions of school-going children in Liberia, it is psychosocially possible to discover that besides thinking of his/her lesson, a child may be worrying about getting a meal to have lunch, tuition and fees, after school meal, and other necessities parents fall short of providing.
Poverty in another term means the absence of development, and the absence of favorable alternatives to an individual in the pursuit of maintaining his human dignity through better living standards. I coined this definition after a tour of several poor communities in Monrovia and its suburbs where I saw the extent to which poverty had consumed the human dignity of people that up to present they use bushes, swamps and beaches for toilets, eat anywhere, and no one can distinguish children from elders because they are all competing for basic life needs at the same time. These people, I again realized were only victims of failed governance systems and poor management of resource that have made the abundant natural resources inaccessible to a small population that have not crossed 3.5 million for over 20 years.
Those communities, most of which are slums, need long term programs in microfinance assistance or grants to help individuals and families get involved with productive activities. And affirmative action through development programs are needed as well to provide for them sources of safe drinking water, good environment and accessible medical care. Sound and efficient local leadership systems that will give communities ownership and managerial control over their own resources will also take us steps forward in reducing poverty across the country.
Development reports continue to present the case of poverty as prevalent in rural Liberia, while this series does not intend to challenge that, its author believes that urban-based poverty is also prevalent and it is the worst because it is a major cause of crimes and prostitutions, and also political uprisings. Reports of poverty in Liberia must therefore present fair cases base on threat potential and security analyses.
Urban communities are sensitive to lot of things, including political situations, prices in commodities, and new technologies. While the rate of poverty relative to the affected communities threats people in varying ways, the tendency of urban-based poverty to get terrible reactions that destabilizes nations is very high. It is believed that most people migrate to urban areas due to the lack of viable economic activities, and efficient social services in the rural settlements.
Most of those that sometimes migrate to urban areas are young people in search of greener pastures or in pursuit of educational goals. With their resettlements in the urban areas without available jobs also lead to mass urban youth unemployment. The Government of Liberia and development institutions must therefore be sensitive to these facts. To avoid mass urban migration that is sometimes a cause of mass urban unemployment, Liberia needs to focus on a more pragmatic system of decentralizing economic and educational activities. The rural communities must be given better incentives to promote agricultural activities and employment. Better education and health services must also be extended to communities in rural Liberia.
Above all, government must ensure a transparent and equitable distribution of the natural resources across the landscape. Concentrating resources in one place with few people threatens peace and security everywhere in the country. Finally, it is prudent to reemphasize that addressing poverty in Liberia needs to be done with a pragmatic approach that must ensure the opening of rural communities. This can be done through affirmative action mainly for counties or communities that are mostly affected by poverty.
-In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, The Pen Shall Never Run Dry-
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY, PROFESSIONALISM VS. INDIVIDUAL GRUDGE: THE CASE OF FRONT PAGE AFRICA AND LAWRENCE BROPLEH
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
Ethics in every profession requires nothing more than rules of integrity and procedures that ensure rights of clients and the responsibility of the practioners to the clients. Professionalism on duty can be simply described as the practical demonstration of ethics.
Media ethics stress among other things, confidentiality and the protection of source(s). It also emphasizes the rights of newsmakers in any case, and spurns privacy invasion. This is a rudimentary premise set for the common reader to understand the issues that sometimes appear to be complicated to a bedazzled state where editors and writers found canopying shields to vent out individual frustrations or rancor against other people, particularly when caught in self-made disputes.
It is so obvious that the current dispensation has allowed for much press freedom. This is a great victory for all activists of press freedom and democracy. What remains a major challenge in consolidating true democracy is to build in the press traits of ethical responsibilities and professionalisms that will ensure the rights of the readers and the rights of the newsmakers as well from the hordes of privacy invasions in today’s media that are mostly blown out of extreme emotions, senile ambitions, incompetence, and individual bitterness.
The current media landscape in Liberia can boast of at least 15 local dailies on the newsstand every working day. This unhindered presence of papers on the newsstand tells of the level of freedom media houses and practitioners enjoy in the country currently. This is however not the issue, because it was advocated for and it has been achieved.
The issue here now is how to have the free press sustained. Can it be done through arrogant reportage or ridiculous flippancies that bring no real news, but mere stories associated with news makers? Of course not. The element of prominence in news writing does not mean whatsoever a prominent person does is news. The issue must be newsworthy before the aspect of prominence is counted.
The above analysis of professionalism and ethics in news writing is attempted to make a decisive intervention in what seems to appear as a rancorous outburst against Information Minister Lawrence Bropleh by the Front Page Africa Website.
In several articles, the FPA had been overwhelmed with personal grief and emotions at the expense of the journalistic profession which among all of its requirements emphasizes objectivity and neutrality of a news writer. Over the years, the FPA has become a popular site for its groundbreaking news on corruption, e.g. The Email Scam. Whether the FPA has been right in entering or hacking into personal emails, a real example of cyber crime is a question. But that does not in any way radiate any commitment to the anti-corruption fight launched in this country, and it is also no indicator of good journalism, because a public relations media outlet for an overzealous “Accountant” harboring future political ambitions does not signal objectivity to the intelligentsia.
The FPA has been finally brought to the fore, and all skeletal bones of its operations as a propaganda machine of the politician wearing mask and garment of an “Accountant” is now made public as everyone sees its articles and the sides of the pendulum it swings particularly when the “Accountant’s” interests is known.
In its 2008 purported Cabinet grade sheet, the FPA in flagrant ignominy and audacious show of odium against Lawrence Bropleh, graded the venerated Information Minister an ‘F’ indicating, according to Liberian local schooling system, that the Information Minister and his Ministry ‘performed dismally’, and ‘did not achieve anything for the year’. This grading was however laughable because lot of professional Liberians working in the Cabinet who have made significant strides in reforming and accelerating our development process were also stab by the spineless saw of the FPA. What a sheer fallacy and frivolous show of ethical misconduct and professional crime? Was the Front Page on the Back Page when the MICAT was making significant gains in 2008 including programs of empowering and trainings for local journalists, or was its lenses covered with dusts when the MICAT in partnership with CSOs finalized and presented three draft media laws for enactment into law? Generally, can the FPA tell under whose administrative direction has the MICAT ever organized an uninterrupted weekly press briefing in this country, or under whose leadership has the MICAT ever been vibrant in all functions-information, culture and the newly explored virgin tourism industry? Though all empirical evidence can speak of the visionary leadership of Lawrence Bropleh that has transformed the MICAT, the FPA is yet to appreciate that. But Bropleh’s achievements or that of any other Liberian cannot be left to be measured by a mercenary media outlet, but by the Liberian people whose confidence Bropleh and his likes of level-headed and concerned citizens continue to feast with pride as a result of their invaluable service to the nation.
The most recent and controversial version of FPA’s smear campaigns against outstanding public servants is its futile attempt to distract Lawrence Bropleh from the speed at which he is moving with progress in the Information Ministry, and his information revolution that has now made Government widely open and visible like a public theatre. This move by the FPA, as can be described by the British media expert, James Shell, is nothing other than abusing the rights of press freedom ‘to fulfill illegal mercenary duties’.
In an article entitled “Did Bropleh Mislead ‘Investor’? Minister Denies Peddling, Misusing Sirleaf’s Name”, the FPA neglected all professional responsibilities in an attempt to destroy Lawrence Bropleh. With all clarities from the Minister, the FPA concluded by listing the Minister among those in the habit of influence peddling by using the President’s name. The article also refused to appreciate all the nationalistic steps taken by Bropleh to salvage the natural resources form the ‘profiteering-philanthropist’, but the FPA rather kept on frivolity expecting to be on the side of the truth by rallying unfounded grounds that would at all cost implicate the Minister. Any objective analysis of the interaction between the Minister and the Belgian trader under the guise of a ‘philanthropist’ cannot indict Bropleh for influence peddling as the FPA would want people to believe. It takes a dedicated public servant to take the position Bropleh took during his interactions with the Belgian trader.
In this propaganda piece, the FPA committed sixty-five grammatical errors ranging from poor sentence construction to unparallel flow of ideas and from careless mechanics to serious conflicts between the subjects and the verbs. Seven illogical arguments and numerous breaches of professional ethics from the article were also discovered. The FPA however does not care as to whether the intelligentsia will form an opinion against this article considering its bold-faced absurdities, poor construction, ill-fated logic and disjointed arguments. What the FPA cares for is to tarnish, and discredit people of distinguishable records who fail to succumb to their overtures. What a futile adventure? This cannot in any way discourage or minimize the enthusiasm of Lawrence Bropleh nor can it have him distracted from his services to this country.
The next part of this article will expose the source of FPA’s support or the station that is fueling it propaganda machine against hardworking Liberians.
Ethics in every profession requires nothing more than rules of integrity and procedures that ensure rights of clients and the responsibility of the practioners to the clients. Professionalism on duty can be simply described as the practical demonstration of ethics.
Media ethics stress among other things, confidentiality and the protection of source(s). It also emphasizes the rights of newsmakers in any case, and spurns privacy invasion. This is a rudimentary premise set for the common reader to understand the issues that sometimes appear to be complicated to a bedazzled state where editors and writers found canopying shields to vent out individual frustrations or rancor against other people, particularly when caught in self-made disputes.
It is so obvious that the current dispensation has allowed for much press freedom. This is a great victory for all activists of press freedom and democracy. What remains a major challenge in consolidating true democracy is to build in the press traits of ethical responsibilities and professionalisms that will ensure the rights of the readers and the rights of the newsmakers as well from the hordes of privacy invasions in today’s media that are mostly blown out of extreme emotions, senile ambitions, incompetence, and individual bitterness.
The current media landscape in Liberia can boast of at least 15 local dailies on the newsstand every working day. This unhindered presence of papers on the newsstand tells of the level of freedom media houses and practitioners enjoy in the country currently. This is however not the issue, because it was advocated for and it has been achieved.
The issue here now is how to have the free press sustained. Can it be done through arrogant reportage or ridiculous flippancies that bring no real news, but mere stories associated with news makers? Of course not. The element of prominence in news writing does not mean whatsoever a prominent person does is news. The issue must be newsworthy before the aspect of prominence is counted.
The above analysis of professionalism and ethics in news writing is attempted to make a decisive intervention in what seems to appear as a rancorous outburst against Information Minister Lawrence Bropleh by the Front Page Africa Website.
In several articles, the FPA had been overwhelmed with personal grief and emotions at the expense of the journalistic profession which among all of its requirements emphasizes objectivity and neutrality of a news writer. Over the years, the FPA has become a popular site for its groundbreaking news on corruption, e.g. The Email Scam. Whether the FPA has been right in entering or hacking into personal emails, a real example of cyber crime is a question. But that does not in any way radiate any commitment to the anti-corruption fight launched in this country, and it is also no indicator of good journalism, because a public relations media outlet for an overzealous “Accountant” harboring future political ambitions does not signal objectivity to the intelligentsia.
The FPA has been finally brought to the fore, and all skeletal bones of its operations as a propaganda machine of the politician wearing mask and garment of an “Accountant” is now made public as everyone sees its articles and the sides of the pendulum it swings particularly when the “Accountant’s” interests is known.
In its 2008 purported Cabinet grade sheet, the FPA in flagrant ignominy and audacious show of odium against Lawrence Bropleh, graded the venerated Information Minister an ‘F’ indicating, according to Liberian local schooling system, that the Information Minister and his Ministry ‘performed dismally’, and ‘did not achieve anything for the year’. This grading was however laughable because lot of professional Liberians working in the Cabinet who have made significant strides in reforming and accelerating our development process were also stab by the spineless saw of the FPA. What a sheer fallacy and frivolous show of ethical misconduct and professional crime? Was the Front Page on the Back Page when the MICAT was making significant gains in 2008 including programs of empowering and trainings for local journalists, or was its lenses covered with dusts when the MICAT in partnership with CSOs finalized and presented three draft media laws for enactment into law? Generally, can the FPA tell under whose administrative direction has the MICAT ever organized an uninterrupted weekly press briefing in this country, or under whose leadership has the MICAT ever been vibrant in all functions-information, culture and the newly explored virgin tourism industry? Though all empirical evidence can speak of the visionary leadership of Lawrence Bropleh that has transformed the MICAT, the FPA is yet to appreciate that. But Bropleh’s achievements or that of any other Liberian cannot be left to be measured by a mercenary media outlet, but by the Liberian people whose confidence Bropleh and his likes of level-headed and concerned citizens continue to feast with pride as a result of their invaluable service to the nation.
The most recent and controversial version of FPA’s smear campaigns against outstanding public servants is its futile attempt to distract Lawrence Bropleh from the speed at which he is moving with progress in the Information Ministry, and his information revolution that has now made Government widely open and visible like a public theatre. This move by the FPA, as can be described by the British media expert, James Shell, is nothing other than abusing the rights of press freedom ‘to fulfill illegal mercenary duties’.
In an article entitled “Did Bropleh Mislead ‘Investor’? Minister Denies Peddling, Misusing Sirleaf’s Name”, the FPA neglected all professional responsibilities in an attempt to destroy Lawrence Bropleh. With all clarities from the Minister, the FPA concluded by listing the Minister among those in the habit of influence peddling by using the President’s name. The article also refused to appreciate all the nationalistic steps taken by Bropleh to salvage the natural resources form the ‘profiteering-philanthropist’, but the FPA rather kept on frivolity expecting to be on the side of the truth by rallying unfounded grounds that would at all cost implicate the Minister. Any objective analysis of the interaction between the Minister and the Belgian trader under the guise of a ‘philanthropist’ cannot indict Bropleh for influence peddling as the FPA would want people to believe. It takes a dedicated public servant to take the position Bropleh took during his interactions with the Belgian trader.
In this propaganda piece, the FPA committed sixty-five grammatical errors ranging from poor sentence construction to unparallel flow of ideas and from careless mechanics to serious conflicts between the subjects and the verbs. Seven illogical arguments and numerous breaches of professional ethics from the article were also discovered. The FPA however does not care as to whether the intelligentsia will form an opinion against this article considering its bold-faced absurdities, poor construction, ill-fated logic and disjointed arguments. What the FPA cares for is to tarnish, and discredit people of distinguishable records who fail to succumb to their overtures. What a futile adventure? This cannot in any way discourage or minimize the enthusiasm of Lawrence Bropleh nor can it have him distracted from his services to this country.
The next part of this article will expose the source of FPA’s support or the station that is fueling it propaganda machine against hardworking Liberians.
ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY, PROFESSIONALISM VS INDIVIDUAL GRUDGE: THE CASE OF FRONT PAGE AFRICA AND LAWRENCE BROPLEH
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
Ethics in every profession requires nothing more than rules of integrity and procedures that ensure rights of clients and the responsibility of the practioners to the clients. Professionalism on duty can be simply described as the practical demonstration of ethics.
Media ethics stress among other things, confidentiality and the protection of source(s). It also emphasizes the rights of newsmakers in any case, and spurns privacy invasion. This is a rudimentary premise set for the common reader to understand the issues that sometimes appear to be complicated to a bedazzled state where editors and writers found canopying shields to vent out individual frustrations or rancor against other people, particularly when caught in self-made disputes.
It is so obvious that the current dispensation has allowed for much press freedom. This is a great victory for all activists of press freedom and democracy. What remains a major challenge in consolidating true democracy is to build in the press traits of ethical responsibilities and professionalisms that will ensure the rights of the readers and the rights of the newsmakers as well from the hordes of privacy invasions in today’s media that are mostly blown out of extreme emotions, senile ambitions, incompetence, and individual bitterness.
The current media landscape in Liberia can boast of at least 15 local dailies on the newsstand every working day. This unhindered presence of papers on the newsstand tells of the level of freedom media houses and practitioners enjoy in the country currently. This is however not the issue, because it was advocated for and it has been achieved.
The issue here now is how to have the free press sustained. Can it be done through arrogant reportage or ridiculous flippancies that bring no real news, but mere stories associated with news makers? Of course not. The element of prominence in news writing does not mean whatsoever a prominent person does is news. The issue must be newsworthy before the aspect of prominence is counted.
The above analysis of professionalism and ethics in news writing is attempted to make a decisive intervention in what seems to appear as a rancorous outburst against Information Minister Lawrence Bropleh by the Front Page Africa Website.
In several articles, the FPA had been overwhelmed with personal grief and emotions at the expense of the journalistic profession which among all of its requirements emphasizes objectivity and neutrality of a news writer. Over the years, the FPA has become a popular site for its groundbreaking news on corruption, e.g. The Email Scam. Whether the FPA has been right in entering or hacking into personal emails, a real example of cyber crime is a question. But that does not in any way radiate any commitment to the anti-corruption fight launched in this country, and it is also no indicator of good journalism, because a public relations media outlet for an overzealous “Accountant” harboring future political ambitions does not signal objectivity to the intelligentsia.
The FPA has been finally brought to the fore, and all skeletal bones of its operations as a propaganda machine of the politician wearing mask and garment of an “Accountant” is now made public as everyone sees its articles and the sides of the pendulum it swings particularly when the “Accountant’s” interests is known.
In its 2008 purported Cabinet grade sheet, the FPA in flagrant ignominy and audacious show of odium against Lawrence Bropleh, graded the venerated Information Minister an ‘F’ indicating, according to Liberian local schooling system, that the Information Minister and his Ministry ‘performed dismally’, and ‘did not achieve anything for the year’. This grading was however laughable because lot of professional Liberians working in the Cabinet who have made significant strides in reforming and accelerating our development process were also stab by the spineless saw of the FPA. What a sheer fallacy and frivolous show of ethical misconduct and professional crime? Was the Front Page on the Back Page when the MICAT was making significant gains in 2008 including programs of empowering and trainings for local journalists, or was its lenses covered with dusts when the MICAT in partnership with CSOs finalized and presented three draft media laws for enactment into law? Generally, can the FPA tell under whose administrative direction has the MICAT ever organized an uninterrupted weekly press briefing in this country, or under whose leadership has the MICAT ever been vibrant in all functions-information, culture and the newly explored virgin tourism industry? Though all empirical evidence can speak of the visionary leadership of Lawrence Bropleh that has transformed the MICAT, the FPA is yet to appreciate that. But Bropleh’s achievements or that of any other Liberian cannot be left to be measured by a mercenary media outlet, but by the Liberian people whose confidence Bropleh and his likes of level-headed and concerned citizens continue to feast with pride as a result of their invaluable service to the nation.
The most recent and controversial version of FPA’s smear campaigns against outstanding public servants is its futile attempt to distract Lawrence Bropleh from the speed at which he is moving with progress in the Information Ministry, and his information revolution that has now made Government widely open and visible like a public theatre. This move by the FPA, as can be described by the British media expert, James Shell, is nothing other than abusing the rights of press freedom ‘to fulfill illegal mercenary duties’.
In an article entitled “Did Bropleh Mislead ‘Investor’? Minister Denies Peddling, Misusing Sirleaf’s Name”, the FPA neglected all professional responsibilities in an attempt to destroy Lawrence Bropleh. With all clarities from the Minister, the FPA concluded by listing the Minister among those in the habit of influence peddling by using the President’s name. The article also refused to appreciate all the nationalistic steps taken by Bropleh to salvage the natural resources form the ‘profiteering-philanthropist’, but the FPA rather kept on frivolity expecting to be on the side of the truth by rallying unfounded grounds that would at all cost implicate the Minister. Any objective analysis of the interaction between the Minister and the Belgian trader under the guise of a ‘philanthropist’ cannot indict Bropleh for influence peddling as the FPA would want people to believe. It takes a dedicated public servant to take the position Bropleh took during his interactions with the Belgian trader.
In this propaganda piece, the FPA committed sixty-five grammatical errors ranging from poor sentence construction to unparallel flow of ideas and from careless mechanics to serious conflicts between the subjects and the verbs. Seven illogical arguments and numerous breaches of professional ethics from the article were also discovered. The FPA however does not care as to whether the intelligentsia will form an opinion against this article considering its bold-faced absurdities, poor construction, ill-fated logic and disjointed arguments. What the FPA cares for is to tarnish, and discredit people of distinguishable records who fail to succumb to their overtures. What a futile adventure? This cannot in any way discourage or minimize the enthusiasm of Lawrence Bropleh nor can it have him distracted from his services to this country.
The next part of this article will expose the source of FPA’s support or the station that is fueling it propaganda machine against hardworking Liberians.
Ethics in every profession requires nothing more than rules of integrity and procedures that ensure rights of clients and the responsibility of the practioners to the clients. Professionalism on duty can be simply described as the practical demonstration of ethics.
Media ethics stress among other things, confidentiality and the protection of source(s). It also emphasizes the rights of newsmakers in any case, and spurns privacy invasion. This is a rudimentary premise set for the common reader to understand the issues that sometimes appear to be complicated to a bedazzled state where editors and writers found canopying shields to vent out individual frustrations or rancor against other people, particularly when caught in self-made disputes.
It is so obvious that the current dispensation has allowed for much press freedom. This is a great victory for all activists of press freedom and democracy. What remains a major challenge in consolidating true democracy is to build in the press traits of ethical responsibilities and professionalisms that will ensure the rights of the readers and the rights of the newsmakers as well from the hordes of privacy invasions in today’s media that are mostly blown out of extreme emotions, senile ambitions, incompetence, and individual bitterness.
The current media landscape in Liberia can boast of at least 15 local dailies on the newsstand every working day. This unhindered presence of papers on the newsstand tells of the level of freedom media houses and practitioners enjoy in the country currently. This is however not the issue, because it was advocated for and it has been achieved.
The issue here now is how to have the free press sustained. Can it be done through arrogant reportage or ridiculous flippancies that bring no real news, but mere stories associated with news makers? Of course not. The element of prominence in news writing does not mean whatsoever a prominent person does is news. The issue must be newsworthy before the aspect of prominence is counted.
The above analysis of professionalism and ethics in news writing is attempted to make a decisive intervention in what seems to appear as a rancorous outburst against Information Minister Lawrence Bropleh by the Front Page Africa Website.
In several articles, the FPA had been overwhelmed with personal grief and emotions at the expense of the journalistic profession which among all of its requirements emphasizes objectivity and neutrality of a news writer. Over the years, the FPA has become a popular site for its groundbreaking news on corruption, e.g. The Email Scam. Whether the FPA has been right in entering or hacking into personal emails, a real example of cyber crime is a question. But that does not in any way radiate any commitment to the anti-corruption fight launched in this country, and it is also no indicator of good journalism, because a public relations media outlet for an overzealous “Accountant” harboring future political ambitions does not signal objectivity to the intelligentsia.
The FPA has been finally brought to the fore, and all skeletal bones of its operations as a propaganda machine of the politician wearing mask and garment of an “Accountant” is now made public as everyone sees its articles and the sides of the pendulum it swings particularly when the “Accountant’s” interests is known.
In its 2008 purported Cabinet grade sheet, the FPA in flagrant ignominy and audacious show of odium against Lawrence Bropleh, graded the venerated Information Minister an ‘F’ indicating, according to Liberian local schooling system, that the Information Minister and his Ministry ‘performed dismally’, and ‘did not achieve anything for the year’. This grading was however laughable because lot of professional Liberians working in the Cabinet who have made significant strides in reforming and accelerating our development process were also stab by the spineless saw of the FPA. What a sheer fallacy and frivolous show of ethical misconduct and professional crime? Was the Front Page on the Back Page when the MICAT was making significant gains in 2008 including programs of empowering and trainings for local journalists, or was its lenses covered with dusts when the MICAT in partnership with CSOs finalized and presented three draft media laws for enactment into law? Generally, can the FPA tell under whose administrative direction has the MICAT ever organized an uninterrupted weekly press briefing in this country, or under whose leadership has the MICAT ever been vibrant in all functions-information, culture and the newly explored virgin tourism industry? Though all empirical evidence can speak of the visionary leadership of Lawrence Bropleh that has transformed the MICAT, the FPA is yet to appreciate that. But Bropleh’s achievements or that of any other Liberian cannot be left to be measured by a mercenary media outlet, but by the Liberian people whose confidence Bropleh and his likes of level-headed and concerned citizens continue to feast with pride as a result of their invaluable service to the nation.
The most recent and controversial version of FPA’s smear campaigns against outstanding public servants is its futile attempt to distract Lawrence Bropleh from the speed at which he is moving with progress in the Information Ministry, and his information revolution that has now made Government widely open and visible like a public theatre. This move by the FPA, as can be described by the British media expert, James Shell, is nothing other than abusing the rights of press freedom ‘to fulfill illegal mercenary duties’.
In an article entitled “Did Bropleh Mislead ‘Investor’? Minister Denies Peddling, Misusing Sirleaf’s Name”, the FPA neglected all professional responsibilities in an attempt to destroy Lawrence Bropleh. With all clarities from the Minister, the FPA concluded by listing the Minister among those in the habit of influence peddling by using the President’s name. The article also refused to appreciate all the nationalistic steps taken by Bropleh to salvage the natural resources form the ‘profiteering-philanthropist’, but the FPA rather kept on frivolity expecting to be on the side of the truth by rallying unfounded grounds that would at all cost implicate the Minister. Any objective analysis of the interaction between the Minister and the Belgian trader under the guise of a ‘philanthropist’ cannot indict Bropleh for influence peddling as the FPA would want people to believe. It takes a dedicated public servant to take the position Bropleh took during his interactions with the Belgian trader.
In this propaganda piece, the FPA committed sixty-five grammatical errors ranging from poor sentence construction to unparallel flow of ideas and from careless mechanics to serious conflicts between the subjects and the verbs. Seven illogical arguments and numerous breaches of professional ethics from the article were also discovered. The FPA however does not care as to whether the intelligentsia will form an opinion against this article considering its bold-faced absurdities, poor construction, ill-fated logic and disjointed arguments. What the FPA cares for is to tarnish, and discredit people of distinguishable records who fail to succumb to their overtures. What a futile adventure? This cannot in any way discourage or minimize the enthusiasm of Lawrence Bropleh nor can it have him distracted from his services to this country.
The next part of this article will expose the source of FPA’s support or the station that is fueling it propaganda machine against hardworking Liberians.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
THE IMPORTANCE OF DEMOCRACY AND YOUTH DEVELOPMENT IN POST-CONFLICT LIBERIA
STATEMENT DELIVERED BY IBRAHIM AL-BAKRI NYEI AT A ONE-DAY SYMPOSIUM ORGANIZZED BY THE YOUTH UNITED FOR CHANGE IN THE TOWNSHIP OF NEW GEORGIAON MARCH 28, 2009
I was pleased and honored to have received a note of invitation from the Youth United for Change to present a paper on a very important and challenging topic that has a resounding relevance in contemporary political discourses and the reconstruction o9f our war-torn nation.
Upon receipt of the invitation, several thoughts began to pierce my mind. First, I was flattered by the invitation considering my limitations and the abundance of knowledgeable and resourceful men and women in Liberia including many prominent youth activities.
Second, I began to wonder as to why a specific topic considering democracy and youth must be a subject of the discourse, and particularly assigned to me.
Having undergone several thoughts and reflections in which my memories recalled the participation of young people in governance, and the terrible consequences that can be visited upon the young people when the society breaks into anarchy and the machineries of government cease to functionally impact their lives, I was quick to realize the essence of the blending. That was what I think liberated me from what I earlier saw as a mental incarceration.
However, it is of significant interest and a resounding prospect for progressive developments in Liberia to see young people in the midst of socio-economic challenges, mobilizing themselves into civil society groups to find alternative solutions to the complex political and socio-economic problems facing the country. Indeed this is a laudable venture which must be encouraged and promoted across the country.
When I received the invitation calling me to present on the topic “The importance of Democracy and youth Development”, I saw it as a broad topic that stretches beyond the horizon with academic and scholarship potentials to demand a global understanding. Again considering our immediate history and national demands as a post-conflict state in still in transition, I thought it necessary to narrow the topic to a particular setting using a case study.
I therefore seek your indulgence my distinguish audience and organizers to permit me to modify the topic as “The Importance of Democracy and Youth Development in Post-conflict Liberia”.
According to experts of international relations, from 1989-2003, the Liberian state ceased to exist as a functional sovereign authority with monopoly over the use of violence. The state deeply sank into terror when rebel forces or illegal citizen organizations under the guise of Liberation groups competed with the state on the use of violence. Liberia therefore became qualified to be listed in the category of ‘failed-states’.
It is important to briefly retrospect on the undemocratic nature of governance in Liberia that opened the precipice of grief, mass frustration and distrust, and finally the violence and the civil war.
The history of governance in Liberia is replete with a tradition of undemocratic practices and imperial leadership. For over 100 years an ethic minority of Americo –Liberian built an absolute and hegemonic control over all facets of the Liberian society, from the politics to the economy and to the social institutions
This kept the country polarized with fears because the vast majority of indigenous African ethnic groups were kept marginalized, disenfranchised, economically dispossessed, and were reduced to subservient levels.
The challenge to the autocracy was built by young Liberians who organized various pressure groups to demand change, reforms and equitable distributions of the nation’s wealth.
Finally, the Americo-Liberian hegemony was deposed by another group of young Liberians enlisted in the armed forces through a bloody coup. It was a sad day in history, because coup d’état in all its forms, is illegal, unconstitutional, barbaric, and a recipe for war and instability.
The history of activism, agitation, and the 1980 coup d’état tells that the youths have been actively involved with the nation’s body-politics, and have been the main engine of change in the country.
After years of governance failure, civil war and mass social dislocation, Liberia is today called a “shadow state”. A shadow state is a state that is fragile with high potential of descending into chaos. For Liberia to move to an ideal state status, with a dependent economy, venerated status in the international community, the need for democratic governance and empowerment of young people must be considered san quo non in our national development agenda.
Democracy must be the art and not and just word of the government and people. But what is democracy. Democracy is a concept that most African leaders have not understood. It is a concept still misunderstood and misused in a time when dictatorships and autocratic regimes have attempted to claim popular support by pinning democratic labels upon themselves. In their self-delusions of running democratic governments, we see massive under developments of the continent, pillage and plunder of resources, extreme poverty, and rigging of elections.
In the phrase of Abraham Lincoln, democracy is a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”, but in a scholarly and theoretical definition, “democracy is a government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system”. Democracy goes beyond the periodic holding of elections. A viable democracy entails the unrestricted participation of the people in governance under a constitutional authority, equitable distribution of resources, and systems of transparency and accountability in governance. Liberia needs nothing less than the above to build its democratic credentials.
Democracy is therefore important in post conflict Liberia. It is only in a system of viable democracy that citizens freely work to reduce poverty and protect sustainable national development.
The young people that account for over sixty percent of the population of Liberia must be seen as the central focus in post conflict development initiative. The youths have participated in the country’s politics mainly during the years of war not as lead campaigners with conscious objectives but as agents or stooges fronting for the aggrandizement and interests of adults who had hidden economic and political agenda.
Empowering the young people must not in any way be reduced to a campaign of mobilizing political support this time around. It must be done with the clear objectives of meeting the national priorities of reconstruction and poverty reduction.
Youth development must entail the initiation of sustainable programs that will support both educational and economic empowerments. If the youths actively participate in the economy, it is most likely to have accelerated economic development, and a dramatic decline in crime, violence and instability in the country.
Youth development in post conflict Liberia is of relative importance to the building of a strong human security system. Security now no more depends on the formation of large armies with sophisticated weaponry, but the protection of individuals from violent comes, economic exploitations and social injustices. This is a new concept called Human security. This includes protecting people from hunger, disease, and natural disasters.
If the young people who are the reservoir of the productive energy of our society are economically and educationally empowered, those vice that threaten our human security will be drastically reduced.
Finally, my distinguished audience, I challenge you all to build a consciousness of national service and take on self initiative in the communities. See the nation as your own, the government as your making, work to promote the nation by respecting and supporting the government, demand your rights peacefully and be able to exercise your supreme power legally. Through this we can together build durable democracy, and provide development alternatives that will give the young people multiple options to better living standards.
In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, The Pen Shall Never Run Dry
I was pleased and honored to have received a note of invitation from the Youth United for Change to present a paper on a very important and challenging topic that has a resounding relevance in contemporary political discourses and the reconstruction o9f our war-torn nation.
Upon receipt of the invitation, several thoughts began to pierce my mind. First, I was flattered by the invitation considering my limitations and the abundance of knowledgeable and resourceful men and women in Liberia including many prominent youth activities.
Second, I began to wonder as to why a specific topic considering democracy and youth must be a subject of the discourse, and particularly assigned to me.
Having undergone several thoughts and reflections in which my memories recalled the participation of young people in governance, and the terrible consequences that can be visited upon the young people when the society breaks into anarchy and the machineries of government cease to functionally impact their lives, I was quick to realize the essence of the blending. That was what I think liberated me from what I earlier saw as a mental incarceration.
However, it is of significant interest and a resounding prospect for progressive developments in Liberia to see young people in the midst of socio-economic challenges, mobilizing themselves into civil society groups to find alternative solutions to the complex political and socio-economic problems facing the country. Indeed this is a laudable venture which must be encouraged and promoted across the country.
When I received the invitation calling me to present on the topic “The importance of Democracy and youth Development”, I saw it as a broad topic that stretches beyond the horizon with academic and scholarship potentials to demand a global understanding. Again considering our immediate history and national demands as a post-conflict state in still in transition, I thought it necessary to narrow the topic to a particular setting using a case study.
I therefore seek your indulgence my distinguish audience and organizers to permit me to modify the topic as “The Importance of Democracy and Youth Development in Post-conflict Liberia”.
According to experts of international relations, from 1989-2003, the Liberian state ceased to exist as a functional sovereign authority with monopoly over the use of violence. The state deeply sank into terror when rebel forces or illegal citizen organizations under the guise of Liberation groups competed with the state on the use of violence. Liberia therefore became qualified to be listed in the category of ‘failed-states’.
It is important to briefly retrospect on the undemocratic nature of governance in Liberia that opened the precipice of grief, mass frustration and distrust, and finally the violence and the civil war.
The history of governance in Liberia is replete with a tradition of undemocratic practices and imperial leadership. For over 100 years an ethic minority of Americo –Liberian built an absolute and hegemonic control over all facets of the Liberian society, from the politics to the economy and to the social institutions
This kept the country polarized with fears because the vast majority of indigenous African ethnic groups were kept marginalized, disenfranchised, economically dispossessed, and were reduced to subservient levels.
The challenge to the autocracy was built by young Liberians who organized various pressure groups to demand change, reforms and equitable distributions of the nation’s wealth.
Finally, the Americo-Liberian hegemony was deposed by another group of young Liberians enlisted in the armed forces through a bloody coup. It was a sad day in history, because coup d’état in all its forms, is illegal, unconstitutional, barbaric, and a recipe for war and instability.
The history of activism, agitation, and the 1980 coup d’état tells that the youths have been actively involved with the nation’s body-politics, and have been the main engine of change in the country.
After years of governance failure, civil war and mass social dislocation, Liberia is today called a “shadow state”. A shadow state is a state that is fragile with high potential of descending into chaos. For Liberia to move to an ideal state status, with a dependent economy, venerated status in the international community, the need for democratic governance and empowerment of young people must be considered san quo non in our national development agenda.
Democracy must be the art and not and just word of the government and people. But what is democracy. Democracy is a concept that most African leaders have not understood. It is a concept still misunderstood and misused in a time when dictatorships and autocratic regimes have attempted to claim popular support by pinning democratic labels upon themselves. In their self-delusions of running democratic governments, we see massive under developments of the continent, pillage and plunder of resources, extreme poverty, and rigging of elections.
In the phrase of Abraham Lincoln, democracy is a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”, but in a scholarly and theoretical definition, “democracy is a government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system”. Democracy goes beyond the periodic holding of elections. A viable democracy entails the unrestricted participation of the people in governance under a constitutional authority, equitable distribution of resources, and systems of transparency and accountability in governance. Liberia needs nothing less than the above to build its democratic credentials.
Democracy is therefore important in post conflict Liberia. It is only in a system of viable democracy that citizens freely work to reduce poverty and protect sustainable national development.
The young people that account for over sixty percent of the population of Liberia must be seen as the central focus in post conflict development initiative. The youths have participated in the country’s politics mainly during the years of war not as lead campaigners with conscious objectives but as agents or stooges fronting for the aggrandizement and interests of adults who had hidden economic and political agenda.
Empowering the young people must not in any way be reduced to a campaign of mobilizing political support this time around. It must be done with the clear objectives of meeting the national priorities of reconstruction and poverty reduction.
Youth development must entail the initiation of sustainable programs that will support both educational and economic empowerments. If the youths actively participate in the economy, it is most likely to have accelerated economic development, and a dramatic decline in crime, violence and instability in the country.
Youth development in post conflict Liberia is of relative importance to the building of a strong human security system. Security now no more depends on the formation of large armies with sophisticated weaponry, but the protection of individuals from violent comes, economic exploitations and social injustices. This is a new concept called Human security. This includes protecting people from hunger, disease, and natural disasters.
If the young people who are the reservoir of the productive energy of our society are economically and educationally empowered, those vice that threaten our human security will be drastically reduced.
Finally, my distinguished audience, I challenge you all to build a consciousness of national service and take on self initiative in the communities. See the nation as your own, the government as your making, work to promote the nation by respecting and supporting the government, demand your rights peacefully and be able to exercise your supreme power legally. Through this we can together build durable democracy, and provide development alternatives that will give the young people multiple options to better living standards.
In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, The Pen Shall Never Run Dry
Another Perspective on Liberia
By Heidi Baumgartner
Hunter College High School, New York
Leaving Roberts International Airport after a long flight from frigid New York City to Liberia, faint shadows of the landscape were all I could see of the new continent I had just landed on. It was a late hour of a humid February night when I arrived in West Africa with my teacher and one of his former students. For the next ten days I would be aiding them with humanitarian work, and exploring a place that was like nothing I had seen before. It was my first time in a third-world country and had no idea of what to expect in an area that only a few short years prior was a war zone.
An unexpected lack of running water and a broken generator awaited us at the house in Congo Town where we stayed that night. These conditions are commonplace to the majority of Liberians, but I admittedly was in a bit of a shock at having to grope my way through the darkness to the bed that the three of us had to share. Never having been deprived of running water, electricity and privacy, which as an American I had always considered essential resources that one could not live without, I was awakened to the fact that what I had always taken for granted could be considered a set of luxuries to others.
The closest previous contact I had with hardship was through my mother’s stories of growing up in impoverished Communist Poland after World War II. Her descriptions of the abject conditions she had to endure as a child were vivid in my mind as I thought about what I would find life to be like in this part of the world that was new to me, which was also still emerging from terrible civil conflict. But how similar could modern Liberia be to an Eastern European country fifty years ago?
My mother recollects much about the lasting effects of the war that ravaged the country. As has happened in Liberia, many buildings and roads in Poland were destroyed; centralized electricity and running water disappeared in many parts of the country. Water had to be carried from the bottom of the hill that my mother’s family lived on, up to the second floor of the building. The first floor was used as a schoolhouse, where seven large classes were fit into four rooms. Her father—my grandfather—was among the first group of college graduates in the country to receive a master’s degree after the war. He subsequently became a schoolteacher in an effort to contribute to the rebuilding of Poland. However, it was difficult. Several million Polish people had died in the war, the economy was destroyed, and the capital city was leveled to the ground in the aftermath of the Warsaw Uprising. There was no foreign aid and no U.N. assistance, leaving the ineffectual and corrupt Communist system imposed by the Soviet Union to cause far more harm than help. Soviet Communist propaganda was heard on the radio, newspapers were censored by the government, and political opponents were thrown into jail.
Under the Communist system, almost nothing was available in stores and there were few opportunities for employment, so my mother and her sister had to help their parents by picking mushrooms and berries and selling them in the market. Army trenches still scarred the land in Poland, and my mother remembers having to walk through them when she went to the forest. Fragments of grenades and land mines scattered the ground; reports about accidents caused by explosions of old undetonated mines were common. In the schoolhouse, one day a boy brought a grenade that he had found. To everyone’s horror, the teacher saw it was undetonated and called the police.
In Liberia I also saw remnants from the war, and problems obviating a system in need of improvement. The façades of government buildings were still visibly scorched, and sadly the people on the streets of Monrovia seemed far too accustomed to the many burning heaps of trash to do anything about them. Over the next week I experienced firsthand the necessity to bribe every police or customs officer to proceed without trouble. I drove on the potholed dirt highway from Monrovia to Ganta, breathing in the nauseating fumes from overfilled trucks that were sold to Liberia because they no longer passed emission requirements in other countries. I saw the omnipresent markets, with children desperately selling the few small items they had in front of them rather than going to school. Yet in the same way that Poland was able to recover from its problems, Liberia will be able to repair itself too.
Perhaps some lessons from Poland’s recovery can be applied to Liberia. I ask my mother what she thinks was the main factor that contributed to the recovery of Poland. The hard work of every single person, she says. Polish people took it unto themselves to make life better, not being able to rely on the government. Thus each and every person rebuilt his own house and planted a garden to grow food and save for the winter. Education was made a priority, as it was known that schooling was the key to advancement. The spectacular rebuilding of Warsaw became a source of national pride, with songs about progress becoming popular (such as the well-known song Budujemy nowy dom, or “We’re building a new house”) and schoolchildren learning about the hard work and strong values of the Polish people. And it was precisely these qualities of determination and self-help that allowed individuals better their lives, rebuild their homes and reestablish infrastructure. With time, Polish people regained independence from the oppressive Soviet rule and returned to a free market system.
And with time, Liberia will rise again. The aspirations, hard work, and strong morals of each individual can assure this success. What has been achieved since the war has been very significant, and the momentum of the progress will be sustained. Reconstruction will continue, and I hope that soon the streets of Monrovia will be cleaned. Maybe more people will take advantage of the relatively fertile soil of the region to grow their own gardens and lessen the burden of food costs on the family. I saw that Liberian students are motivated and well-disciplined, but those children who do not go to school need to be pushed into the classroom. Undaunted by the hindrances of ineffectual leadership, indifferent to the empty promises of foreign aid, and embracing the diversity of culture in Liberia to foster a sense of nationalism and unity, the Liberian people will sustain a lasting peace and prosperity.
About the Author
Heidi Baumgartner from Hunter College High School traveled to Liberia in February 2009 with her teacher Asumana Jabateh Randolph and his former student David Bauer, who is now studying at City University of New York. The group conducted workshops for science teachers about inexpensive laboratory technology that can be incorporated into the classroom. More information about their I-HELP Liberia Project can be found at http://www.ihelpliberia.com. The trip was also sponsored by LIMANY, the Liberian Mandingo Association of New York.
Hunter College High School, New York
Leaving Roberts International Airport after a long flight from frigid New York City to Liberia, faint shadows of the landscape were all I could see of the new continent I had just landed on. It was a late hour of a humid February night when I arrived in West Africa with my teacher and one of his former students. For the next ten days I would be aiding them with humanitarian work, and exploring a place that was like nothing I had seen before. It was my first time in a third-world country and had no idea of what to expect in an area that only a few short years prior was a war zone.
An unexpected lack of running water and a broken generator awaited us at the house in Congo Town where we stayed that night. These conditions are commonplace to the majority of Liberians, but I admittedly was in a bit of a shock at having to grope my way through the darkness to the bed that the three of us had to share. Never having been deprived of running water, electricity and privacy, which as an American I had always considered essential resources that one could not live without, I was awakened to the fact that what I had always taken for granted could be considered a set of luxuries to others.
The closest previous contact I had with hardship was through my mother’s stories of growing up in impoverished Communist Poland after World War II. Her descriptions of the abject conditions she had to endure as a child were vivid in my mind as I thought about what I would find life to be like in this part of the world that was new to me, which was also still emerging from terrible civil conflict. But how similar could modern Liberia be to an Eastern European country fifty years ago?
My mother recollects much about the lasting effects of the war that ravaged the country. As has happened in Liberia, many buildings and roads in Poland were destroyed; centralized electricity and running water disappeared in many parts of the country. Water had to be carried from the bottom of the hill that my mother’s family lived on, up to the second floor of the building. The first floor was used as a schoolhouse, where seven large classes were fit into four rooms. Her father—my grandfather—was among the first group of college graduates in the country to receive a master’s degree after the war. He subsequently became a schoolteacher in an effort to contribute to the rebuilding of Poland. However, it was difficult. Several million Polish people had died in the war, the economy was destroyed, and the capital city was leveled to the ground in the aftermath of the Warsaw Uprising. There was no foreign aid and no U.N. assistance, leaving the ineffectual and corrupt Communist system imposed by the Soviet Union to cause far more harm than help. Soviet Communist propaganda was heard on the radio, newspapers were censored by the government, and political opponents were thrown into jail.
Under the Communist system, almost nothing was available in stores and there were few opportunities for employment, so my mother and her sister had to help their parents by picking mushrooms and berries and selling them in the market. Army trenches still scarred the land in Poland, and my mother remembers having to walk through them when she went to the forest. Fragments of grenades and land mines scattered the ground; reports about accidents caused by explosions of old undetonated mines were common. In the schoolhouse, one day a boy brought a grenade that he had found. To everyone’s horror, the teacher saw it was undetonated and called the police.
In Liberia I also saw remnants from the war, and problems obviating a system in need of improvement. The façades of government buildings were still visibly scorched, and sadly the people on the streets of Monrovia seemed far too accustomed to the many burning heaps of trash to do anything about them. Over the next week I experienced firsthand the necessity to bribe every police or customs officer to proceed without trouble. I drove on the potholed dirt highway from Monrovia to Ganta, breathing in the nauseating fumes from overfilled trucks that were sold to Liberia because they no longer passed emission requirements in other countries. I saw the omnipresent markets, with children desperately selling the few small items they had in front of them rather than going to school. Yet in the same way that Poland was able to recover from its problems, Liberia will be able to repair itself too.
Perhaps some lessons from Poland’s recovery can be applied to Liberia. I ask my mother what she thinks was the main factor that contributed to the recovery of Poland. The hard work of every single person, she says. Polish people took it unto themselves to make life better, not being able to rely on the government. Thus each and every person rebuilt his own house and planted a garden to grow food and save for the winter. Education was made a priority, as it was known that schooling was the key to advancement. The spectacular rebuilding of Warsaw became a source of national pride, with songs about progress becoming popular (such as the well-known song Budujemy nowy dom, or “We’re building a new house”) and schoolchildren learning about the hard work and strong values of the Polish people. And it was precisely these qualities of determination and self-help that allowed individuals better their lives, rebuild their homes and reestablish infrastructure. With time, Polish people regained independence from the oppressive Soviet rule and returned to a free market system.
And with time, Liberia will rise again. The aspirations, hard work, and strong morals of each individual can assure this success. What has been achieved since the war has been very significant, and the momentum of the progress will be sustained. Reconstruction will continue, and I hope that soon the streets of Monrovia will be cleaned. Maybe more people will take advantage of the relatively fertile soil of the region to grow their own gardens and lessen the burden of food costs on the family. I saw that Liberian students are motivated and well-disciplined, but those children who do not go to school need to be pushed into the classroom. Undaunted by the hindrances of ineffectual leadership, indifferent to the empty promises of foreign aid, and embracing the diversity of culture in Liberia to foster a sense of nationalism and unity, the Liberian people will sustain a lasting peace and prosperity.
About the Author
Heidi Baumgartner from Hunter College High School traveled to Liberia in February 2009 with her teacher Asumana Jabateh Randolph and his former student David Bauer, who is now studying at City University of New York. The group conducted workshops for science teachers about inexpensive laboratory technology that can be incorporated into the classroom. More information about their I-HELP Liberia Project can be found at http://www.ihelpliberia.com. The trip was also sponsored by LIMANY, the Liberian Mandingo Association of New York.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN X
THE LTA NEEDS INTERNAL ORDER
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
pericle925@yahoo.com / www.ibrahimnyei.blogspot.com
The Liberia Telecommunication Authority was created by an Act of the Legislature to regulate telecommunications and frequency bands in the country. The LTA is part of the general public sector reform process aimed at ensuring efficiency in the delivery of services nation wide. Like many public commissions, members are appointed with a Chair to preside over its meetings and break ice when there are tied votes. Little did many know that the frequency zone is a major source of revenue in this country, but its effective regulation to maximize gains for the country was realized with the formation of the LTA, and the migration of moguls in the communication business into the country. In less than two years of its operations, its first chairman was hooked in a dubious deal with the West African Telecommunications which exposed its revenue generation capacity to many ordinary Liberians. The major problem observed was the balloon-infliction of the position of chairmanship which the first Chairman used in his attempt to dub his colleagues and the Liberian people. Little did he know that even a rubber balloon when improperly or over filled with air can explode and become irrelevant, particularly when the pressure exceeds its capacity. But this confusion and its resultant effect with the chairmanship issue of the LTA has not taught much lessons to those who are there now, as another inferno has begun to sink the regulating Authority into a crisis born out of an apparent lack of internal regulatory framework.
In all cases, there is no chairman of a public commission that is clothed with an authoritarian garment to unilaterally and sub-terraineously function without regular consultations with other members of the commission. But the case with the LTA has proven counterconsistent with conventional practices in the few months of its operations. The media's attention had been drawn to its activities and it seems that the Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Albert Bropleh had been caught hanging in a web of trilemas- failure to consult fellow members of the commission, failure to comply with auditors, and the self-crowning with an imperial leadership helmet. Bropleh on the other side of the divide had resurged with counterclaims. This and previous controversies at the LTA had magnetized the attention of pundits, and in the interest of furthering the national debate, and remaining constructive in engaging issues with the pen, this edition of the series had been preoccupied by the developments at the LTA and is therefore calling for immediate ceasefire, calm and order.
If our telecommunication systems will improve with consumers getting the maximum satisfactions from service providers and the service providers being regulated in a way that the chain is truly balanced - suppliers and consumers satisfied-this outcome will be based on a robust regulatory system. Regulating communication frequencies, bands, and all other telecommunication activities is much more like a saint presiding over a religious shrine whose deportment influences and direct the lives of his followers. The LTA therefore needs to be transparent and consistent with rules and regulations in order to be taken seriously and revered by its clients.
The internal rivalry at the LTA if not curtailed is capable of robbing it of its reverence in regulating our telecommunication systems, and we the consumers stand at a dangerous peril when the regulating agency is in internal feud. With prominent Liberians like Lamini Waritay, a long time public servant and redoubtable journalist this country can boast of, Commissioner Jappah-Samuka, Commissioner York, and others, the LTA can make a professional team to rely on. We expect the differences to be settled with majority votes as it is the case with public commissions that have commissioners with a ceremonious chairman whose power is only felt during elections. Differences in policies and ideological issues are never crashed over in the form and manner exhibited at the LTA. The problem identified now is that the nomenclature of 'Chairman' is being misconstrued thereby making Commissioner Bropleh to believe that he is an overhead boss, presiding over policy issues, meetings, and at the same time running the administration of the Liberia Telecommunication Authority.
Considering this complication of nomenclature and function which to some extent is building an imperial leadership that has met the conscious resistance of other Commissioners at the LTA, it is however prudent to recommend that the LTA hire the services of full time staffs under the supervision of a full time Executive Director, Executive Secretary, or Administrator, who shall be responsible for the financial, administrative and managerial operations of the LTA. With this at hand, the commissioners will mostly focus on regulatory policies and governance issues and the fear of dominance on the commission shall be extensively obliterated. As we can see with prominent commissions like the Governance Commission, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the newly created Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission, commissioners are preoccupied with policies and governance while the central administration is run by full time employees.
The feud at the LTA had also led to the leakage of several important financial documents detailing several transactions. On matters of such, only a well commissioned forensic audit can authenticate claims of misappropriation and theft of state resources. The LTA must therefore open its books to the General Auditing Commission for audit and should stop postponing or delaying scheduled audit if there is nothing under the sleeves to quarantine from public notice. We therefore rely on the viability and objectivity of the GAC to transform our rumors into facts or establish their current mixtures as truisms that need not be debated any further.
Finally, there is nothing more relevant in rescuing the LTA from drowning in a pool of corruption that will render it incompetent and incapable of regulating of frequency zones and generating revenues for our country than a system of genuine internal governance, cooperation and regular consultations among commissioners, an effective central administration and a transparent and accountable managerial framework. We believe that these will be important than to allow such relevant institution drown with the tarnishing of the good reputations of other commissioners who have outstanding records of services to this country and its people.
-In The Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, The Pen Shall Never Run Dry-
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
pericle925@yahoo.com / www.ibrahimnyei.blogspot.com
The Liberia Telecommunication Authority was created by an Act of the Legislature to regulate telecommunications and frequency bands in the country. The LTA is part of the general public sector reform process aimed at ensuring efficiency in the delivery of services nation wide. Like many public commissions, members are appointed with a Chair to preside over its meetings and break ice when there are tied votes. Little did many know that the frequency zone is a major source of revenue in this country, but its effective regulation to maximize gains for the country was realized with the formation of the LTA, and the migration of moguls in the communication business into the country. In less than two years of its operations, its first chairman was hooked in a dubious deal with the West African Telecommunications which exposed its revenue generation capacity to many ordinary Liberians. The major problem observed was the balloon-infliction of the position of chairmanship which the first Chairman used in his attempt to dub his colleagues and the Liberian people. Little did he know that even a rubber balloon when improperly or over filled with air can explode and become irrelevant, particularly when the pressure exceeds its capacity. But this confusion and its resultant effect with the chairmanship issue of the LTA has not taught much lessons to those who are there now, as another inferno has begun to sink the regulating Authority into a crisis born out of an apparent lack of internal regulatory framework.
In all cases, there is no chairman of a public commission that is clothed with an authoritarian garment to unilaterally and sub-terraineously function without regular consultations with other members of the commission. But the case with the LTA has proven counterconsistent with conventional practices in the few months of its operations. The media's attention had been drawn to its activities and it seems that the Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Albert Bropleh had been caught hanging in a web of trilemas- failure to consult fellow members of the commission, failure to comply with auditors, and the self-crowning with an imperial leadership helmet. Bropleh on the other side of the divide had resurged with counterclaims. This and previous controversies at the LTA had magnetized the attention of pundits, and in the interest of furthering the national debate, and remaining constructive in engaging issues with the pen, this edition of the series had been preoccupied by the developments at the LTA and is therefore calling for immediate ceasefire, calm and order.
If our telecommunication systems will improve with consumers getting the maximum satisfactions from service providers and the service providers being regulated in a way that the chain is truly balanced - suppliers and consumers satisfied-this outcome will be based on a robust regulatory system. Regulating communication frequencies, bands, and all other telecommunication activities is much more like a saint presiding over a religious shrine whose deportment influences and direct the lives of his followers. The LTA therefore needs to be transparent and consistent with rules and regulations in order to be taken seriously and revered by its clients.
The internal rivalry at the LTA if not curtailed is capable of robbing it of its reverence in regulating our telecommunication systems, and we the consumers stand at a dangerous peril when the regulating agency is in internal feud. With prominent Liberians like Lamini Waritay, a long time public servant and redoubtable journalist this country can boast of, Commissioner Jappah-Samuka, Commissioner York, and others, the LTA can make a professional team to rely on. We expect the differences to be settled with majority votes as it is the case with public commissions that have commissioners with a ceremonious chairman whose power is only felt during elections. Differences in policies and ideological issues are never crashed over in the form and manner exhibited at the LTA. The problem identified now is that the nomenclature of 'Chairman' is being misconstrued thereby making Commissioner Bropleh to believe that he is an overhead boss, presiding over policy issues, meetings, and at the same time running the administration of the Liberia Telecommunication Authority.
Considering this complication of nomenclature and function which to some extent is building an imperial leadership that has met the conscious resistance of other Commissioners at the LTA, it is however prudent to recommend that the LTA hire the services of full time staffs under the supervision of a full time Executive Director, Executive Secretary, or Administrator, who shall be responsible for the financial, administrative and managerial operations of the LTA. With this at hand, the commissioners will mostly focus on regulatory policies and governance issues and the fear of dominance on the commission shall be extensively obliterated. As we can see with prominent commissions like the Governance Commission, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the newly created Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission, commissioners are preoccupied with policies and governance while the central administration is run by full time employees.
The feud at the LTA had also led to the leakage of several important financial documents detailing several transactions. On matters of such, only a well commissioned forensic audit can authenticate claims of misappropriation and theft of state resources. The LTA must therefore open its books to the General Auditing Commission for audit and should stop postponing or delaying scheduled audit if there is nothing under the sleeves to quarantine from public notice. We therefore rely on the viability and objectivity of the GAC to transform our rumors into facts or establish their current mixtures as truisms that need not be debated any further.
Finally, there is nothing more relevant in rescuing the LTA from drowning in a pool of corruption that will render it incompetent and incapable of regulating of frequency zones and generating revenues for our country than a system of genuine internal governance, cooperation and regular consultations among commissioners, an effective central administration and a transparent and accountable managerial framework. We believe that these will be important than to allow such relevant institution drown with the tarnishing of the good reputations of other commissioners who have outstanding records of services to this country and its people.
-In The Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, The Pen Shall Never Run Dry-
Friday, February 6, 2009
THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF FREE SPEECH AND EXPRESSION IN THE CONSOLIDATION OF DEMOCRACY IN LIBERIA: THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA AND THE CIVIL SOCIETY
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
Introduction
Liberia is a transitioning state struggling to heal wounds of a protracted civil conflict that resulted from a culture of marginalization, (attempts to alienate inalienable rights) suppression of inalienable rights, and opaque system in government transactions - underpinned by a system of bad governance. The people’s views were suppressed and crushed, thereby keeping them a distance from the administration of their country. This promoted imperial leadership, undermined democracy, and all values of transparency and accountability. The gross suppression of the views of the people, their rights to associate and express themselves freely, left them with no definitive role in the nation-building process, but to sit as passive observers. Unfortunately, while the people went through such political-dehumanization, the state was theoretically claiming to be run under a democratic system. But the overwhelming demands of the people have been popular participation and equality before the law. This surely can not take place in the absence of a propitious and enabling environment that will guarantee their rights to free expression and free speech.
In this post-conflict era democracy has been welcomed and its tenets promulgated in all corners of the country mainly by local and international civil society groups. Freedom of Expression and freedom of Speech are the pillows on which a durable democratic state stands. Practically, in the absence of a system that guarantees and promotes these rights, the people become separated from their state, vis-à-vis, their own destiny with fears and act of intimidations. Constructive and challenging competitions for leadership become non-existent, and policy decisions are made for a selected few.
The institutions of society and the state that guide and watch the activities of the state and the people to promote the tenets of democracy, the rule of law, and the inalienable rights of the citizens are the media and the civil society groups. These groups have pivotal roles in all aspects of the socio-economic and political developments of the state.
This paper will examine the essence of upholding the values of free speech and free expression in post-war Liberia not only as fundamental rights, but as sine quo non to fostering democracy and making it a culture and system of governance. It argues that if democracy is to be a system of governance in Liberia, the people must be free to speak and express themselves, they must have unlimited access to the media (both private and public media), participate in constructive dialogues and debates; and the people must also be conscientiously aware of the dangers associated with the abuse of those fundamentals rights.
The paper also asserts that the civil society and the media are the most appropriate vehicles through which the citizens express themselves, reach their government. Considering the critical aspects of the role of the civil society and the media in terms of values and objectivity, the paper concludes with a call to civil society and media groups to remain critical and independent in the performance of their roles as watchdogs.
The Rights to Free Speech and Expression
The rights to free speech and free expressions are inalienable rights given to mankind by his creator. The two are absolutely inextricable. Governments and civil society are created to protect those rights because it is those rights that set the foundations upon which democratic governments are legitimized and popularly supported. Attempts to have them suppressed or abrogated are potential causes for mass civil unrest, dishonesty, underdevelopment, and ultimately war. Several wars and unwanted revolutions have provided the absence of free speech, democracy and injustice as justifications. The Liberian Civil War, the fight Against Apartheid in South Africa, and the ongoing crisis in Zimbabwe are examples.
The building of democracy in Liberia will not just be dependent upon the holding of periodic elections for public officials. A genuine and functional democratic society is constructed by the participation of the people in a system of unhindered freedom to determine their own destinies singularly or in association with others through processes of dialogue and opportunities to provide alternatives for the operations of government and where necessary. In the 1986 Constitution of Liberia, Article 15 (a) declared the state’s commitment to its citizens in protecting their rights to free expression by providing that: ‘Every person shall have the right to freedom of expression, being fully responsible for the abuse thereof. This right shall not be curtailed, restricted or enjoined by government…’
The above provision of the 1986 Constitution draws a balance sheet which needs to be promulgated and properly interpreted for the people at all levels. That balance sheet is the point where the people’s rights as to be guaranteed by their government and their (people) responsibilities to those rights meet. A responsible government protects and strengthens the inalienable rights of the people, protects them from fears, relies on their views to make informed policy decisions, and maintains power by their general consent. On the other hand, a responsible citizenry gives loyalty to the state and supports its programs, and live under its laws. In a society where both sides honestly and transparently perform their shares of the responsibilities, democracy is strengthened and solidly consolidated, and the potentials for fears, corruption and injustices are considerably minimized.
In addition to the rights of free speech as part of free expression, the rights to freedom of religion and conscience, freedom of association and assembly, and the right to equal protection before the law are all complimentary in building and sustaining democracy in any civilized society. The suppression or attempt to abrogate any undermines the existence of all. These rights therefore, must in no way be limited to demands of constitutional provisions or statutes, but as natural gifts to mankind that are indispensable to the pursuit of happiness and liberty in society. Governments also must in no way legislate or decree in any form that will place restrictions on citizens from practicing those rights.
The state of democracy in Liberia today remains a function of extensive dialogues through symposia and conferences that ended the civil war, and called for elections which was freely held to inaugurate the present government. The democratic credentials of the present government, as have been declared by study groups, are ‘Good’ (World Bank, 2007). Liberia is a party to numerous international conventions and protocols that assert the basic fundamental rights discussed above. But the threat the country currently face in its transition to democracy is the looming illiteracy problem. As it is widely stated that democracy is for a conscious society, so is the requirement that consciousness goes with information through average literacy. The state must now work in programs to promote mass literacy which will not only build consciousness and awareness on fundamental rights, but will indeed promote growth and save succeeding generations from the scourge of bad governance and misrule that are extremely counterproductive to democracy.
The Media and Democracy
The role of the media is indisputable in generating and building a culture of democracy that extends beyond the political systems and becomes a way of life of the people as their consciousness increases. The media, as the name presents it, stands as a bridge that links the people to each other and their government. It is through the media that the government gets the thinking of the people and vis-à-vis the people get informed about the government and its activities, and also information from amongst them. The media as a channel of information also synthesizes and objectively presents to both the people and their government balanced reports to ensure that decisions are taken in the public interest.
By definitions, the media is the channel through which messages and information flows, and democracy is a system of government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
As stated above, freedom of speech and expressions are basic pillars of democracy. The common fact that the people can only express themselves or freely speak out their views through the media, makes it (media) an indispensable element of a democratic society. In the affirmative, no democracy exists without a vibrant media.
As the media’s role has been declared sacrosanct in the consolidation of democracy, its viability is essential in maintaining independence. The Liberian media community, like a typical African community, has struggled with tyrannical and oppressive regimes, and it still struggles to gain full independence from the ruling political establishment. Adding to the challenges posed by political influence-peddling in the media that undermines objectivity and credibility are the economic constraints and professional and technical inadequacies of practitioners and institutions in Liberia. Durable democracy in Liberia depends on an independent and vibrant media that will continuously provide credible reports, solicit views, and do critical analyses on principles of objectivity. The existence of such media community in a democratic state can transcend the role of message and information carrier in the eyes of the people to building trust and confidence among them and for their government. Those are the threads that hold the fibers of democracy together.
A state craving for democracy must not only have media institutions to use as channels for mere message carrying, but must ensure a propitious environment for the development and emergence of more institutions that will promote the tenets of democracy independent of government and political manipulations. The Liberian state must therefore ensure structural and functional viability and stability of media houses by enforcing laws of the media, promoting free speech and free expression, and legislating statutes where necessary to further strengthen the role of the media in the consolidation of democracy. It will be a resounding step forward if the current government can effectuate the passage of the three media laws drafted by the Liberia Media Law and Policy Reform Working Group: The Freedom of Information Act, the Act to Establish an Independent Broadcast Regulator for Liberia, and the Act to Transform the LBS into a Public Service Broadcast System.
Article 15 of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia supports the above requirements. In section (B) it outlines several rights to the citizens including ‘the right to hold opinions without interference and the right to knowledge’, the ‘right to free speech, academic freedom to receive and impart knowledge and information’, the right to libraries to make such knowledge available’, the ‘privacy of usage of the mail, telephone and the telegraph’ and the ‘right of citizens to remain silent’.
To have the above proclaimed rights fully exercised by the people, Section C states that ‘…there shall be no limitation on the public right to be informed about the government and its functionaries’.
The Role of the Civil Society
The civil society is the largest portion of the society representing all forces out of the government. Governments are functions of the civil society because it is from the civil society that all free governments are formed and operated. The civil society therefore has a pivotal role in ensuring that democracy is consolidated in Liberia. According to the Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs there are over four hundred civil society organizations operating in the country. The goals and objectives of most of these groups are nearly the same, and sometimes they form coalitions to implement programs.
The history of effective contemporary civil society organizations in Liberia can be traced to the 1970s when pressure groups from around the country bounced on the national scene and began advocacies and agitations for multi-party democracy. These groups, the Movement for Justice in Africa, Progressive Alliance of Liberia represented people mainly from the destitute masses that were marginalized in political activities. The advocacy then could be done in no robust way in the absence of a democratic system that values and protects the rights of the people to express themselves by associating or socializing, and the right to speak out without intimidations.
Much of the works of mass public sensitization and awareness on governance and rule of law issues are done by the civil society. The media is more or less left as a one man army to inform and educate the people at the same time fearing reprisals for reports unfavorable to the political establishment. The civil society is now leading the campaign of mass awareness and civic education all directed at consolidating democracy as a way of life from the grassroots level. It is the civil society that leads the campaign against human rights violation, and the freedom of the press, and the freedom of the people to freely express themselves.
Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) must therefore build a firm reputation and stand vigilantly as the frontline agent in the advocacy for free speech and free expression. The need for effective internal governance and transparency in the operations of CSOs activities must be the moral ground on which CSOs should stand as campaigners against social malfeasances in society. In the absence of that the civil society by itself will drown into irrelevance, thereby fertilizing the ground for the sprouting of a modern dictatorship or totalitarian regime.
Civil society organizations in our context of free speech and expression must ensure that media institutions remain protected, and must continuously present the case that freedom of expression and access to official information are keys to sustainable human and economic development, democracy development, and the prevention of corruption, which in turn support conditions necessary for economic growth and good governance.
The Media and Civil Society as Partners
The partnership between the media and civil society organizations should be by practice, an ordained marriage of the proverbial ‘Roman Catholic’ style. In this partnership each compliments the work of the other and stands for the sake of the other in all instances. There is absolutely no room for divorce. The campaigns of civil society organizations can not go public in the absence of media coverage and at the same time the media can not afford to work in an environment that has no civil society independent of the government.
In contemporary societies, like Liberia, the media is an integral part of the civil society. And its role as a part of the whole civil society community is being seen through the works of independent media houses that have taken lines of ebullient advocacies for social justice and democracy in reportages that are people-sensitive. Since the return of normalcy in the country, several independent media institutions have emerged and hundreds of civil society organizations have also been formed by conscious-minded citizens. At the same time, some media practitioners have established civil society groups intended for the promotion of free speech, freedom of the press, and the empowerment of local journalists through training.
The results of the collaborations of the media and other civil society groups have been of significant impacts on both sides. The Press Union of Liberia and the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission (JPC) are in a partnership in which the JPC provides free legal services for journalists who during the expeditious execution of their duties are arrested or taken to court. At the same time, the three draft Laws of the Liberian Media that are now before the Legislature for enactments were drafted by a collaboration of government line agencies, several civil society groups, and the mass media, including the Press Union of Liberia, the Center for Media Studies and Peace Building, the Liberia Media Center, and the National Coalition of Civil Society Organizations in Liberia. The Liberia Coalition of Free Expression, another collaborating group comprising of media advocacy groups, other civil society groups and the PUL, is leading a campaign to ensure the speedy passage of the draft Laws.
Many civil society groups in the country are in specific agreements with media institutions for promotional and awareness programs aimed at civic education and the promotion of good governance and democracy. The Actions for Genuine Democratic Alternative (AGENDA) has a special program area intended to strengthen media institutions and civil society groups.
Conclusion
Building a culture of democracy in Liberia and establishing a system of democratic governance must be done simultaneously with the building and consolidating of a culture of press freedom and civil liberty. Democracy can not survive in an unfriendly media environment and an environment where the people’s fundamental rights are abused.
Consolidating democracy in Liberia with the media and civil society as active participants requires technical and professional capacity building of both the media and civil society actors. A weak civil society and biased media can pose challenge to the survivability of democracy. The media and the civil society must therefore be strong, unwavering and dedicated in the discharge of their duties as watchdogs and promoters of good governance. The people, too, the ultimate beneficiaries of a democratic system, must be empowered to participate through mass awareness and education. Article 6 of the Constitution of Liberia recognizes the people’s right to be educated as a requirement for national development:
The Republic shall, because of the vital role assigned to the individual citizen under this Constitution for the social, economic and political well-being of Liberia, provide equal access to educational opportunities and facilities for all citizens to the extent of available resources. Emphasis shall be placed on the mass education of the Liberian people and the elimination of illiteracy.
Introduction
Liberia is a transitioning state struggling to heal wounds of a protracted civil conflict that resulted from a culture of marginalization, (attempts to alienate inalienable rights) suppression of inalienable rights, and opaque system in government transactions - underpinned by a system of bad governance. The people’s views were suppressed and crushed, thereby keeping them a distance from the administration of their country. This promoted imperial leadership, undermined democracy, and all values of transparency and accountability. The gross suppression of the views of the people, their rights to associate and express themselves freely, left them with no definitive role in the nation-building process, but to sit as passive observers. Unfortunately, while the people went through such political-dehumanization, the state was theoretically claiming to be run under a democratic system. But the overwhelming demands of the people have been popular participation and equality before the law. This surely can not take place in the absence of a propitious and enabling environment that will guarantee their rights to free expression and free speech.
In this post-conflict era democracy has been welcomed and its tenets promulgated in all corners of the country mainly by local and international civil society groups. Freedom of Expression and freedom of Speech are the pillows on which a durable democratic state stands. Practically, in the absence of a system that guarantees and promotes these rights, the people become separated from their state, vis-à-vis, their own destiny with fears and act of intimidations. Constructive and challenging competitions for leadership become non-existent, and policy decisions are made for a selected few.
The institutions of society and the state that guide and watch the activities of the state and the people to promote the tenets of democracy, the rule of law, and the inalienable rights of the citizens are the media and the civil society groups. These groups have pivotal roles in all aspects of the socio-economic and political developments of the state.
This paper will examine the essence of upholding the values of free speech and free expression in post-war Liberia not only as fundamental rights, but as sine quo non to fostering democracy and making it a culture and system of governance. It argues that if democracy is to be a system of governance in Liberia, the people must be free to speak and express themselves, they must have unlimited access to the media (both private and public media), participate in constructive dialogues and debates; and the people must also be conscientiously aware of the dangers associated with the abuse of those fundamentals rights.
The paper also asserts that the civil society and the media are the most appropriate vehicles through which the citizens express themselves, reach their government. Considering the critical aspects of the role of the civil society and the media in terms of values and objectivity, the paper concludes with a call to civil society and media groups to remain critical and independent in the performance of their roles as watchdogs.
The Rights to Free Speech and Expression
The rights to free speech and free expressions are inalienable rights given to mankind by his creator. The two are absolutely inextricable. Governments and civil society are created to protect those rights because it is those rights that set the foundations upon which democratic governments are legitimized and popularly supported. Attempts to have them suppressed or abrogated are potential causes for mass civil unrest, dishonesty, underdevelopment, and ultimately war. Several wars and unwanted revolutions have provided the absence of free speech, democracy and injustice as justifications. The Liberian Civil War, the fight Against Apartheid in South Africa, and the ongoing crisis in Zimbabwe are examples.
The building of democracy in Liberia will not just be dependent upon the holding of periodic elections for public officials. A genuine and functional democratic society is constructed by the participation of the people in a system of unhindered freedom to determine their own destinies singularly or in association with others through processes of dialogue and opportunities to provide alternatives for the operations of government and where necessary. In the 1986 Constitution of Liberia, Article 15 (a) declared the state’s commitment to its citizens in protecting their rights to free expression by providing that: ‘Every person shall have the right to freedom of expression, being fully responsible for the abuse thereof. This right shall not be curtailed, restricted or enjoined by government…’
The above provision of the 1986 Constitution draws a balance sheet which needs to be promulgated and properly interpreted for the people at all levels. That balance sheet is the point where the people’s rights as to be guaranteed by their government and their (people) responsibilities to those rights meet. A responsible government protects and strengthens the inalienable rights of the people, protects them from fears, relies on their views to make informed policy decisions, and maintains power by their general consent. On the other hand, a responsible citizenry gives loyalty to the state and supports its programs, and live under its laws. In a society where both sides honestly and transparently perform their shares of the responsibilities, democracy is strengthened and solidly consolidated, and the potentials for fears, corruption and injustices are considerably minimized.
In addition to the rights of free speech as part of free expression, the rights to freedom of religion and conscience, freedom of association and assembly, and the right to equal protection before the law are all complimentary in building and sustaining democracy in any civilized society. The suppression or attempt to abrogate any undermines the existence of all. These rights therefore, must in no way be limited to demands of constitutional provisions or statutes, but as natural gifts to mankind that are indispensable to the pursuit of happiness and liberty in society. Governments also must in no way legislate or decree in any form that will place restrictions on citizens from practicing those rights.
The state of democracy in Liberia today remains a function of extensive dialogues through symposia and conferences that ended the civil war, and called for elections which was freely held to inaugurate the present government. The democratic credentials of the present government, as have been declared by study groups, are ‘Good’ (World Bank, 2007). Liberia is a party to numerous international conventions and protocols that assert the basic fundamental rights discussed above. But the threat the country currently face in its transition to democracy is the looming illiteracy problem. As it is widely stated that democracy is for a conscious society, so is the requirement that consciousness goes with information through average literacy. The state must now work in programs to promote mass literacy which will not only build consciousness and awareness on fundamental rights, but will indeed promote growth and save succeeding generations from the scourge of bad governance and misrule that are extremely counterproductive to democracy.
The Media and Democracy
The role of the media is indisputable in generating and building a culture of democracy that extends beyond the political systems and becomes a way of life of the people as their consciousness increases. The media, as the name presents it, stands as a bridge that links the people to each other and their government. It is through the media that the government gets the thinking of the people and vis-à-vis the people get informed about the government and its activities, and also information from amongst them. The media as a channel of information also synthesizes and objectively presents to both the people and their government balanced reports to ensure that decisions are taken in the public interest.
By definitions, the media is the channel through which messages and information flows, and democracy is a system of government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
As stated above, freedom of speech and expressions are basic pillars of democracy. The common fact that the people can only express themselves or freely speak out their views through the media, makes it (media) an indispensable element of a democratic society. In the affirmative, no democracy exists without a vibrant media.
As the media’s role has been declared sacrosanct in the consolidation of democracy, its viability is essential in maintaining independence. The Liberian media community, like a typical African community, has struggled with tyrannical and oppressive regimes, and it still struggles to gain full independence from the ruling political establishment. Adding to the challenges posed by political influence-peddling in the media that undermines objectivity and credibility are the economic constraints and professional and technical inadequacies of practitioners and institutions in Liberia. Durable democracy in Liberia depends on an independent and vibrant media that will continuously provide credible reports, solicit views, and do critical analyses on principles of objectivity. The existence of such media community in a democratic state can transcend the role of message and information carrier in the eyes of the people to building trust and confidence among them and for their government. Those are the threads that hold the fibers of democracy together.
A state craving for democracy must not only have media institutions to use as channels for mere message carrying, but must ensure a propitious environment for the development and emergence of more institutions that will promote the tenets of democracy independent of government and political manipulations. The Liberian state must therefore ensure structural and functional viability and stability of media houses by enforcing laws of the media, promoting free speech and free expression, and legislating statutes where necessary to further strengthen the role of the media in the consolidation of democracy. It will be a resounding step forward if the current government can effectuate the passage of the three media laws drafted by the Liberia Media Law and Policy Reform Working Group: The Freedom of Information Act, the Act to Establish an Independent Broadcast Regulator for Liberia, and the Act to Transform the LBS into a Public Service Broadcast System.
Article 15 of the 1986 Constitution of Liberia supports the above requirements. In section (B) it outlines several rights to the citizens including ‘the right to hold opinions without interference and the right to knowledge’, the ‘right to free speech, academic freedom to receive and impart knowledge and information’, the right to libraries to make such knowledge available’, the ‘privacy of usage of the mail, telephone and the telegraph’ and the ‘right of citizens to remain silent’.
To have the above proclaimed rights fully exercised by the people, Section C states that ‘…there shall be no limitation on the public right to be informed about the government and its functionaries’.
The Role of the Civil Society
The civil society is the largest portion of the society representing all forces out of the government. Governments are functions of the civil society because it is from the civil society that all free governments are formed and operated. The civil society therefore has a pivotal role in ensuring that democracy is consolidated in Liberia. According to the Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs there are over four hundred civil society organizations operating in the country. The goals and objectives of most of these groups are nearly the same, and sometimes they form coalitions to implement programs.
The history of effective contemporary civil society organizations in Liberia can be traced to the 1970s when pressure groups from around the country bounced on the national scene and began advocacies and agitations for multi-party democracy. These groups, the Movement for Justice in Africa, Progressive Alliance of Liberia represented people mainly from the destitute masses that were marginalized in political activities. The advocacy then could be done in no robust way in the absence of a democratic system that values and protects the rights of the people to express themselves by associating or socializing, and the right to speak out without intimidations.
Much of the works of mass public sensitization and awareness on governance and rule of law issues are done by the civil society. The media is more or less left as a one man army to inform and educate the people at the same time fearing reprisals for reports unfavorable to the political establishment. The civil society is now leading the campaign of mass awareness and civic education all directed at consolidating democracy as a way of life from the grassroots level. It is the civil society that leads the campaign against human rights violation, and the freedom of the press, and the freedom of the people to freely express themselves.
Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) must therefore build a firm reputation and stand vigilantly as the frontline agent in the advocacy for free speech and free expression. The need for effective internal governance and transparency in the operations of CSOs activities must be the moral ground on which CSOs should stand as campaigners against social malfeasances in society. In the absence of that the civil society by itself will drown into irrelevance, thereby fertilizing the ground for the sprouting of a modern dictatorship or totalitarian regime.
Civil society organizations in our context of free speech and expression must ensure that media institutions remain protected, and must continuously present the case that freedom of expression and access to official information are keys to sustainable human and economic development, democracy development, and the prevention of corruption, which in turn support conditions necessary for economic growth and good governance.
The Media and Civil Society as Partners
The partnership between the media and civil society organizations should be by practice, an ordained marriage of the proverbial ‘Roman Catholic’ style. In this partnership each compliments the work of the other and stands for the sake of the other in all instances. There is absolutely no room for divorce. The campaigns of civil society organizations can not go public in the absence of media coverage and at the same time the media can not afford to work in an environment that has no civil society independent of the government.
In contemporary societies, like Liberia, the media is an integral part of the civil society. And its role as a part of the whole civil society community is being seen through the works of independent media houses that have taken lines of ebullient advocacies for social justice and democracy in reportages that are people-sensitive. Since the return of normalcy in the country, several independent media institutions have emerged and hundreds of civil society organizations have also been formed by conscious-minded citizens. At the same time, some media practitioners have established civil society groups intended for the promotion of free speech, freedom of the press, and the empowerment of local journalists through training.
The results of the collaborations of the media and other civil society groups have been of significant impacts on both sides. The Press Union of Liberia and the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission (JPC) are in a partnership in which the JPC provides free legal services for journalists who during the expeditious execution of their duties are arrested or taken to court. At the same time, the three draft Laws of the Liberian Media that are now before the Legislature for enactments were drafted by a collaboration of government line agencies, several civil society groups, and the mass media, including the Press Union of Liberia, the Center for Media Studies and Peace Building, the Liberia Media Center, and the National Coalition of Civil Society Organizations in Liberia. The Liberia Coalition of Free Expression, another collaborating group comprising of media advocacy groups, other civil society groups and the PUL, is leading a campaign to ensure the speedy passage of the draft Laws.
Many civil society groups in the country are in specific agreements with media institutions for promotional and awareness programs aimed at civic education and the promotion of good governance and democracy. The Actions for Genuine Democratic Alternative (AGENDA) has a special program area intended to strengthen media institutions and civil society groups.
Conclusion
Building a culture of democracy in Liberia and establishing a system of democratic governance must be done simultaneously with the building and consolidating of a culture of press freedom and civil liberty. Democracy can not survive in an unfriendly media environment and an environment where the people’s fundamental rights are abused.
Consolidating democracy in Liberia with the media and civil society as active participants requires technical and professional capacity building of both the media and civil society actors. A weak civil society and biased media can pose challenge to the survivability of democracy. The media and the civil society must therefore be strong, unwavering and dedicated in the discharge of their duties as watchdogs and promoters of good governance. The people, too, the ultimate beneficiaries of a democratic system, must be empowered to participate through mass awareness and education. Article 6 of the Constitution of Liberia recognizes the people’s right to be educated as a requirement for national development:
The Republic shall, because of the vital role assigned to the individual citizen under this Constitution for the social, economic and political well-being of Liberia, provide equal access to educational opportunities and facilities for all citizens to the extent of available resources. Emphasis shall be placed on the mass education of the Liberian people and the elimination of illiteracy.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN IX
ON THE PRESIDENT'S APPEARANCE AT THE TRC
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
It was in the interest of national reconciliation and the promotion of an environment of genuine coexistence that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established as part of resolutions at the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Accra in 2003. Since the commencement of its activities in the country, we have witnessed the appearance of victims, perpetrators as well as witnesses or individuals who have experiences or involvement with certain events during the conflict. In that direction, we have heard the testimonies of key actors, including the leaders of the NPFL, INPFL, ULIMO-K, ULIMO-J, MODEL, LURD, LPC, and other smaller groups that were duped as ‘defend forces’ for tribal or geographical settings. Individuals associated with the People’s redemption Council and the mass citizen-driven revolutionary groups of PAL and MOJA have also appeared and vivid accounts of their experiences during the internecine political decadence our country went though were delivered publicly. It is also of interest to state that children, civil society actors, women advocates, and media practitioners and historians delivered presentation on their own experiences. This indicates the relevance of the reconciliation process, and the resolved commitment of the people of Liberia to reconcile history and set a stage through structural and institutional change to avoid recurrence of conflict. Even those that were directly affected (those whose families were broken apart, homes and properties destroyed, loved ones killed) have embraced the process and are mustering the courage in true spirit of nationalism appearing before the Commission.
At this critical and terminal point of public hearings in the work of the Commission, the attention of this series has been drawn to a very simple issue – the appearance of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf - that have turned to be controversial due to misinterpretation, misinformation, sycophancy, and the traditional Liberian style of favor-buying from the power-that- be. This edition of the series intends not to further deepen the controversies of the debate, but to emphasize the need for the President to appear, and not ignoring her right to an alternative appearance as provided by the TRC ACT.
Since the debate concerning the public appearance of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf surfaced in the intellectual gymnasium, many commentators have argued that the President should not appear in public, some have campaigned for her public appearance like main perpetrators have done, but others, like the Attorney General of Liberia, have argued against any form of appearance by the President. The legal premise of those who are against public appearance and non-appearance have been based on Article 61 of the 1986 Constitution: “The President shall be immune from any suits, actions or proceedings, judicial or otherwise, and from arrest, detention or other actions on the account of any act done by him while President of Liberia pursuant to any provision of this Constitution or any other laws of the Republic. The President shall not however, be immune from prosecution upon removal from office for the commission of any criminal act done while President”.
At the same time, this argument has been buttressed by what they call ‘protecting the reverence of the office of the presidency’. As for the Attorney General, he had warned that the President should not appear on the basis of his assumption that some commissioners ‘could seek to also use the opportunity to embarrass or humiliate the presidency and this most noble office’. But this is a sheer sycophancy and a direct attempt to undermine the credibility of the Commissioners and their efforts in reconciling this country. The office of the presidency has no ounce of reverence to lose by appearing before the TRC to willingly make presentation on experiences, and answering questions from Commissioners which may primarily be drawn from testimonies of previous witnesses concerning the role of President Sirleaf in the civil crisis. Giving the office of the Presidency the noblest reverence, it remains prudent that as a person her position should not bereft her of her humanity and personality. That is, her position as a president should not restrict her from doing what she has openly expressed willingness to do in the national interest (not violating the constitution), and should also not deny her the opportunity to clear doubts of her involvement in the civil crisis as there are numerous claims on this subject.
The misinterpretation of Article 61 by those pseudo-constitutionalists is the belief or assumption that the TRC is a court, or proceedings at the TRC are forms of prosecution. An invitation to appear before a truth commission to give accounts of experiences is in no way an indictment, a suit nor an arrest. And statements at a truth commission, like the Liberian TRC, cannot be used in any court of law against the person making them (TRC ACT-Article VII, Section 30). The Commission’s sole mandate, according to its Act of 2005, is to promote national peace, security, unity and reconciliation. It is pursuant to that mandate that hearings are held to document the historical occurrences and the experiences of key players of the civil crisis, victims, witnesses, experts and individuals of interest to the process.
Another erratic and blatant bias on the part of the pseudo-constitutionalist is their deliberate refusal to interpret Article 97 of the 1986 Constitution which protects members of the People’s Redemption Council from answering questions at any proceedings regarding their roles in the change of government in 1980, and all other actions taken by the Council thereafter. Interestingly members of the PRC have appeared and their appearances in the eyes of those pseudo-constitutionalists have not contradicted any constitutional provision since they have kept silence on it. If history were to accidentally make President Sirleaf a member of the PRC, the basis of their argument would have been on Article 97 (but glory be to God she survived that historical accident).
President Sirleaf had promised to lead by example, and initiatives in her regime are manifestations of the fulfillment of that promise. She has taken bold steps to kickoff many national projects intentionally to encourage her fellow Liberians to follow. This was demonstrated when she took the HIV/AIDS and other Tests. Her mini agriculture project in her back yard and many other initiatives are resounding examples of leadership by example. In like manner, had President Sirleaf being the first to testify before the TRC, considering results yielded from initiatives she had launched, could make one to believe that the TRC would have had more witnesses than it currently have. And those threatening to boycott the process, particularly ministers in government, would have thought twice.
Her appearance before the Commission, no matter what is never late as she will be treated like any other witness as a prominent Liberian during the war years and not as the President of Liberia. Some witnesses have alleged that she directly participated in the. One witness claimed that he saw her in military outfits in rebel control areas; another witnessed linked her to the 1985 abortive coup. The veracities of those claims are yet to be established. There is also a statement attributed to her concerning the dismantling of the Executive Mansion during the heat of the war. The TRC public hearing is a ‘one-stop shop’ opportunity for every Liberian including President Sirleaf to perforate the rumor-balloon of their involvement with the civil crisis.
There are alternatives to appearing before the TRC. A witness could chose to appear in Camera by an application for proceedings to be held in camera by victims, perpetrators or witnesses and such application shall be considered and passed upon as the commission deems fit (TRC ACT – Art. VII Sec. 26, ii). President Sirleaf like any other Liberian has rights to all available alternatives.
But considering Liberia as a rumor- based society, where rumors, rather than facts spread quickly, we see it prudent and expedient that President Sirleaf muster the courage to appear before the TRC in public. This will not only promote her leadership by example campaign, but will help to clarify the doubts that many Liberians have concerning her involvement with war in this country. At the same time her failure to appear publicly will indirectly gown the claims of the previous witnesses as fact. Finally, this is a call to President Sirleaf, that for the sake of the national good, for the interest of those that admire her and willing to know about her involvement with the crisis, and for the clarifications of public doubts, and for the defense of her humanity she must disregard all ill-advices and make a public appearance at the TRC. If possible this must be broadcast live on all radio and television stations for many Liberians to have the opportunity to obtain first hand information.
It is a Liberian parable that says ‘the kojologbo (bitter medicine) is too bitter, but you must close your eyes to drink it with courage, and you will be healed”.
-In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, the Pen Shall Never Run Dry-
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
It was in the interest of national reconciliation and the promotion of an environment of genuine coexistence that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established as part of resolutions at the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Accra in 2003. Since the commencement of its activities in the country, we have witnessed the appearance of victims, perpetrators as well as witnesses or individuals who have experiences or involvement with certain events during the conflict. In that direction, we have heard the testimonies of key actors, including the leaders of the NPFL, INPFL, ULIMO-K, ULIMO-J, MODEL, LURD, LPC, and other smaller groups that were duped as ‘defend forces’ for tribal or geographical settings. Individuals associated with the People’s redemption Council and the mass citizen-driven revolutionary groups of PAL and MOJA have also appeared and vivid accounts of their experiences during the internecine political decadence our country went though were delivered publicly. It is also of interest to state that children, civil society actors, women advocates, and media practitioners and historians delivered presentation on their own experiences. This indicates the relevance of the reconciliation process, and the resolved commitment of the people of Liberia to reconcile history and set a stage through structural and institutional change to avoid recurrence of conflict. Even those that were directly affected (those whose families were broken apart, homes and properties destroyed, loved ones killed) have embraced the process and are mustering the courage in true spirit of nationalism appearing before the Commission.
At this critical and terminal point of public hearings in the work of the Commission, the attention of this series has been drawn to a very simple issue – the appearance of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf - that have turned to be controversial due to misinterpretation, misinformation, sycophancy, and the traditional Liberian style of favor-buying from the power-that- be. This edition of the series intends not to further deepen the controversies of the debate, but to emphasize the need for the President to appear, and not ignoring her right to an alternative appearance as provided by the TRC ACT.
Since the debate concerning the public appearance of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf surfaced in the intellectual gymnasium, many commentators have argued that the President should not appear in public, some have campaigned for her public appearance like main perpetrators have done, but others, like the Attorney General of Liberia, have argued against any form of appearance by the President. The legal premise of those who are against public appearance and non-appearance have been based on Article 61 of the 1986 Constitution: “The President shall be immune from any suits, actions or proceedings, judicial or otherwise, and from arrest, detention or other actions on the account of any act done by him while President of Liberia pursuant to any provision of this Constitution or any other laws of the Republic. The President shall not however, be immune from prosecution upon removal from office for the commission of any criminal act done while President”.
At the same time, this argument has been buttressed by what they call ‘protecting the reverence of the office of the presidency’. As for the Attorney General, he had warned that the President should not appear on the basis of his assumption that some commissioners ‘could seek to also use the opportunity to embarrass or humiliate the presidency and this most noble office’. But this is a sheer sycophancy and a direct attempt to undermine the credibility of the Commissioners and their efforts in reconciling this country. The office of the presidency has no ounce of reverence to lose by appearing before the TRC to willingly make presentation on experiences, and answering questions from Commissioners which may primarily be drawn from testimonies of previous witnesses concerning the role of President Sirleaf in the civil crisis. Giving the office of the Presidency the noblest reverence, it remains prudent that as a person her position should not bereft her of her humanity and personality. That is, her position as a president should not restrict her from doing what she has openly expressed willingness to do in the national interest (not violating the constitution), and should also not deny her the opportunity to clear doubts of her involvement in the civil crisis as there are numerous claims on this subject.
The misinterpretation of Article 61 by those pseudo-constitutionalists is the belief or assumption that the TRC is a court, or proceedings at the TRC are forms of prosecution. An invitation to appear before a truth commission to give accounts of experiences is in no way an indictment, a suit nor an arrest. And statements at a truth commission, like the Liberian TRC, cannot be used in any court of law against the person making them (TRC ACT-Article VII, Section 30). The Commission’s sole mandate, according to its Act of 2005, is to promote national peace, security, unity and reconciliation. It is pursuant to that mandate that hearings are held to document the historical occurrences and the experiences of key players of the civil crisis, victims, witnesses, experts and individuals of interest to the process.
Another erratic and blatant bias on the part of the pseudo-constitutionalist is their deliberate refusal to interpret Article 97 of the 1986 Constitution which protects members of the People’s Redemption Council from answering questions at any proceedings regarding their roles in the change of government in 1980, and all other actions taken by the Council thereafter. Interestingly members of the PRC have appeared and their appearances in the eyes of those pseudo-constitutionalists have not contradicted any constitutional provision since they have kept silence on it. If history were to accidentally make President Sirleaf a member of the PRC, the basis of their argument would have been on Article 97 (but glory be to God she survived that historical accident).
President Sirleaf had promised to lead by example, and initiatives in her regime are manifestations of the fulfillment of that promise. She has taken bold steps to kickoff many national projects intentionally to encourage her fellow Liberians to follow. This was demonstrated when she took the HIV/AIDS and other Tests. Her mini agriculture project in her back yard and many other initiatives are resounding examples of leadership by example. In like manner, had President Sirleaf being the first to testify before the TRC, considering results yielded from initiatives she had launched, could make one to believe that the TRC would have had more witnesses than it currently have. And those threatening to boycott the process, particularly ministers in government, would have thought twice.
Her appearance before the Commission, no matter what is never late as she will be treated like any other witness as a prominent Liberian during the war years and not as the President of Liberia. Some witnesses have alleged that she directly participated in the. One witness claimed that he saw her in military outfits in rebel control areas; another witnessed linked her to the 1985 abortive coup. The veracities of those claims are yet to be established. There is also a statement attributed to her concerning the dismantling of the Executive Mansion during the heat of the war. The TRC public hearing is a ‘one-stop shop’ opportunity for every Liberian including President Sirleaf to perforate the rumor-balloon of their involvement with the civil crisis.
There are alternatives to appearing before the TRC. A witness could chose to appear in Camera by an application for proceedings to be held in camera by victims, perpetrators or witnesses and such application shall be considered and passed upon as the commission deems fit (TRC ACT – Art. VII Sec. 26, ii). President Sirleaf like any other Liberian has rights to all available alternatives.
But considering Liberia as a rumor- based society, where rumors, rather than facts spread quickly, we see it prudent and expedient that President Sirleaf muster the courage to appear before the TRC in public. This will not only promote her leadership by example campaign, but will help to clarify the doubts that many Liberians have concerning her involvement with war in this country. At the same time her failure to appear publicly will indirectly gown the claims of the previous witnesses as fact. Finally, this is a call to President Sirleaf, that for the sake of the national good, for the interest of those that admire her and willing to know about her involvement with the crisis, and for the clarifications of public doubts, and for the defense of her humanity she must disregard all ill-advices and make a public appearance at the TRC. If possible this must be broadcast live on all radio and television stations for many Liberians to have the opportunity to obtain first hand information.
It is a Liberian parable that says ‘the kojologbo (bitter medicine) is too bitter, but you must close your eyes to drink it with courage, and you will be healed”.
-In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, the Pen Shall Never Run Dry-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
