Marginalization and Inequality in the Justice and Rule of Law Systems in Liberia

Introduction

Liberia’s history of governance from 1847 to the fall of the True Whig Party oligarchy in 1980, and to the fall of the military dictatorship in 1990 has been characterized by marginalization and inequality in the distribution of the nation’s wealth. Even after those two periods, the years of crisis also witnessed similar governing arrangements. Indeed, warring factions found eloquent justifications in using the terms ‘marginalization and inequality’ as a means of rallying mass support for their factions. Membership of a warring party became a prerequisite for participating and/or benefitting from the country’s wealth. Ironically, however, only selective members of these factions were able to benefit from the distribution of the state resources, leaving most of the foot soldiers and citizens excluded from the spoils of the crisis.

Given the above history, the perennial challenge of the country remains limited or no participation of the majority of the people in the political direction of the state – or lack of good governance. This is generally underscored by the poor quality of the law, or no effective system for addressing grievances in the country. It is within this corridor – the interaction between the citizens and the state – that needs focused attention.

Marginalization, Inequality, Poverty and Conflict in Liberia

In the past, political marginalization through which the majority of the people were excluded or limited from the state formed the basis for establishing the two economic classes in Liberia. This is anchored in Jeanne E. Arnold’s (1995) definition of marginalization and how it builds social inequality. Arnold (1995) defines marginalization as a process by which established or emerging elites create socio-economic relations of superior versus subordinate/dependent through manipulations of labor and distributions of social services (See Jeanne E. Arnold (1995): Social Inequality, Marginalization, and Economic Process: Chp. III Foundation of Social Inequalities). In Liberia, this socioeconomic arrangement thrives because the political system had been structured to marginalize and systematically impose on majority of the people. For example, schools, hospitals, public utilities and recreation centers were limited to only selective few of the population nestled in urban enclaves like Monrovia. Consequently, the relationship between handfuls of elites (mainly senior public servants) to that of the majority has been that of superior-to-servant; and in some cases, low level government workers, including military officers, drivers, and office assistants have been used as house helps by their superiors.

On the basis of this structural arrangement, the majority saw the state and the functionaries of government as ‘personal’ properties of senior officials, until lately in the 1970s when a group of ‘progressive’ Liberians mainly from indigenous communities mounted a challenge to the status quo and demanded participation. This challenge and demand for a wider democratic space was preempted in 1980 when the military unseated the ruling oligarchy at the applause of the marginalized masses. This euphoria was short-lived as the military regime became infested with ethnic rifts, and assumed a character of repression and dictatorship. Nonetheless, the new government officials, mainly illiterate soldiers and their cronies, and members of the ‘progressives of the 1970 suddenly became Liberia’s new elites.

Under this arrangement, military officers took senior positions in government and civilian employees were given military ranks and uniforms. Leaders from the three frontline advocacy groups against the True Whig Party autocracy – the Progressive Alliance of Liberia, Movement for Justice in Africa, and the Union of Liberian Associations in the Americas – were all incorporated into the military government, thus giving them status in the class of elites.

Reflections on these historical patterns of class and elite constitution in Liberia form the premise of this article: access to political positions has defined the class divide in the country, and has also determined who deserves full justice and who does not. In other words, the dominance of one class (elites) in one sector of Liberia - its politics - empowers that class to spread its influence to other sectors. Consequently, Liberia’s political elites have always formed its economic elite as well. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, in its final report clearly indicated that the exclusion of the majority of the people from the affairs of the state, and the foundations on which the state was established as a separatist state to ‘civilize, and Christianize’ were part of the causes of the civil war, and have further contributed immensely to poverty in Liberia.

The struggle for participation by the marginalized groups in Liberia, and the insatiable desire for everyone to be part of the governing class, which may subsequently give him/her membership to the economic class is another succinct explanation for the intractability of crisis in Liberia.

Resolving these issues must be through a systematic process of institution building, particularly in governance and the rule of law. An effective governance system that will promote equal participation and efficient service delivery to every part of the country is critical to addressing the issues of marginalization and inequality. Also important is the opening of economic corridors that for private sector development that will facilitate the growth of an economic middle class.

The right of every citizen before the law and the availability of means to get access to justice at any given point in addressing grievances cannot be overemphasized. The strengthening of public institutions that will provide services in a way that individuals are left to blame for their own progress or failure can properly address structural violence in Liberia.


Judiciary and Rule of Law Reforms

The Rule of Law is a concept that represents the ideal function of the modern state in addressing the interests of the community and the general population of its territory (See Swiss Agency for Development Corporation: The Rule of Law Concept: Significance in Development Corporation). Basic indicators for a functioning rule of law system include: An adequate functioning judiciary, equality of all citizens in legislations and the application of law; the separation of powers between the legislative, executive, and the judiciary; the respect of human rights (both civil and political rights); the primacy of the constitution; the principle of the legitimacy of the administration; and the human security of every citizen etc.

The above are very relevant to present day Liberia, particularly during this post-war recovery era. The Government of Liberia Poverty Reduction Strategy generically addressed all in separate ways, and some cut across the four pillars.

Judicial and rule of law reforms are addressed in Pillar Four of the PRS: Strengthening Governance and the Rule of Law in which the GOL‘s goal is ‘to work in partnership with all citizens to build and operate effective institutions and systems that will strengthen peace and promote and uphold democratic governance, accountability, and justice for all’ (See Republic of Liberia (2008): Strengthening Governance and the Rule of Law; Poverty Reduction Strategy). A broader focus in this pillar is placed on increasing participation of all citizens in governance and public policy decision-making processes. The remaining sections speaks of justice and rule of law, but with little details. This is also stated in the 2009 -2011 Strategic Plan of the Judiciary. Realizing that the GoL placed little emphasis on judiciary and rule of law reforms in the PRS, the plan contends that ‘even though its (the GoL) major contribution will focus on governance and the rule of law, the effective functioning of the Judiciary is also a necessary prerequisite for success in the remaining three pillars of the PRS’ (See The Judiciary of the Republic of Liberia (2009); Strategic Plan 2009 -2011.


Challenges

The justice system and the Judiciary in Liberia have faced many challenges that can be traced as far back as the founding of the country. The Judiciary has been manipulated by the Executive Branch of Government in many instances, and most of its dispositions in both lower and upper courts have supported and further explained the inequalities in the dispensation of justice in Liberia.

However, the challenges face by the judiciary and the enforcement of the rule of law are not limited to its manipulation by the Executive Branch, but also extend to its huge technical and professional deficiencies to function effectively. Many cases are left unaddressed; and many persons are accused and detained for very long periods before or without trial. These and many more have eroded its confidence in the eyes of the very people it is serving. As a result many persons or communities have resorted to mob actions or violent uprisings as a means of settling grievances. In February 2010, angry citizens burnt to death an officer of the Liberia National Police, after he allegedly killed a resident of their community. This reaction of the citizen was in response to the slow process of justice delivery in the courts, which has caused extreme lack of confidence for the judiciary and rule of law systems among the people.

In rural communities trial by ordeal or traditional means, mainly through the application of magical ‘science’ is used by local people as alternative to statutory judicial process. This justice process has numerous ways for its trial process. One example is the laying of a very hot iron on the foot of suspects, with the belief that only the guilty person can be burnt in this process. Verdicts from such trials are usually highly contested like in courts, but there is no source of last appeal.

Since the launch of the PRS the process of judiciary and the rule of law reforms has been a daunting one for the government of Liberia, and it is observed that the three-year implementation period as set within the PRS is too limited for such a herculean task. The following are still major issues to ensuring equal access before the law as a means of dealing with the long system of marginalization and inequality in Liberia: Limited number of court houses in most parts of the country; Limited number of law enforcement officers around the country (particularly rural communities) – in most rural communities police officers are hardly seen, and in some parts individuals volunteering as community police erect checkpoints on main highways, and lack capacities to arrest or enforce any laws. Magistrates, public defenders, prosecutors, and even judges in courts in the rural communities are under trained. An observation at a magisterial court hearing in the Cestos City Hall (Rivercess County) in April 2010 further convinced me that the state is not fully functional at the level of the counties, and the local people are left to survive their own way. Yet, they look up to that system, despite its conspicuous faults. In some counties, County Attorneys are lords unto themselves. In Bomi County for example, a County Attorney used his title to intimidate people for a contested farmland in which he has vested interest.

Political influence on law enforcement officers- Liberia is yet to establish an effective system of rule of law to which every citizen must account. Public officials constantly interfere with the work of the police, particularly in cases of their interest. In July 2010, an officer of the Liberia National Police was badly flogged on order of the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives. This situation became a heated political issue when member of his political party rallied at his gate to stop his arrest by the LNP. Additionally, the following challenges are still in the judiciary; Unresolved cases on courts’ dockets; Limited or no action against corruption – even with a professed anti-corruption agenda, there is still a class system in the ruling administration on which the rules for accountability are compromised. Prosecution or dismissal for corruption in the government remains selective, and the president in some instances will publicly defend officials indicted by audits and special investigative committees; Lack of adequate legal representation for indigents litigants and accusers.

In the midst of the numerous challenges faced by the judiciary and the justice system, some progresses are however noteworthy. The problematic issue remains whether the progresses made can be institutionalized and distributed equally across the country. Carving out a national strategy for sustaining these reforms will go a long way in assuring equal opportunities to justice in Liberia, and enhancing popular participation of Liberians everywhere. Some notable progress made thus far include, the establishment of the James A.A. Pierre Judicial Institute; The deployment of public defendants and county attorneys in the counties; The establishment of the judicial budgetary independence; The building of modern court houses in some counties; The building of new police stations in some counties; The recruitment of college graduates to be trained as magistrates for lower courts.

Conclusion

The Poverty Reduction Strategy represents a well defined program for post-war development in Liberia provided its implementation is well articulated and sustained and its vision pursued forward beyond 2011. Despite the numerous inadequacies of resources, and the challenges face by the current administration, significant progress is being made in reaching out to communities with public goods and service, particularly justice. The most problematic issue remains the delivery of services to rural communities, particular security and the enforcement of the rule of law.
The judiciary needs a well carved out program of de-concentration in the country to ensure that people everywhere, no matter their social or economic statuses, have access to institutions of legal remedy to settle grievances.

Citizens have resorted to mob violence in Liberia because of the slow pace in addressing their grievances through the court system. Informal sectors are left on the fringes of the state creating alternative power and authority independent of the state. Additionally, corruption and parochial interests are gravely undermining the rule of law system. In most cases the sale of justice begins with law enforcement officers at the expense of indigent people. This has continuously led to distrust for the system, and has increased cases of crimes and mob actions. The best way to address these (mainly mob violence) is to build a system of integrity in the judiciary, and build the capacity of law enforcement and judicial officers, not only through education and training, but also through pay and incentives reforms that will motivate staff and improve integrity and professionalism.

Revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt: Lessons for African Autocrats and Revolutionaries

Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
pericle925@yahoo.com

A wave is blowing across the Middle East and North Africa, and there are prospects for other oppressed people in sub-Sahara Africa to gain inspirations from this wind of change blowing upward. Interestingly the people’s power is challenging and bringing down – in matter of days – regimes that have maltreated them and mismanaged their resources. What is doubtful is that whether sub-Saharan Africa, a region whose history is replete with violence and civil crises, can succeed in toppling kleptocrats and autocrats without arms? Two of Liberia’s respected young intellectuals (Ali Sylla and Ali Kaba) argue that such revolutions are mainly possible in ‘highly conscious societies’, they therefore doubt the capacity and ability of the people of sub-Saharan Africa to imitate their northern counterparts in self-organizing and liberating themselves. A reflection of what took place before toppling Mobutu in Zaire, Doe and Taylor in Liberia, Momoh in Sierra Leone, and the numerous past and current civil wars in the region led me to accepting their postulation. I concur that if Liberia had a conscious civil society in 1979, the True Whig Party oligarchy would have come to an end without going through a high scale violent struggle, or if indeed the people were weary of the dictatorships of Doe and Taylor the long bush path to destruction would have been averted and a mass nonviolent citizen protest against the harsh excesses of said regimes would have installed a democratic order.

The Middle-east and North Africa have proven to be different in expressing grievances at autocrats. The people’s power in this region has made significant changes like the Iranian revolution of 1979 and other past civil disobedient actions in that region. Egypt and Tunisia have demonstrated real people’s power in the 21st century, and this is snowballing across the region. What are the lessons now?

Revolutionary successes in Tunisia and Egypt have taught new lessons to African autocrats that they cannot perpetually marginalize and oppress their people, and the people of Africa have been reminded that the real power is in their hands, and where socio-economic conditions become unbearable, political processes repressive, mass mobilization for non-violent revolutions can make the necessary change popularly demanded. Egypt and Tunisia have indeed taught good lessons in 21st century Africa. Interestingly, the developments took place in a continent where processes of regime change and even electoral processes have been very violent. In some instances, military coups hijack constitutional processes, or for the ‘better’ put end to resented dictatorships. In 2010 alone Africa was experiencing civil wars largely necessitated by bad governance and dictatorship in Somalia, Darfur Region of Sudan and DR Congo. Countries like Guinea and Niger were under military leaderships while Madagascar was under a pariah civilian regime that came to power through a putsch.

Unlike the cases of unconstitutional regime changes or military putsches across the continent, no international group or nation has announced any form of sanction or suspension of membership or diplomatic ties against the popular people’s action in either Tunisia or Egypt. Powerful nations and organizations have praised the resilience and determination of the people in their attempts to liberate themselves without armed struggle. This must also teach us that no force is powerful enough to condemn a popular success of regime change planned and executed by the people. Liberia, Sierra Leone, DR Congo, and some other conflict-affected countries in Africa became pariahs because their revolutions were led by greedy and power-drunk politicians whose only motivations were to ascend to power and get access to state resources. Those were not revolutions popularly supported from the grassroots.

What African leaders need to learn now is that they can leave power just in days when their people grow weary of their excesses. This lesson must be a motivation for immediate reforms across the continent. Reforms in constitutions that promote popular democratic participation and accountability are critical to addressing present day governance challenges in Africa. The people’s power in Tunisia and Egypt were expressed against regimes that spanned more than two decades, and resentment has begun to grow in Cameroon and Libya against strongmen rules. This means that Africans are getting increasingly angry with old fashioned leadership, and want to experiment with new ideas of the 21st century deposited in the marginalized young population. Constitutional reform processes must therefore be clear on term-limit for elected offices, and be specific on age range for political offices. Young people are the engine of political development and economic growth across the world. They have shown it in Egypt and Tunisia, and they are mobilizing in Algeria, Libya and Bahrain. They must therefore wake up for national leadership.

In some regions, like in the West, young leaders are progressively ending the poverty of their people through contemporary innovations. Africa is still led by politicians from the 1960s. In Liberia for example, it is most likely that emerging young politicians and technocrats will not easily succeed in transforming the country to a 21st century nation-state with its attendant opportunities while politicians from the 1970s are still struggling for space in the process. Leading oppositions and the key figures in the ruling party in Liberia are politicians from the 1970s - with the least age being 67 - who are still mounting efforts for another six-year political challenge. These people are also succeeding by machinations, co-optations and manipulations of the young people. How then can the young generation lead a progressive and nonviolent revolution in sub-Saharan Africa?

The young people of Africa need to stand up for their rights and demand from their governments accountability in the use of resources and the exercise of power. More to that, the young people need to work and build mass consciousness among their people and begin to take political challenges for higher offices. They must motivate and inspire their people into revolutions that will positively transform their societies and make socio-economic opportunities equitable. These revolutions must be accompanied by strong desires and passions for ending the suffering of the people of Africa. Honest and sincere revolutions in the name of the people can only be executed by young men and women who have high moral character and high sense of political and social responsibility to their people and community.

As for Mohammed Bouazizi of Tunisia, he believed that by committing suicide would have ended his suffering as a young university graduate without a job under a regime that have oppressed him for decades. The self-immolation of this young vegetable seller in December 2010 was the sacrifice for the redemption of his people and his country from an unbearable autocracy. The end of Bouazizi’s life and the liberation of the people of Tunisia has become an inspiration for the self-emancipation of oppressed people worldwide. Bouazizi’s self-immolation did not only expelled Ben Ali and his cronies from Tunisia, but has cost Mubarak his job of 30 years, and is threatening the foundations of other autocrats in Africa. May the souls of Mohammed Bouazizi rest in peace, and may the arches of his soul from the self-immolation be a fertilizer for democracy around the world. Bouazizi has gone to join ranks with other martyrs of African liberation. The ways to commemorate Bouazizi and to ensure that his sacrifice does not go in vain are to ensure that democracy flourish in his native Tunisia and Africa at large; that socio-economic opportunities in employment, heath care and education be available and affordable for the people of Tunisia and Africa at large; and that young Africans continuously challenge autocracies and begin to work towards transforming their countries for the better.

Prejudice of Ethnicity and the Disenfranchisement of the Mandingoes

CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN XX
Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
pericle925@yahoo.com

We begin this edition of the series with cautionary notes on the devastating consequences humanity has suffered resulting from either emotional or physical expression of ethnic prejudices. In the Great Lakes region in Africa, Rwanda and Burundi have continued to suffer ethnic differences expressed violently. In Sri Lanka, differences between the Tamils and Sinhalese led to years of civil war with the Tamil leaders forced into exile repeatedly calling for a separate Tamil state. In Liberia, we need not mention of the tragedy of the 1990s when rebel forces launched an invasion and specifically targeted Krahns and Mandingoes for elimination. With over millions of Tutsis and Hutus killed in Rwanda and Burundi, the two ethnic groups continue to live together. And with the attempted genocide against the Mandingoes, they are still around and progressive than ever before. This is meant to remind us all that no one group can completely eliminate any other group in a country or anywhere. If this was possible there might have been no Jew after the Holocaust.

We lay the above historical premises to draw attentions to what seems to be a recurrent provocation of the Mandingoes in Liberia. Let it be known that the peacefulness members of this ethnic group have exhibited in the midst of trials and tribulations, even from state authorities, cannot easily be borne by other ethnic groups in some places. In the 1990s, there was a genocide attempt that failed miserably. Today discrimination against this ethnic group have manifested itself in many ways including provocations, public denials, and harsh questioning of their citizenship; and now, it seems a real opportunity has come for their ‘nemeses’ to disenfranchise them from the forthcoming elections. This by extension is to effectively deny them their citizenship. Individuals assigned at voter registration centers have acted as though they were trained to be critical of only elements of the Mandingo ethnic group. This, they do by questioning the citizenship of people who carry names associated with this tribe. There are several factors that should be considered in the Mandingo case which many Liberians do not understand. The only postulate they have used is that Mandingoes are from Guinea, and therefore anyone bearing name associated with this ethnic group is from Guinea. How weak or intellectually strong is this postulate? We declare the debate open.

A point of clarity to make here is that Mandingo is not the only Liberian tribe found in other countries. An understanding of the political concept of transnationalism can answer many questions around ethnic groups found in multiple countries and regions, and how they have maintained their ethnonational identities without interfering with their individual citizenship. In the Mano River basin alone, the Kissis, Mendes, Lormas, Kpelle, Gios, Krahns etc, are transnational ethnic groups with members bearing different citizenship. Scholars have attributed some of these to the creation of artificial boundaries as a result of Western colonialism in Africa. Another point we need to clarify here is that the attempted genocide against the Mandingoes in the 1990s forced them into exile and children born to those exiled families in refugee camps in Sierra Leone, Guinean, Ivory Coast and elsewhere are returning home with limited knowledge of this country. They are entitled to Liberian citizenship like any other Liberian born inside or outside of the country. Unfortunately, and very preposterously, immigration officers, and voter registrars judge people’s citizenship by their accent in English or the standards of English they speak. What’s about those Liberian government officials who speak like Americans or Europeans? Can that be used as a measurement of citizenship? Of course not! (A second debate is left opened). Sadly, As a result of growing prejudices against the Mandingoes in Liberia, the stereotype has been constructed in a way that a Guinean Kpelle or a Sierra Leonean Kissi for examples, can easily be considered a Liberian than naturally born Liberian Mandingo citizens.

Reports from around the country, mainly Bong County and around Monrovia speak of continuous denials of the Mandingoes in the voter registration exercise, and that those successful face thorough scrutiny than any other registrants. Denial of a person in an isolated community is not limited to that person, but constitutes a target of a larger community with hundreds of thousands of people. We must know that we are at the crossroad in determining the next direction of this fragile, but ‘stable’ country, therefore we must continuously remind ourselves of our bitter past. What we achieve as a nation during the fourteen years of internecine feud must be the best lesson for us if we are to move forward. A short term employee or contractor with no advance training is wrongly suited in determining someone’s citizenship, or by extension disenfranchising a person. I mean the citizenship of a person should not be determined at the discretion of a contracted voter registrar.

Liberians will have to call themselves to order, and be reminded that the grievances from unbearable prejudices against ones ethnic group can be responded to terribly, and that the toll such grievances have had on humanity are too tragic to be stated here.

We see the current trends of ethnic differences as issues crossing over from the civil war that remains unaddressed seven years after the war. It is hard time for our country to begin to address critical issues concerning national identity, citizenship and the use of ethnic, sectarian and religious differences as forces of development rather than forces of division. Ethnic prejudice against any single ethnic group in Liberia must be discouraged because they are sources of chaos. As I conclude, I am filled with hopes that one day the diversities in this country will collectively strengthen us to build a nation that will value individual worth rather than ethnic or religious affiliations.

- In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice the Pen Shall Never Run Dry

A Country for Sale: How and Why Poor Liberians are Selling the Country to the Bourgeoisie

Critical Issues of National Concern XIX

Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei
pericle925@yahoo.com

A specter is haunting Liberia. This specter seems different from the ones that came in the 1970s, the 1990s, and the early 2000s. This time, it seems, having survived decades of poverty in harsh socio-economic conditions and hopelessness, many poor Liberians have resolved to sell their most powerful constitutional possession to those of their fellow countrymen that have become wealthier by preying on the state. The same people have over the years unleashed poverty, illiteracy and injustice in the country as a means of enhancing wealth and consolidating power bases.

Article One of the Constitution of Liberia states that ‘All power is inherent in the people. All free governments are instituted by their authority and for their benefit and they have the right to alter and reform the same when their safety and happiness so require. In order to ensure democratic government which responds to the wishes of the governed, the people shall have the right at such period, and in such manner as provided for under this Constitution, to cause their public servants to leave office and to fill vacancies by regular elections and appointments’. The powers discussed above are in the citizens’ vote, and petitions for impeachments of elected officials and petitions for legislations. In an emerging democracy like Liberia, the citizens exercise this power periodically, like after every six years or in the event of death of an elected official. Their ability to demand and evaluate the outputs of the government as part of the process of ‘assessing output legitimacy’ is weak due to manipulations, poverty, and mass illiteracy’.

Why are the people selling their constitutional power to vote? Many Liberians believe that whether they participate or not, they will remain disaffected by the state and its policies. Observations and experiences from travelling around Liberia indicate that effective state institutions for service delivery and security are absent in almost 90 percent of the country. The people have had limited roles and their power-to-vote comes just every six years, and the output legitimacy of successive governments have been very weak. Currently, the people have developed serious apathy towards the electoral process, and now they believe that their votes are only legitimate instruments of giving individuals power and wealth. This is being discussed in public transport vehicles, market areas and community squares. A young woman said openly on a taxi cab that she cannot ‘do voter registration free of charge’ when others are being paid to register. With about 68 percent of the population in abject poverty, it is assumed that only about ten percent enjoys real ‘wealth’, and that those wealth are directly traceable to the Government of Liberia. This means, those considered wealthy Liberians, must have either worked for the government, still works for the government, or are close relatives of former government officials. Some of them are in giant size businesses, which cannot survive without the support or manipulation of government officials. With a seemingly competitive democratic space, the cash must be spent to retain political seats that will ultimately give unfettered access to economic opportunities. The repetition of this process after every six years will keep the poor poorer, and make the rich grow richer. How this vote-buying market running and what are other motivating factors behind it?

Liberia is built on a system in which access to political power gives an individual dominance and influence in the economy. This is to say, the easiest way to economic fortune in Liberia, is to seek political power. This is why the bourgeoisie are doing all they can to retain their status, either by retaining electoral offices, or by graduating from presidential appointment to autonomy in the legislature, where they will by law, set their own salaries and benefits. There is a huge profit in this business: pay for votes with as low as 20 to 30 US dollars, donate bags of rice to poor people, and expect to get in return over US 5000.00 and hundreds of gallons of gasoline monthly, guardsmen, home servants, and high lobby fees.

This is a dramatic and ironic occurrence in our process of democratic development. After years of agitation for participation, the process has now been opened and we have a seemingly level playing field. Wealthy and influential Liberians, mainly government officials are taking people to legislative districts of their interests to register for the pending election. With voter registration on-going, thousands of people, mainly young voters (young people are over 60 percent of Liberia’s population) are transported from their communities to far away electoral districts by rich Liberian politicians, where they will be paid to register and in return vote for the same politicians. The prices vary per area and distance. In some places, you register and give your card to the rich Liberian and get 20 USD and make a promise that you will collect the card on voting day and mark a ballot in the favor of that rich Liberian. Consider after this transaction that your share of the country has been sold or permanently leased for six years. If socio-economic conditions remain the same, you may renew the lease agreement after another six years.

The justification they have for transporting voters is that they are facilitating citizens who wants to go back to their counties of origin to vote. Interestingly, these people did not transport citizens to their counties of origin during the 2008 census, something that might have recorded high populations for those areas and put them under considerations for development programs, if any. Doing this at the time of voter registration have exposed their selfish motives.

The long time effect of this on our country is that it will deepen systems of marginalization and promotes predatory regimes. Citizens’ frustrations with predatory and marginalized systems have been expressed aggressively around Africa. The civil war in Liberia has probably not revolutionized the country to the equitable advantage of all of its citizens. The secession of southern Sudan, the recent fall of the long time ruler of Tunisia, Ben Ali, the fall of the Marxist regime in Ethiopia (1990), were aggressive citizens’ actions that resulted from long time grievances and frustrations.

With the country being sold to the rich politicians, it is obvious that sincere individuals with advocacy and strong leadership backgrounds in communities will be effectively disenfranchised due to their financial impotencies. Political parties are scrutinizing aspirants on the basis of their financial power and their willingness to pay huge sums of money to buy votes. Instead of sitting and allow the poor people to unsuspectingly sell their rights, and by extension their country, the civil society must now take the lead to do massive civic education in communities. This civic education must consider among other things how to choose leaders, rights and duties under the constitution, and methods of scrutinizing certified candidates – this must also consider individual competence, integrity, leadership charisma and moral and criminal records. High schools and university instructors must also be involved in this process of civic education, because it is assumed that many first-time-voters are students.

-In the cause of democracy and social justice, the pen shall never run dry

The Servant Paradox: The benefits the People’s Doctor, the People's Teacher, and the People's Representatives

CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN XVIII

Africa has always been a poor and unstable region with reputations of dangerous political games. The reason is if you enter politics in Africa, you must enter with your whole life, because it is a ‘do or die’ contest. In political science, when reading game theory, you will come across the zero-sum game. In the zero-sum game the winner takes all, and the loser takes none. This is the style of politics in Africa. The fortune of winning an electoral office in an African country, like Liberia, exposes you to many benefits even out of your scope of duties. First you have a constitutional cover that protects you even if you flout public rule. Second, the country’s resources are at your disposal. With only the politicians having unfettered access to their country’s natural resources and the financial returns from those resources, the stakes for political seats will always be very too high. This is why we can see a real rush and plethora of candidates vying for electoral seats in Liberia as we go to the next general and presidential elections.

This edition of the series looks at the benefits the people’s teachers have while in the classroom making future leaders and servants, and the doctors while in the hospitals saving lives as compared to the benefits of those who represents the people in the Legislature makes. Do they do the same work? The man who teaches, the man who saves lives, and the man who makes the law - who lives the better life? These are the questions we seek to answer here, and ultimately we can determine while everybody is petitioning some people to petition him/her for a legislative seat.

The paradox here is that the people who are always in hurry and very busy making society to function are paid less and less cared-for by the governing authority, while the people who make laws for society, make a budget and determine their own salary, work just for two days a week in six months, and take a six months leisure break, live an extravagant and opulent life paid for by the people. The people’s representatives will call this leisure break an agricultural break, but it is mostly spent in cities and hotels in other countries like the United States. Imagine an Ambassador telling the people’s representatives to stop going for visas and spend their break in their constituencies. The people’s doctors work throughout the year, and practically have no break, likewise the people’s teachers.

According to the Constitution of Liberia, the people’s representative cannot be arrested for any crime while going to the Legislature, except for felonious crimes, but the people’s doctor and people’s teacher can be arrested for any crime including traffic violations, even if going to save lives or going to the classroom.
The people’s representatives practically live on the state, while the people’s teacher and the people’s doctor are left by themselves and survive on handouts from the state. Every year in Liberia, the people’s doctors stage strikes and walk out of health centers either because of low pay or no pay. The people’s teachers are the most deserted, and there is no successful school year in the country that does not experience a teachers’ walkout due to low pay or no pay.

The people’s representatives will never stage a strike for their ‘sixteen hours’ work per week benefits and salaries. Any attempt to delay, reduce or deny the people’s representatives of getting their pay, the official responsible must be ready to respond to contempt charges in a tribunal where the representatives are the prosecutors, the jurors and judges. Today in Liberia, the cash value of the monthly salary and benefits of a representative of the people is more than 100% higher than the total value of what the people’s doctor and their teacher take home in total.
This is how the socio-economic disparity, as defined by the body-polity is wide in our country; and this is a country that does not have running water, electricity, and better sanitation for up to 10 percent of its population. Any system of such terribly undermines the effective functioning of a society and cast doubts on the seriousness of modern capitalism in improving citizens’ welfare. Do we advocate here for a non-capitalist order? NO! We call for a social democratic revolution that will address our national income disparities in a way that everyone will not necessarily be paid equally, but that everyone’s income can be considerable enough to justify his/her level of contributions to the welfare of the citizens, and the state.

How then do we rationalize this servant paradox? It takes a real people’s revolution to mobilize the workers against such conspicuous disparity. The people must now begin to call for constitutional reforms and make decisions on these issues. By the law, the constitution must lay down the floor and ceiling for the pay and benefits of the people’s servants – doctors, nurses, teachers, representatives and other officials. And if every servant is left to decide his own pay and benefits, like the representatives have, there will obviously be no control, but effective exploitation and legitimate pillage of the state’s resources. With only the people’s representatives deciding their own pay (a very fabulous and huge one), all of the citizens will seek to be representatives, and the society risks losing teachers, and doctors, for everyman loves good and free life, uncheck and in abundance as we can see our fellow citizens on Capitol Hills.

-In the cause of democracy and social justice, the pen shall never run dry

CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN XVII

The Politicization of Civic Voter Education Campaign

Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei

Elections in Liberia are just 10 months way, and the stakes are getting too high, ultimately, there will be huge desperations in contenders for the presidency and legislative seats. Electoral processes with high stakes and uncontrolled desperations are usually characterized by enmity amongst contenders, violence and distrusts. With the dawn of 2011 commencing with a voter registration exercise, one can see that the politicians or interested contenders are not waiting for full certification and declaration of campaign period. The strategy of subterranean campaign activities can now be seen in the ongoing civic education process aimed at increasing mass turnout during the voter registration exercise.

This edition of this series has one major argument: That voter and civic education initiatives during electoral processes are functions of the legitimate electoral management institution, and independent civil society organizations. Unfortunately, the current trend of voter education is being overshadowed by politicians in the name of promoting mass turn out. What is more ironical in this process is that people who are publicly known to have direct vested interest in contesting the elections or are members of political parties are the ones fronting as civic educators and claiming neutrality. Interestingly, the National Elections Commission and the civil society are accepting this, and in some cases, endorsing them.

Some political parties have begun to publicly announce to offer free transportation facilities to voters wanting to travel distances to register. Ministers in government are launching their own voter education campaigns. Incumbent legislative candidates have begun the same. These legislative and cabinet officials claiming neutrality have several advantages over other candidates; this must be seen as the beginning of what is called unfair elections. First, they invite the citizens in the name of their official capacities, and second use the forums to create awareness about their interests in the elections. It is no argument that any citizen has the right to call an assembly of citizen or to canvass for support. But the assumption of the functions of the National Elections Commission and that of the civil society movement by political parties and interested candidates can influence the electoral process in many ways and cast doubts on the credibility of the election.
Contrary to the popular belief that electoral frauds can only be done during voting and counting of ballots, is the fact that frauds begin from the beginning and planning processes of elections. To ensure credibility in democratic elections like the forthcoming one in Liberia, the process must be thoroughly guided from the process of nominating members of the electoral management body – developments have shown that we have an independent and credible NEC in Liberia. Other sources of fraud long before the voting exercise can be the process of registering political parties and candidates; the process of civic voter education, and the process of voter registration, and so forth.

With voter registration being the issue at hand, what political parties and candidates should do is to train their supporters to observe the process and take recorded notes of registered voters, outline successes and challenges. Developments from this exercise will give each party a roadmap to strategizing an effective campaign and will also help to give early warnings to the NEC where challenges are discovered. The announcement of transportations facilities for voter education and distribution of food and water at registration sights are the beginning campaigning with material inducements or vote buying. The NEC must therefore call on the parties and the interested candidates to stay clear of the civic voter education campaign, and the voter registration. Each citizen is entitled to be at the center only on the day he is registering, except electoral workers and observers.

The Liberian civil society movement has a huge challenge. And bulk of the work of civic voter education should be channeled through the CSOs that are in the counties, and this should be done in effective collaboration with the NEC. With the civic voter education being overshadowed by politician using covert-campaign slogans, concerned activists will continue to wonder as to what the civil society is doing in all of these, and what role will the civil society play in the future, and will the parties leave the continue their proclaim ‘civic education campaign’ when political campaign is declared open?

-In the cause of democracy and social justice, the pen shall never run dry

CRITICAL ISSUES OF NATIONAL CONCERN XVI

AN EXPERIENCE WITH LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES

Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei




For the past few months, I have been engaged with official matters going around the country working on a major national reform process: the Liberia Decentralization and Local Development program. This engagement and other scholarly vocations have kept me not necessarily silent, but in action for what I have been campaigning for - the empowerment of local people to advance themselves through democratic self-governance. For those who have been reading this series for the past two years, I invoke your forgiveness for keeping you waiting so long, but truly I have been working to ensure that our collective visions and thoughts are translated into actions. Our work around the country has been about engaging local leaders and citizens in each county on the National Policy on Decentralization and Local Governance. This has basically involved sensitization and soliciting inputs on how decentralization can be implemented in Liberia.

My experiences around the country were mixed. And I intend to share these experiences in this edition and the ones that will follow. First, may I say that it was a grand opportunity, and a significant education for me to travel to all of the counties in Liberia. I spent not less than 72 hours in each of the county capitals. My curiosity led me to discovering lot of things I have not learned in a classroom, neither had I seen on paper. Through conversations with local residents, I discovered a resilient characteristic to survive in the absence of a fully functional state authority. I travelled so many miles and passed so many towns and villages without seeing state institutions. I saw how resourceful Liberia is in terms of forest and habitable resources when I travelled through the southeast, and I discovered a huge potential for tourism and fishery investment in some counties, like Grand Cape Mount, Rivercess, and Grand Kru Counties. Gambia is today boasting of tourism as a major source of revenue. Kenya and Ghana are also making significant gains in the tourism industry. Liberia needs to dig into this area to have an additional source of state revenue. This will also empower local communities.

The people of Rivercess for example, have two major occupations: Fishery and Forestry. Empowering the people in that part of the country to advance in these areas will take them from subsistence to commercial activities. This will promote local employment and sustainable development. Our failure to efficiently tap into what nature has endowed us with is what continues to hold us back.

It is not strange that despite Monrovia being a very least developed city, all of the capitals in the counties are far least developed, and that effective modern institutions for human development are absent. My experience at a magisterial court hearing in the Cestos City Hall (Rivercess County) in April 2010 further convinced me that the state is not fully functional at the level of the counties, and the local people are left to survive their own way. Yet, they look up to that system. I witnessed major cases concerning mineral agents and illegal miners, rapes, and civil matters decided by undertrained magistrates and city solicitors.

In all of the counties, you see revenue collection offices, but you will hardly see effective service delivery institutions. This piece is just intended to practically state how challenging it is for an under-resourced central government to effectively deliver services to the local people. The need for decentralization in Liberia is long overdue, but will never be late in as much as the centralized state system continues to dismally fail those that are not in the urban and peri-urban areas of Monrovia. I mean not to say either that it has greater efficiency in the urban and peri-urban areas, but I admit that it has huge visibility in those areas.
In some of the counties, the imperial presidency in Monrovia is vested in the president’s agents - Superintendents and Commissioners - who do not see themselves as leaders of the people, whose power and authority is in the hands of the people. As agent of the President in Monrovia, they act on their own and wait for command from Capitol Hill to decide the fate of thousands of people in big communities and towns. Some of them see themselves as lords, and they are imposing arbitrary rules on the local people. In Bomi County for example, a County Attorney is using his title to intimidate people for a contested farmland in which he has vested interest.
Beyond Monrovia, there is no major socio-economic development, and the rise in rural-urban migration is heavily affecting agricultural activities in those areas; and with limited employment opportunities in Monrovia, the potential for crime in idled young people cannot be overemphasized. Monrovia is getting populated by the day even in the absence of socio-economic facilities. The solution to our development problems can be directly traced to our inadequacies in governance and public administration. In order to avert these and ensure an equitable distribution of our collective power and wealth, we must accelerate the process of transferring power to our local people. Through this, they will be empowered to determine who leads them, and what development priorities they want. Government decentralization is also a means to peace and democracy. The ‘power inherent in the people’ as provided for in Article One of our Constitution, cannot be adequately accentuated if our people do not fully participate in their own governance and development processes. Holding periodic elections does not translate into functional participatory democracy. Participatory democracy extends to the right of the people to continuously decide what they want, get regular accounts of the actions of their leaders, alter government at their will, and so forth. And this process is not an end, but its goal is to advance the lives of the people at all levels, and to create the enabling environment through which every individual has equal opportunities to excel. By this, greed is curtailed, and the possibilities for individual, ethnic or sectarian grievances become limited. Thus peace and development will prevail. Therefore, the most sustainable solution to our development challenges lies in a process of decentralization or a system shared-authority between national government and semi-autonomous local governments.

-In the Cause of Democracy and Social Justice, the Pen Shall Never Run Dry-

POST-WAR SECURITY SECTOR REFORM IN LIBERIA: DEVELOPMENT AND CHALLENGES

IBRAHIM AL-BAKRI NYEI

NOTE: This article was first published in the April 2010 Issue 1 of Conflict Trends by the African Center for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD) in South Africa. Any reference to this article should mention that issue because it is the sole property of ACCORD.

The end of the civil war in Liberia in 2003, and the
subsequent free and fair democratic elections of 2005,
signalled the emergence of peace, stability and sustainable
development to the country. Reaping benefits from
the cessation of hostilities and the ensuing democratic
environment, Liberians needed to make necessary
adjustments to accommodate decisions stemming
from the 2003 Peace Accord. The National Transitional
Government of Liberia (NTGL) and the United Nations
Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) worked together to ensure that
the Peace Accord was decisively pursued and scrupulously
implemented. Subsequently, the first post-war democratic
regime assumed power in 2006, and continued the
collaboration with the UN Mission to ensure that the
country’s reform peace agenda was implemented.

Paramount among the reform recommendations
was Security Sector Reform (SSR). This issue sparked
major debate amongst the country’s actors. Warring
factions wanted to feature their generals in the reformed
(new) army, while civil society activists and political
parties argued against the recruitment of “rebels” into
the military. The outcome was an agreement that the
new army would accommodate members of all warring
factions in its ranks, including the moribund Armed Forces
of Liberia (AFL) and forces loyal to the government of
Charles Taylor1 at the time of the signing of the peace
agreement. The reform programme was ongoing until
31 December 2009, when the United States turned over
the Armed Forces of Liberia’s SSR programme to the
democratic government of Liberia.

This article is an assessment of the SSR programme
in Liberia since the end of the civil war. It also looks
into the challenges faced by the stakeholders in ensuring
that Liberia gets trained security institutions that are
responsive to the people and are not agents of abuse and
blind state loyalists, as was seen in the past.

The Context of Post-war Security Sector Reform

SSR is a concept that was introduced in international
development discourses in 1998, in a speech delivered
by the ministerial head of the British Department for
International Development (DfID), Clare short. Issues
concerning the building of democratic security institutions
and the need for a viable and comprehensive security
sector had featured earlier in development discourses,
but it was short’s speech and the policies promulgated by
the DfID that made the concept of SSR a relevant concept
in international peace, security and development2. Since
then, it has been applied to countries emerging from
wars, and nations that are either failing or weak and
fragile. Specifically, development donors have argued
that assistance must flow into secured environments and,
as such, the necessary security architecture must be in
place to ensure successful and peaceful implementation
of such development aid. Security reform has mainly been
applied to help countries that are transitioning to peace
and rebuilding state institutions.

The concept of SSR is now widely accepted and
popularly used, even though there were proposals of
different phrases to represent the concept when it was
introduced to the development debate. These proposals
included that of the Bureau of Crisis Prevention and
recovery (BCPR) of the united Nations Development
Program which, in 2003, began to promote similar ideas
but with different terms, like “justice and security sector
reform” (JSSR)3.

SSR is now understood to refer to a programme of
reform of a country’s security system, which involves the
transformation and restructuring of the military and police
forces, and any paramilitary organisations controlled by
the state. This process has to do with the restructuring
and empowering of security-related institutions for
effectiveness, discipline and capacity-building for
community development initiatives. In some instances,
judicial or judiciary reform initiatives are considered under
SSR programmes.

When a country goes to war or becomes embroiled in
internal civil strife, and its legitimate security institutions
(the military and police) divide into factions with belligerent
motives, peacekeeping activities become difficult, civilians
are abused, more warring parties emerge, and the entire
nation degenerates into disorder. In such a scenario, when
the violence subsides and peacebuilding programmes
are being implemented, reform of the security sector is
essential to restore the state’s credibility and to reassure
the citizenry of their security.

Liberia’s security sector has been no exception to the
above. During the country’s 14-year-long civil war, all of
the security forces and institutions joined warring factions,
and the institutions became factionalised. As a result, the
citizenry lost faith in these security institutions. reforming
the sector in the post-war era was thus critical to ensure
the security of the people of Liberia, and not merely the
protection of short-term regimes.

Political and Legal Background of Security Sector
Reform in Liberia

Even before the plunder and devastation of the civil
war (1989–2003), Liberia’s security institutions were
heavily politicised by officials of government, and
survived on patronage. Its personnel were poorly trained
and had no special civic education programmes. Security
personnel saw themselves and their political patrons as
masters of the people rather than protectors and servants
of the people. They became unpopular for their lack
of professionalism, corruption, frequent human rights
violations and their exploitation by their political patrons
to intimidate – and, at times, terrorise – the people. In
1980, the military seized power in Liberia and, in 1985,
transformed itself into a civilian government. From 1980
onwards, Liberia’s security forces were part of the political
process and thereby lost their neutrality and relevance
as enforcers of the law and protectors of the people.
The ruthlessness of these forces was seen during the civil
war, when most of them joined factions and led campaigns
of terror against the civilians. After the civil war – and with
virtually no reliable security institutions left in the country
– it became politically necessary to reorganise, train and
rebuild an effective and well-trained pro-people security
regime for the country, as part of the post-war governance
reform process.

Liberia’s SSR programme was conceived to address
the above historical faults, and “to create a secure and
peaceful environment, both domestically and in the
sub-region, that is conducive to sustainable, inclusive,
and equitable growth and development”4. In the Poverty
Reduction Strategy of Liberia (PRS) of 2008-2011, the
government articulated issues of peace and security
as a first priority, without which there could be no real
development in the country. The first pillar of the PRS was
therefore “consolidating peace and security”.
Liberia’s SSR programme is legally empowered by
three enabling, but complicated, instruments. These are
the Comprehensive Peace Accord of 2003, the Constitution
of Liberia, and the united Nations security Council
resolution 1509 of 2003.

The Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA)
The CPA was signed in 2003 in Accra, and set the
platform for the end of the war. It provided for several
institutional reforms – including those in the security
sector – to guide the peace process and lead the transition
to a new democratic dispensation. It was operational for
two years, and was the foremost legal instrument for the
NTGL of 2003-05, since certain provisions of the 1986
Constitution of Liberia were suspended to accommodate
the compromises and reforms needed for the country’s
stability and recovery. Part four of the CPA – security
sector reform – first called for the disbandment of all
irregular forces in the republic of Liberia, to set the stage
for total reform in the security sector. The real process of
reform is outlined in Articles VII and VIII of part four of
the CPA.

In Article VII, the CPA called for the disbandment of
all irregular forces, and the reforming and restructuring of
the Armed Forces of Liberia. It also requested substantial
support in material, capacity-building and other technical
support from the united Nations (UN), the economic
Community of West African states (ECOWAS), the African
Union (Au), and the International Contact Group on Liberia
(ICGL), with a call to the United States (US) to play a lead
role in reforming the Armed Forces of Liberia. To that end,
the US contracted the services of private companies –
including DynCorp and Pacific Architects & Engineers, or
PAE – to take charge of the training process.

Article VII also set out the criteria by which personnel
should be recruited into the new armed forces, and it laid
emphasis on education, medical fitness, professionalism
and one’s human rights record. Article VII (c) clearly
outlined the mission of the new Armed Forces of Liberia
as “to defend the national sovereignty and in extremis,
respond to natural disasters”5.

In Article VIII, the CPA called for the restructuring of the
Liberia National Police and all other security forces in the
country, including the Special Security Services, as well as
the “ruthless” Anti-Terrorist Unit and the Special Operation
Division of the Liberia National Police – both of which were
created by the regime of Charles Taylor and had developed
fearsome reputations for human rights violations. The two
were disbanded in 2003 and their members demobilised.
In restructuring the police and other security services, the
CPA laid special emphasis on democratic controls and
values, and the respect of human rights by these forces,
stating:
There shall be an immediate restructuring of the
National Police Force, the Immigration Force, Special
Security Service (SSS), custom security guards and
such other statutory security units. These restructured
security forces shall adopt a professional orientation
that emphasizes democratic values and respect for
human rights, a non-partisan approach to duty and the
avoidance of corrupt practices6.

The Constitution of Liberia (1986)
The Constitution of Liberia gave the executive and the
legislative branches of government a broad mandate on
security issues in the country. under the Constitution, the
president as commander-in-chief “appoints members of
the military from the rank of lieutenant or its equivalence
and above; and field marshals, deputy field marshals,
and sheriff”7. In addition, issues of defence and security
management are implemented by agencies in the executive
branch, headed by the president.

The Constitution empowered the legislature to “provide
for the security of the republic, defend, declare war and to
order the executive to declare peace, and to make rules for
the governance of the Armed Forces of Liberia”8. At the
inception of the SSR programme, all the provisions of the
Constitution concerning the powers of the executive and
the legislature were suspended, and the only legal national
instrument was the CPA of 2003.

Upon the election and subsequent inauguration of
President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf in 2006, all suspended
provisions of the 1986 Constitution were reinstated, and
the Constitution regained its position as the supreme law
of Liberia. This Constitution has been very relevant to the
post-war security reform process over the last years.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1509
UN Security Council resolution 1509 of September
2003 provided a legal framework for the SSR programme
in Liberia. It mandated UNMIL to assist the transitional
government in monitoring and restructuring the police
and military forces, with an emphasis on democratic
values. The security Council also mandated UNMIL to
monitor and facilitate reforms in other areas, including
the security sector, where it required that UNMIL “…assist
the transitional government of Liberia in monitoring and
restructuring the police force of Liberia, consistent with
democratic policing, to develop a civilian police training
program, and to otherwise assist in the training of civilian
police, in cooperation with ECOWAS, international
organizations, and interested states”.

For the AFL, it mandated UNMIL “to assist the
transitional government in the formation of a new and
restructured Liberian military in cooperation with ECOWAS,
international organizations and interested states”9.

What Progress?

Since 2004, stakeholders in the Liberian peace process
have been engaged in a public campaign to recruit young
Liberians into the police and military forces, as well as
such paramilitary groups as immigration and correctional
services. Restructuring of the Liberian National Police
(LNP) began in 2004, with the help of the UNMIL. This
reform has gone beyond a mere recruitment of officers
to a process of institutional capacity-building, with
reforms in the rank and file of the police service. Monthly
salaries for the lowest rankings in the police have been
increased over 100% during the last four years. In the
areas of infrastructure and institutional reform, the LNP
has undergone considerable restructuring. The position
of police director has now been changed to inspector
general, and the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) is
now called the Crime Service Department. These changes
in names are intended to reflect the modified missions
and purposes of the positions and departments within the
police. For example, a Women and Children Protection
Section has been created within the LNP as a first line of
response regarding women’s and children’s issues.

Other institutional rebuilding initiatives that have
taken place include the development of a LNP duty manual
and the establishment of a Police Promotion Board, and
new police stations (depots) are being built around the
country. Currently, the police have trained and deployed
over 3 500 personnel. In the area of emergency response
to armed robberies and riots, the LNP has established an
Emergency Response Unit (ERU). This unit is intended to
be a specialised, armed anti-crime unit in the police, and
it now has 287 personnel toward a target of 500. There is
also a Police support unit, which has trained 148 officers
toward a target of 60010.

With regard to the military, the AFL is currently the
main spotlight of the country’s SSR programme. Liberians
fear the military, due to its brutal roles in the civil war
and its general violence, indiscipline and human rights
abuses. Reforming the AFL is popular with the people of
Liberia, and the process has involved individual citizens
and civil society organisations – citizens have the right
to challenge and vet new applicants to the army. During
the recruitment process, photographs of applicants are
displayed in community centres for citizens to review and
to object, should candidates have a record of indiscipline,
crime and human rights abuses. Besides this process,
background investigations are conducted on individual
applicants in their communities and schools. The
target for the reformed AFL in the PRS is 2, 000 soldiers.
Successfully, through the support of the US government
and other development partners of Liberia, the AFL has
trained over 2 000 personnel, who have been deployed to
various barracks.

The AFL is also undergoing institutional and human
capacity-building. The reform process is serious about
having a literate army. This new AFL is now comprised of
personnel with at least a junior high school education, and
it also has in it many high school and college graduates.
The “new AFL”, as it is called, has over time been involved
in community services, including the construction of
roads and bridges, medical assistance to hospitals, and
community clean-up efforts.
The US and other partners have aided the government
of Liberia in rebuilding barracks and providing logistical
support to the new army, and four barracks have been
refurbished and made fully operational11. The Liberian
Coast Guard unit of the AFL has also trained about
40 officers, and this unit has a mandate of improving
coastline management, controlling smuggling and illegal
fishing. There is also a new bureau for the welfare of
retired AFL servicemen, called the Bureau of Veteran
Affairs.

Other security institutions have also been reformed
and reactivated, including the Bureau of Immigration,
Bureau of Correction and the National Fire Service. A
general review process of all of the security institutions
has taken place, and the government has adopted a
National Security Strategy as the working tool for peace
and security in the country.

Factors Impeding the SSR Programme

Liberia’s security reform programme, like most post-conflict
governance reform initiatives, is faced with the
perennial challenges of inadequate resources and limited
human resource capacity to improve and sustain the
integrity of the programme and the effectiveness of the
security institutions. All of these are faced with logistical
challenges in the discharge of their duties, and these are
further exacerbated by the level of underdevelopment in
the country.

The ineffectiveness of the LNP to respond to
emergencies in the country has been attributed to a lack
of equipment – including radios, vehicles, handcuffs and
raincoats (for the rainy season). These shortages are also
common to the Bureaux of Immigration and Correction,
and the National Fire service. The integrity of the police
system is highly criticised in the country, resulting in
some citizens describing the police force as “a new wine
in an old bottle”. The police have been seen engaging in
violations, including brutality against civilians and bribery.
These attitudes of indiscipline, while publicly condemned,
discourage a populace already weary of insecurity
and corruption.

The country is also still struggling to deal with the
ex-servicemen of the AFL, who have staged numerous
strikes for benefits and re-enlistment into the new military.
Some of the demobilised soldiers still allege that they
are in the army, claiming that the CPA called for the
restructuring of the AFL, and not its disbandment. The
new army has retained some staff from the old army
and re-enlisted them into the force. The government has
tried to respond to the concerns of the disbanded soldiers
by paying arrears of US$4.1 million – including US$228
000 to AFL widows – and has promised that any further
assistance to the disbanded soldiers will be directed at
jobs and training opportunities as a means of ensuring
sustainability in benefits12.

Conclusion

Liberia’s current security system is a considerable
improvement over the pre-war untrained and highly
politicised security institutions that were used to
intimidate citizens and maximise the power of the security
forces. Significant gains have been made through the
training and/or retraining of officers for the AFL, LNP,
Immigration, Correction and other security institutions. As
the training of security institution personnel – particularly
in the armed forces and the police – grows in terms of
numbers, donors are gradually leaving the process to the
Liberian government.

As for the AFL, the us government has already turned
it over to the Liberian government. It is now time for
the country to protect its citizens by maintaining trained
and equipped security institutions. The need to train
and deploy more police officers around the country is
critical to sustaining the integrity of the SSR programme
and promoting internal security. The need to open
educational and training opportunities for personnel of
the security institutions to advance themselves cannot
be overemphasised, since there is a yearning for a literate
security regime with civic and democratic values. Equally
important to the process is the need to improve the
salaries and benefits of servicemen and women in security
institutions, and to maintain the standards of training
introduced by the development partners at the inception
of the SSR programme.

Endnotes

1 Forces loyal to the government of Charles Taylor included the
Anti-terrorist unit, special Operation Division, the militia, and
other paramilitary forces.

2 Brzoska, Michael (2003) Development Donors and the Concept
of Security Sector Reform. Geneva Centre for the Democratic
Control of Armed Force (DCAF), Occasional Paper No. 4, p. 3.

3 Malan, Mark (2008) Security Sector Reform in Liberia: Mixed
Results from humble Beginnings., strategic studies Institute,
US Army War College. Carlisle, Pennsylvania.

4 Republic of Liberia (2008) Consolidating Peace and security,
Chapter 6: Poverty Reduction STrategy

5 Comprehensive Peace Accord of Liberia, Part Four,
Article VII (c).

6 Comprehensive Peace Accord of Liberia, Part Four, Article VIII,
Section 1.

7 Constitution of the republic of Liberia, Article 54, January
1986.

8 Constitution of the republic of Liberia, Article 34 (b) and (c),
January 1986.

9 United Nations Security Council resolution 1509, September
2003.

10 Annual Message to the 5th session of the National Legislature
by Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, 25 January 2010.

11 Griffith, Cecil (2010) Initial report on Liberia’s SSR Program.
Civil society SSR Working Group.

12 Annual Message to the 5th session of the National Legislature
by Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, 25 January 2010.

Commemorating Africa’s Liberation on May 25… But is Africa Really Free?

Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei

In the 1960s the struggle to wipe out white imperial rule on the continent of Africa gained steam with several nations gaining political independence – to govern themselves without the interference of western imperialists. During that time revolutionary movements on the continent became strong and the battle for independence became fierce. Some western powers yielded to compromises, some were defeated and forced out.

In the first three years of the 1960s independent African states formed what was the Organization of African Unity (now the African Union) with the aim of decolonizing the rest of Africa. Through the OAU several efforts were made to help territories under colonial rule become independent. Before the OAU, there were some other pro-independent African organizations like the Pan-African Movement, the Conference of Independent African States, and the All-African People’s Conference (made up of territories under colonial rule) all vociferously advocating the total independence of Africa.

Then before them and even during their existence, there were so many wars during which thousands of Africans died at the hands of imperialists just to gain access and control over their own lands. This article also recognizes the role of the mosquito in inflicting malaria on the imperialists, something that also feared them away.

But the question now is after all of these efforts and years of independence… is Africa free? The answer here is a big NO – and open for extended arguments. The first burden on the continent was slavery through which Europeans captured or bought the living and healthy bodies of African men and women, took them away as their properties. They were made to work on plantations and in homes, and tied in chains with their freedom restrained in all aspects. Above all, they were dehumanized as they were made to believe that they were sub-humans. Since then, Africans have lived with the mentality that whatsoever is Western, and whosoever is not a black by race, is a superior. Here individual worth does not matter, but race and country of origin. This is one burden on the mentality of Africans.

During exploration, either through geographical adventures or the search for resources, the westerners discovered that Africa was a rich continent, and to claim ownership of that wealth was to establish political authorities on the continent. Then came colonization and imperialism. They came and took over territories and established governments amenable only to themselves. They looted, pillaged, plunder the continents resources. They desecrated African cultures, religions, and traditional values. They colonized and corrupted the mentality of the young Africans and made them to believe that anything African is uncivilized, even though civilization began in Africa (Egypt). Then it came time when there was a scramble over African territories, so they met and partitioned the continent like a piece of pie.

The new bondage on the continent is huge debts. While the West is keeping Africa in bondage through huge debts, they are also keeping the continents development in check through international institutions that enforces rules of governance and for development assistance only applicable to Africa. International laws are also enforced in Africa then any part of the world.

Those are the external factors that have over the years affected the states in Africa. And by extension the people. In the midst of the threats from imperialists in the 19th and 20th centuries and neo-imperialists of today, African leaders pose a second and more frustrating threat to the total liberation of their people. Yet, they are politically free to run sovereign nations. But their people are impoverished to the ebb. African leaders in many countries have not done much to liberate their people from poverty and make them feel proud of the abundance of resources and potentials endowed to the continent. Africa tops in all of the vices: Highest HIV/AIDS rate, highest malaria rate, highest rate in teenage pregnancy, and harbors the world’s poorest people; even though those poor people own lands and resources that are making the world’s richest people to be who they are. As a result there are mass exoduses of Africans everyday to western nations in such of greener pastures. There, they work as casual laborers to process raw materials from their homes, and the end-products sent back to them to purchase.

Corruption and autocratic leadership have been the most internal obstacles to the freedom of African people. I accept that we are running sovereign states, but I argue that we the people are not free. And that remains the basis of my argument. In Zimbabwe the man once revered to be the freedom fighter and the ‘people’s popular leader’ has clinched unto power, terrorizing and crushing opposition dissents, and at the same time westerners have imposed sanctions on him in vengeance to his stance against neo-imperialism. That is a dilemma for the people of Zimbabwe. Their economy has sunk into an abyss, and socio-economic conditions have become too harsh. In the central region of the continent, most of the states have failed, collapsed or are weak. Congo has failed, Sudan has collapsed and secession is eminent by next year, Chad and the Central African Republic are weak. West Africa is dominated by weak and failing states. Corruption is uncontrollable in this region. This is where society frowns on accountable leaders and cherishes murderers and corrupt officials. In Liberia, few groups of people, about 75 persons have held the country for over forty years and it is among them leadership circulates. The rest of the population still lives in poverty and hopelessness. Corruption is at its peak in the present government, and it is not just casting doubts on the credibility of the present regime, but also eroding public confidence in the state as a whole. Warlords and former corrupt government officials are the most ‘honorable’ citizens.

Guinea, Niger, Mauritania, Guinea Bissau, and Madagascar are failing as a result of coups and civil uprisings. Madagascar is a rear case and deserves extended political research. This is where civilians launched a coup and the coup was endorsed by the military.

Again I continue to argue that with poor leadership on the continent, bad governance, mass poverty, poor health care, mass illiteracy, huge debt burden, and the external threat of neo-imperialism through international organizations, AFRICA IS NOT FREE!

The vices are enormous and pathetic to name. Africa’s solutions to total liberation must begin now! And that must be a priority of every African, mainly the continent’s leaders. True independence in Africa will come when the leaders of the continent are accountable and transparent in public service; when the people of Africa participates freely and openly in a system of democratic governance; when the people are free to choose among options that will advance their socio-economic needs; when the nation-states in Africa will be strategic partners in international development and cooperation not mere receivers of aid, or not ‘gatekeeper states’; when civil uprisings and violent conflicts end; and when the first priority of every African government will be to advance the human security of its citizens. LONG LIVE AFRICA, AND LONG LIVE THE PEOPLE OF AFRICA!!!!

A MESSAGE FOR PEACE AT FLY’s ASSEMBLY 2010

Fellow young people, delegates to the Sixth general Assembly of FLY, I bring you greetings in the name of unity, peace, solidarity and nationalism. We have left our counties, our homes, our families and schools to assemble here today and deliberate on issues pertinent to the socio-economic empowerment of ourselves and our country. We are here to discuss issues that will affect us and the generation behind us. It is therefore incumbent upon us to be tolerant and peaceful as we embark on this process intended to open a new chapter for the Federation and the young people of Liberia. Let us remember that a house divided against itself cannot stand at all. We must therefore be united and mutually tolerant to speak as one, because we have the same problems that affect us as young people. What affect the youths of Maryland County, affects the youths of Grand Cape Mount County, and the same affects youths all over the country. We share the same problems; we must therefore derive collective solutions. If one person succeeds, we have all succeeded. This assembly must be a turning point for us all. We have had perennial problems of marginalization in national development issues, and our progress have been retarded by the level of poverty and underdevelopment that resulted from the fourteen years of decadent conflicts our country went through. Today is a new day, we are experiencing peace and normal activities have resumed in our country. This is therefore a moment of opportunity we must seize to address the problems associated with our advancement. We cannot hold anyone responsible if we fail to work together for ourselves today, and for the generation behind us. For the past few years we have been stereotyped as violent-oriented youths. Our critics build their assumptions on what we have done in the last two years. In 2007 we made the world to think negatively about us when we failed to organize ourselves in Gbarnga (April) and in Kakata (September). A replica of the same situations took place when we met in Gbarnga in 2009 (July) to elect a new leadership for LINSU. We are challenged to prove our critics wrong. We are challenged to tell the world that we are prepare for peace and we that are prepare to contribute to the peace and development of our country. This assembly is an opportunity for us. We must strive as best as possible to ensure that we have peaceful deliberations and a peaceful electoral process that will facilitate a smooth transition in our leadership. We must relinquish our personal interests for the collective good. We are here today as individuals, but what we do will represent our counties, our homes, and the schools we come from. Some months back, I got several calls by friends from all over the country asking me to contest for the position of First Vice President of FLY. I accepted those petitions as a call to duty. Today I am in the race as a candidate certified by the Independent Election Commission of FLY. I look up to you all to support me in this election, and also after the election that we all may work together and make FLY the organization we want it to be. While we look up to government for our empowerment, we must also begin to put in place those mechanisms that will prove to the world that we are serious; and we must begin to work towards our own empowerment by organizing ourselves peacefully, by working in our communities as volunteers for development, and by ensuring that we get the necessary education, discipline and training for national leadership. Long Live FLY!!!!! LONG, LONG LIVE LIBERIA!!!!!!!!! May Peace Prevail Ibrahim Al-bakri Nyei