November 28, 2006 - We Are Back

A lot has occurred in Liberia over the few weeks since the Last Word. And many of our dedicated readers have wondered about the absence of our voices on these matters, especially since our positions on events as they occur in Liberia have always been carefully and objectively articulated, which to them seem positive. Our silence, however, must not be interpreted as being out of sync with recent events, for we have meticulously followed the arguments and the varying points of view on most, if not all, of these occurrences and formed ours as well.  

We now gather ourselves once more to contribute, as we have been, to the public forum for change in Liberia in a more consistent and regular manner. The challenges that face our country are monumental and require all hands on deck. However, in doing so we must remain resolute in recognizing detractors and the distortions they create that have the propensity to alter the direction and course that we have embarked upon for a new Liberia that promises to uphold the freedoms and rights that for long eluded us. The tendency to stifle change, growth and progress will be unrelentingly exposed and providing insights and alternatives will continue to be the primary persuasion. 

Forward we go with objectivity and truth. And this is THE LAST WORD!

November 27, 2006 - Equity And Advocacy

The aura created by the new breed of human rights groups in Liberia against an identified target – the Liberian government – is one when considered in its totality reveals the inadequacies of these organizations, using the interests of the impoverished Liberian as the basis for their work. But the questions then become: What benefits the people accrue from the activities of these groups? What transformation occurs from the hullabaloo they orchestrate when they request sunshine on transactions that need not be fully within the public domain, but withhold information on agreements, grants or funding that they receive from international donors?  Their activities and approaches seem to suggest that the milieu for human rights violations predominantly exists within the circle of government. However, abuses are widespread occurring in government, the private sector, and the environment. Interestingly, those that attract significant international funding are the ones given consideration. 

As a way of presenting other options to these groups, there are laws on the books whose constitutionality has not been tested in the courts; there is pollution occurring in the environment that affects the lives of the residents in the community – for example the damage being done to the Mesurado River with the disposal of garbage by the marketing association, as well as the destruction of the marshlands along the Somalia Drive with garbage, etcetera. Cherry-picking is wrong, and shows the weakness and ineptitude of these groups! Abuse is abuse in whatever way it shows its face and whatever form. The object of such advocacy is that the people and society benefit with tangible changes. As a result there has to be a comprehensive approach to all of the issues that not only emanate from the government but from other spheres of the society as long as they fall within the context of what is considered abuse.  

Certainly, if it is good for the goose, it must be good for the gander. When human rights groups raise the issue of disparity in the salary structure of the government and miscellaneous appropriations that still require some justifications, they must be able to rise above reproach and declare their salary structures as well and the percentage margins between the head of these organizations and their employees. They must also declare their tax receipts as an indication of their contribution to the overall provision of social services for the people on whose behalf they advocate; justify other budgetary allocations and expenditures on their books; declare accounting structures that support transparency and accountability; publish annual reports for public consumption and not donors alone; reveal structure or body, especially a board, that oversees and/or approves yearly budgets and seek accountability from those who carry out the daily operations of these organizations; and above all, justify how the public benefits in a tangible way from their advocacies that warrant international funding.   

Many seem not to be concerned about these issues, except for the obvious distraction that is created by the insistence of advocacy groups to run government in the press or public, which in itself is a calculated scheme that shrewdly defers the deserving attention and scrutiny that should follow these organizations. Because of this, advocates assume unto themselves a status that seems sacrosanct and immune to criticism or reproach. When faced with criticism or scrutiny, their only excuse seems to be “a ploy to silence them.” This is farcical! As long as advocates determine a standard that individuals, corporations and the government have to abide, they and their groups must conform to such standards or go above and beyond, since they are in the business of exposing the vices of the society. As much as they hold others accountable, they must be accountable to the society as well for “he who seeks equity must come with clean hands.” 

November 22, 2006 - Responsible Citizens And Freedom Of Expression

Liberia’s past have been one that has, from time to time, frowned on dissent and disallowed expression and the assembling of its citizens as its constitution allows. Even when peaceful protests were allowed in the late 1970s, violence ensued. In most cases such violence was initiated by security forces acting upon the orders from higher-ups in government in an attempt to crush dissent. Although the Liberian constitution gives its citizens the right to peacefully assemble and voice their grievances, controlling statutes enacted by previous administrations disguised under the pretext of national security have added more fuel to the flame; as they have become mechanisms created to clamp down on dissent and suppress free expression. The spirit of the clause in the constitution was intended to create a responsible citizenry that could freely and peacefully assemble and voice their grievances and get some results. That has not been the case as history can attest that many, if not all, requests that were made to previous administrations by political groupings or other social forces on issues that ran contrary to the regimes were denied; but those intended to pledge support and solidarity were instantly approved. 

The challenge of this administration is to begin to create that responsible citizenry, by removing the hurdles and bottlenecks that are intended to curb dissent and allow for peaceful assembling of citizens to voice their views. This challenge must involve empowering the necessary institutions, particularly the courts, to expeditiously respond to class action litigations in a rather fair and just manner. There is also a responsibility for the citizens as well in this endeavor. Citizens must realize and be cognizant of their responsibilities under the law to protect the rights and properties of others and the state as they carry out their right of expression. Being responsible and peaceful in this regard strengthens your position and could also serve as a catalyst to obtaining redress. Taking incremental steps to seek redress that ultimately leads to peaceful street protest could be a rule of thumb, as many would expect.  

Exerting legality to downplay the grievances of citizens on the one hand, and exercising a guaranteed right in a rather flawed manner by instituting violence on the other, only creates a continuous circle of violence that would adversely affect the tenuous peace which is unwarranted for the society. Above all, it remains a high priority to institute actions geared towards building a responsible citizenry and removing those laws that are only meant to suppress freedom of expression, and adequately empower the institutions to expeditiously address grievances brought before them by “peaceful” citizens.

November 8, 2006 - Do Not Blame Religious Institutions

Those who now blame religious institutions for moral decadence in Liberia are wrong, attempting to shift blame and sending the wrong message about religious institutions instead of focusing on the actual attending factors that precipitated this decline. Such a decline must not be attributed to religious institutions for they have in every way remained engaged with ensuring the cohesion of the Liberian society. When the society was faced with the challenge of peacemaking between rival factions at the onset of the Liberian conflict, it was religious institutions that morphed into the Inter-Faith Mediation Committee and assumed the onerous task of bringing those groups together for peace sake. Also, we must not forget the time when, in 1990, civilians could find nowhere for sanctuary against warring groups except for the churches and mosques that provided same, but were later desecrated by armed groups – the Lutheran Church and Bakedu Mosque massacres are just some reminders. 

Religious institutions also created a voice in the society for the voiceless when abuses of the rights of the people were rampant, coming from those who held the reins of power, particularly warring factions. We can never forget the voice of His Grace Michael Francis who, on that April morning of 1997, with a barrage of gun fire and fighting advancing towards the Sacred Heart Cathedral on Broad Street, bravely and courageously continued his homily about injustices in Liberia; or Shiekh Kafumba Konneh who placed his life on the line and stood up to leaders of warring factions including those from his ethnic group. Even when warring factions indulged in actions that had the propensity to undermine the level of peace and tranquility in the society, it was religious institution that assumed the moral high ground and called for peaceful actions that brought factions in check. The stay home action called by religious and civil society organizations, including The Catholic Justice and Peace Commission – an arm of the Catholic Church – was about morality.  

Placing the blame for moral decay in Liberia on the shoulders of religious institutions undermines the essence of this vital sector, for this is where the moral conscience of the nation resides, and it is wrong to do so. When warring factions placed guns and drugs into the hands of children and exposed them to violence, and taught them that the gun was their mom and dad, they eliminated the conscience of that budding stratum of the society. As a result parents could not put any bearing on their children neither could religious institutions. There are many instances where pastors and imams were shown disdain and disrespect by kids whose parents belonged to the local church or mosque, only because of the gun. What about the role warring factions played in this decline that seemed to be unrecognizable to some for obvious reasons? To single out religious institutions for moral decline would only be an acknowledgment to the youth that their conditions can be traced to religious institutions and an incitement to youth towards unforeseen actions against the very institution we look to for guidance. This is déjà vu – when warring factions incited youth to violent actions against leaders of religious organizations to avoid scrutiny. 

When those in government realize that they are now part of a team whose collective actions and activities are in the limelight for scrutiny, the initial instinct would be to denigrate the institution that serves as the microscope of the society. In some cases they may attempt to distance themselves from the group if the latter fails, as was the case with the denial in the 1992 Black Beret saga. When warring factions divided Liberia into strongholds there were lots of places to cast blames; now that they are non-existent the only group available to shift blames to has become religious institutions. Yesterday it was warring factions; today it has now become the institution that provided the platform and canopy that many utilized for advocacy – religious institutions; tomorrow it will be the collective unit – the government – the team that one was a part. This is flip-flopping for political expediency, using faulty syllogism which is dead wrong.

October 31, 2006 - Let The Truth Be Told

An eye for an eye seems to be what many Liberians expect as retribution especially for those individuals that inflicted egregious harm to civilians during the Liberian civil conflict. However, it seems that the majority tendency in this regard seems to be skewed towards the spirit of bygones, reconciliation and forgiveness, which is innate to the Liberian psyche. It is difficult to fathom the degree of abuse and evil that characterized the actions particularly of Liberians, a people considered to be the most hospitable and peaceful within the West African sub-region. What drove Liberians to act the way they did? Were there external actors that introduced behaviors that were un-Liberian? Were these tendencies and/or behavior ever a characteristic of Liberian groups that were suppressed or contained? If they were, what factors provided the seals to restrain these unimaginable acts? Also, what led to the wearing away of these seals? These are just some inquiries that may begin to tell the story of Liberia’s recent bitter past. 

The creation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) by the government of Liberia is a deserved approach. What seems puzzling though is whether the TRC fully understands its mission, particularly within the confines of the overall thinking of the population. One does not have to be a rocket scientist to understand where the mindset of the people resides. It is clear what the people have spoken about their intentions as they relate to reconciliation. There is also a view that seems contrary to the overall consideration and the both have to be synthesized so that the society benefits. Seemingly fashioned after the South African, the conditions that necessitated the creation of these bodies vary starkly however lessons can be learnt, as abuse seemed to be the common denominator. Nonetheless creating a commission that conforms to the Liberian reality is the aha that is anticipated. 

Veering away from the majority view on reconciliation may have the tendency to create chaos that is not warranted in the new Liberia, although the majority may not always be right. Rethinking the objective of the TRC within what the overall view of the people is will be a positive turn-around. When the people of Liberia elected individuals whose hands are stained with blood to positions that include writing laws for the country, it carried along the message of “internalized acceptance,” just as it did in 1997.  No doubt, the story has to be told for future generations so that never again will Liberia go down this destructive path, which should be foundation and/basis for this project. But verifiable truth must form the crux of statements provided the TRC, which must be fully vetted, perhaps taken under oath so that it wards against rumors, and aspersions. This is not the place to settle old scores that could disturb the peace within the society. The TRC must now step back, initiate a survey on the pulse of the nation regarding such project, and review the approaches and processes that have been initiated and make some alterations, if necessary, that would be audacious for preserving the peace. Certainly, though justice is necessary and must be assured, peace is paramount.

October 25, 2006 - Gird Up Your Loins 

The Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General to Liberia recently cited challenges, if not met, that could affect the stability of Liberia. The overall pursuit, in his view, would be efforts to create jobs and other economic opportunities for many Liberians, especially youth, ex-combatants, and those affected by the recent downsizing in government. In keeping with this call and prior to making such declaration, the current administration began making significant strides to, first of all, revive Liberia’s paralyzed economy, generate revenue to pay salaries and provide basic services to Liberians, and institute plans and actions along with international financial institutions that would relieve Liberia of its colossal debt. These initiatives compounded with many others require enormous inputs and energies, as the layers of breakdown and destruction reveal.  

Despite these challenges that may seem insurmountable to many, the current administration has not taken a back-seat approach to tackling them. Reports from many Liberians in country reveal that changes are occurring albeit gradually, and the overall approval rating of the government is high. For the first time in Liberia it is not business as usual. But the creation of opportunities requires a lot, not only on the part of the government, but every Liberian as well. In the first place creating the enabling environment for economic activities is of foremost relevance, as well as the strengthening of judicial institutions. These are tied to stability in a country that has seen war and destruction for 14 years, and a sub-region that is still volatile and rife with other conflicts.   

While all of these positive developments occur, a residue of devious elements of the past are bent on undertaking schemes intentionally designed to undermine the current administration. For those individuals, it is pay-back time, considering the role played by the current head of government during Liberia’s so called “second and third republics”. While many Liberians viewed her role as astute and intended to ensure equality and freedom for all within the Liberian society, others saw it as an attempt to take away the privileges of a select group that had long been sought after. To this day, resentment and animosity still persist and there is an underlying, sinister will to unleash chaos and undermine the current administration that is veneered with position statements of support.  

The conditions are rife within the sub-region, particularly the Mano river basin to serve as a spring-board for such actions, with the sole purpose of creating a wait-and-see approach on the part of Liberia’s friends in the international community. The marriage of convenience is certain, especially so since there seems to be a common enemy amongst these groups. This time, the enemy of my enemy is not my friend, but the making of strange bedfellows amongst proven enemies. This administration must remain ahead of the game, gird up its loins and be resolute in tackling this gathering threat in order to ensure the safety, well-being and prosperity of the state. Liberia must see chaos and destruction no more. The resilience of the people to overcome the many setbacks; their steadfastness and belief in the ability of this administration must not be taken for granted. Borrowing from the words of Mao: “be resolute, fear no sacrifice and surmount every difficulty to become victorious”.

October 9, 2006 - Shut Up Or Be "Wolokollied"

Recent uproar in the Liberian House of Representatives involving a claim by one of its members, and the body’s decision to suspend that member, continues to exhibit the depth to which the standard of that institution has fallen. While it is clear that Representative Wolokollie made a statement that raised questions about legislators’ intent, the action taken by the body does not seek to address the issues that surrounds Wolokollie’s claim. What the action does is to circumvent attempts to delve into the characters of some of these individuals which may be devious and could hamper efforts to restore confidence in Liberia, especially its economy. What Wolokollie is claiming is not a new tendency. Such was the case during the infamous Taylor regime where investors had to relinquish a greater portion of their investment capital to higher-ups in government, including Taylor himself, in order to invest in Liberia. In some cases investors were chased out of Liberia after they had initiated their enterprises and invested so much capital in the country.  

This tendency was prevalent in the Executive branch during Taylor’s regime as he presided over investments and contracts owing to the much criticized legislation that ascribed to him exclusive authority over Liberia’s natural resources and exclusivity over the granting of contracts and concessions. With the current dispensation the shift, it seems, has moved from the Executive to the Legislature with some of its members still inclined and orientated with the faceless characteristic of extortion and bribery from investors. Some of these elements in the Legislator were agents of Taylor in the pursuit of this unwholesome scheme who now have been granted access to legitimate state power that is now being used to exact coercion or, in the case of Wolokollie, silence. Mechanisms established within the House to check and police itself seemed dormant or obviously ineffective as those with such responsibility may be the perpetrators who, as a way of avoiding censuring or expulsion would instigate measures to suppress any evidence of impropriety.  

Considering the ineptitude of these policing committees, one would opine that Wolokollie would have taken his claim through the first level of channels to effect an investigation into his allegations and then a subsequent public declaration if need be. One would also have expected the House to initiate an investigation into the claims of one of its members, when such claim brings the body into disrepute (The House Ethics Committee). The action and inaction of both parties seemed short of public expectation. Notwithstanding, the overall resolve by a select majority to have Wolokollie apologize, retract his claims or be suspended, shows the extent to which a segment of that body is prepared to put a lid on uncovering any and all of their malpractices. More so, Wolokollie’s bow to such pressure can be interpreted in many ways: (1) his latitude in standing his grounds has been tested by his peers and now wanes in the face of public perception as there seems to be no genuine justification for not staying the course and exposing those rotten apples; (2) he would have to now comply with the status quo and perhaps become tainted with their unwholesome practices, if not drawn into some of these deals – if you can’t beat them, join them; (3) his actions sharpens the teeth of the corrupt and sends their message to other whistleblowers in the House that any action of exposure of improprieties will be Wollokollied, even with a preponderance of evidence

September 26, 2006 - Civil Liberties, Security And "The Sacred Cows"

When the President of Liberia, in taking the oath of office, “swears to defend and uphold the Constitution and the Republic…,”that individual’s obligation, first and foremost, is the safety and security of the state. The constitution is known to be an embodiment of the aspirations of the people. In order to ensure that these aspirations are fulfilled governments evolve with the participation of the population. Challenged by the many contradictions, interests and demands within the society, as well as the endowment of the people to exercise liberties expressed in their aspirations, the government becomes bound to ultimately create the enabling environment necessary for people to achieve those aspirations. Creating such an environment constitutes ensuring that the state of the republic is secured from all threats, real or perceived.   

Ensuring the security of the state and upholding civil liberties simultaneously is delicate in societies emanating from conflict and those engaged in hostilities with non-state actors. The major consideration for leadership is what comes first: security or liberties? In most cases, security becomes paramount and citizens sometimes forgo some of those entrenched liberties that may be considered sacrosanct. For a society such as ours, where the population has begun to enjoy some of those liberties, any inkling that suggests a reversion to the past would create a stir, notwithstanding overall security concerns which supplant all. It is however important and crucial to create the conditions where people enjoy these liberties. However, in doing so, one cannot wait to be overwhelmed by circumstances that could be averted from its planning stage. As the leader of the free world said in his speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations in 2002 “we cannot stand by and do nothing while danger gathers.”  

Cognizant of the dangers and difficulties that have accompanied unrest over the years, the exercise of constitutional responsibilities to ensure safety and security in Liberia cannot fall below the prevailing paradigm of preemption. However in the conduct of such responsibilities leadership must be consigned to ensuring that basic liberties are upheld, and in fluid instances the security of the state must always be primarily guaranteed. Using civil liberties as a ruse to plan, strategize and execute actions that have the propensity to cause undue hardship and undermine recent, hard-earned achievements in Liberia must not be tolerated in lieu of upholding democracy. On the other hand, however it is important that government ensures there is a preponderance of facts to pursue any threat real or perceived and use all of the legal safeguards to avoid infringement and abuse of liberties. Striking such a balance is relevant in our recovering democracy.

 September 19, 2006 - The Rice Pretext

When in the 70s the Tolbert regime announced that Liberia would pursue a policy of self-sufficiency in food production, opposition groups seized the opportunity to advance their agenda for change. Unable to adopt a unified political strategy and an approach that would have attracted popular support and become a catalyst for change against the entrenched True Whig Party (TWP) order, leaders of opposition political movements were successful in changing the message and the ultimate benefits that such policy would have brought to the larger Liberian society. On the other hand, instead of maintaining its focus on the policy and its values, the ruling TWP guards took the bait and became drawn into a fight which, when considered, was an objective of the political movements. Their strategy worked, and many Liberians accepted a partisan-clad propaganda that undercut the policy. The overall picture and good remained hidden to the masses by leaders of the political movement. The policy that was intended to strengthen Liberia’s dependence on its internal resources never took off, and violence followed. The rest is history. 

The larger picture, one would surmise, would have resulted in a major focus on Liberia’s agriculture sector, benefiting Liberian farmers and entrepreneurs, and reducing Liberia’s dependence on external sources for sustenance. Moreover, there would have been an increase in the consumption of locally grown produce, like cassava, plantain, sweet potato, bread-fruit, and also rice, but a different grade of rice (country rice a.k.a. gaysee rice). Little did they (the activist leaders) realize that Liberians would have adapted their innovative spirits and introduce new products and ways to preserve foods. The effects of the recent civil war on the Liberian society reveal how the resilience of the human spirit in Liberia transcended scarcity and lack of rice and shifted to other Liberian foods, some we had no knowledge about, as well as unthinkable methods of preservation. Perhaps one would wager that the civil crisis was a proclamation that we were wrong in 1979 about “rice.” 

But the scarcity of and increment in the price of rice is a false political wand that is still being used by fading politicos and the new wannabes. In addition it is also a pretext when considered within the rural context of the country. Liberia’s rural population is self-sufficient and has always been. There has never been a riot in Totota or Zaewordamai when dwellers in those communities do not have rice; in fact these communities grow rice! There was never a riot in Yekepa, Tubmanburg or Robertsport on April 14, 1979. The riot of 1979 branded “rice riot” were for rights and not rice, but the violence that accompanied the riot is now being wrongly used as a flare against taking steps towards empowering Liberians. The will of the Liberian people to take the noble step towards self-sufficiency in food production must be put to a test, we can and we must. By all indications, past and present, Liberia has the capacity to endure and become successful.

September 11, 2006 - Harry Greaves The Guilty!

Many events in Liberia have a tendency to remain on the front burner for a few days and submerge without any tangible settlement of the issues surrounding these events. There are others that may be more protracted due to the gravity of the issue, but such continuity may be interrupted by subsequent events, more egregious to overshadow and make the former dormant. That these issues submerge without a full resolution only deepens the canker that is prevalent in Liberian society. 

One such issue is the whistle-blowing act of Harry Greaves, managing director of the Liberian Petroleum Refining Company (LPRC). Liberians from every walk of life were encouraged by this bold act and anxious to know the legislator involved in this illegal solicitation. In the first place, criminal solicitation and bribery for favors have been a serious vice and a travesty that have impeded growth within the society. This tendency has, in the past, stretched from the head of government to the lowest civil servant. As a result the society has lost enormous benefits and resources that could have positively impacted the country in general. Combating corruption and bribery was a campaign promise of the Sirleaf-led government and it is making commendable headways on same. 

But combating corruption has many approaches one of which is encouraging whistleblowers who come in contact with unscrupulous characters, especially in government where bribery and corruption is endemic. Truth has to be ensured under such encouragement, although it becomes difficult with he-said/she-said statements. However, Greaves’ well-deserved declaration went far beyond assurances that his was the truth, considering his consistent character of upholding what is just and true. On the other hand, his reticent on the matter raises the stakes and diminishes the public’s willingness to accept statements from Greaves as credible, even amongst his peers. Remember the story of the boy who cried wolf?  Why would Greaves plea for forgiveness to the House under the circumstance? Why did the House not exercise the usual contempt powers in this regard or have Greaves take an oath avoid perjury? It seems “when you pull rope, rope pulls bush,” the usual Liberian saying! His silence is akin to an accomplice, condoning and encouraging the culture of corruption and solicitation, and this must be stopped. Reneging on his promise to identify the perpetrator not only ruins his reputation but renders him guilty as well!

August 28, 2006 - Applause For The Commerce Minister (Part II)

Liberia has been known to many as being the most hospitable country within the West African sub-region, and for good reasons. However, such hospitality has on many occasions been taken for a ride and in the end the Liberian people have borne the brunt of the negative effects of such hospitality. Talk to some West Africans and you will get a different classification of Liberians. In their view Liberians are stupid! This is not in a negative sense, but based on the extent that Liberians go to provide that so called “hospitality.” Has hospitality given rise to complacency such it undermines nationalism, patriotism and Liberianization?  

The audacious ploy by Lebanese businessman George Haddad, the general manager of Bridgeway Corporation, to challenge the decision of the Ministry of Commerce and ultimately the Government of Liberia, in collaboration with some members of the Liberian Legislature, using his wealth, vindicates the “hospitality” classification of Liberians and undermines efforts aimed at re-instilling a sense of nationalism and Liberianization. Many Liberians are amazed that instead of bringing Haddad to book for violating the policies and procedures of the government relating to the importation of rice, some members of the Liberian Legislature opted to, for obvious financial reasons, side with Haddad and play the monopoly card when the prime and sole beneficiary of monopolistic tendencies in Liberia has been Haddad.   

These charlatans in the Legislature, without fully understanding the issue as it affects Liberia’s patriotism and empowerment, but ironically claiming to understand the concept of monopoly and the law, are encouraging Haddad’s disruptive behavior and bad business practice for going ahead and importing rice in Liberia without an import permit declaration. This has been a prerequisite and a policy with the Ministry of Commerce since decades, and Haddad is only circumventing same – nothing else. Reading Haddad’s “prepared” presentation one gathers the cunning, pitiful, sweet-talking approach being utilized to sway opinion. Was there not a reason for him to call for the introduction of competition in the rice business when he single-handedly dominated this sector, or was it irrelevant since he benefited to the behest of struggling Liberian entrepreneurs who longed to be a part of this sector but were stifled because they had not the wherewithal to bankroll officials of government? 

 He puts his foot in his mouth by stating that his corporation has “409 small business distributors and credit to these businesses is approximately 1.7 million.” For goodness sake, did the Legislators not recognize that these small businesses are only “distributors” in the true sense of the word for Haddad and nothing else? They have been placed in a dependent state by Bridgeway to market its product without any incentive as Haddad did not state the benefits these businesses accrue for using (a) their facilities, labor, and other contingencies. This is not empowerment but dependence. What the Ministry is trying to achieve is empowering Liberians to have the capacity and wherewithal to be able to stand up to the Bridgeway giant who seems to have connections in high places.  

If Bridgeway has, over the years of its relationship with these small Liberian businesses, empowered them financially then there is no reason for not having the capacity to purchase or establish credit lines with Sinkor Trading, except that such relationship was only using indigent Liberians as tools and perhaps slaves for Bridgeway. This is not empowerment!! Real wealth must be created, situated and sustained amongst Liberians and the Ministry of Commerce is attempting to do just that. To do otherwise would be denying Liberians of their inherent right to create wealth for themselves with the protection of government through the introduction and enactment of policies that would raise them to such state. Send a Liberian to Lebanon and see if he/she would be permitted to go against Lebanese standardized policies with impunity and the support of their parliament. Again, we support you madam minister, and stick to your guns for Liberia’s sake!

August 24, 2006 - Applause For The Commerce Minister (Part I)

The band of pipers for George Haddad seems to be growing day by day over what should be a celebrated decision taken by the Ministry of Commerce to award rice importation to a Liberian entity! Some of the pipers even find themselves in the Liberian Legislature, a body that is clothed with the responsibility of representing the Liberian people, particularly their interests. But is seems that the peoples’ interest is second to George Haddad’s as he goes about dishing out left-over and peanuts to the greedy and shortsighted lawmakers and groups who consistently fail to understand the national security significance of rice in Liberia, and its transfer to a Lebanese national!! 

In the first place many Liberians recall the aftermath caused by the rice debate in 1979 and its effect on Liberia’s infrastructure and economy. Notwithstanding, previous administrations have made strange bedfellows with George Haddad and his Bridgeway corporation, assigning him sole proprietorship of the importation of this commodity only to pocket kickbacks for the favor. As a result, Haddad controlled the price, and was able to even control the availability of what grade of rice that was necessary for Liberians. While this was being done, no one, not even those who are clamoring about the Ministry’s decision was raising any issue of liberalizing the market. This was because their mentors and godfathers were being bankrolled by George Haddad. Even institutions in Liberia began singing praises to Haddad for controlling what can be considered the lifeline of Liberia! Let’s ask ourselves these: would a Liberian be able to exercise such authority in Lebanon to the extent of having Lebanese parliamentarians summon their minister for a decision in favor of a Lebanese? Ultimately, would the Lebanese government even be liberal enough to offer to a Liberian businessman doing business in Lebanon, if possible, the sole responsibility to import a commodity that has the propensity to cause strife if unavailable? 

Let’s not fool ourselves and follow the weak arguments and manipulations that Haddad is employing to undercut the decision of the Ministry, but applaud the Minister for being so bold to stand up to the doyen of the treacherous Lebanese cartel – George Haddad – unlike other ministers who were deep in the pocket of this unscrupulous Lebanese who have robbed the country of millions. Liberians must be the controllers of their destiny and their livelihood and the Ministry’s decision is in the right decision. Why should Haddad now run to his stooges with a ploy when he participated in a bid? Why did he not run to them initially before entering the bid, but waited until he had lost. Organizing a bidding process involving other players was even liberal, considering that in the past Haddad only stayed at this Vai Town office and made a phone call to some past Commerce Ministers and had the Import Permit Declaration rush-delivered to him. No wonder why Haddad stooges in the Senate including Nyepan and Johnson find themselves wailing about “monopolistic methodology”, because their little pods of peanuts and that of their godfathers including Matthews and the rest will be cut short by Haddad, as the equation has changed. Where were they when Haddad monopolized this commodity? The decision has been taken and the tentacles of this cartel on Liberia must be cut. George Haddad lost the bid and this should be final. He must accept the Ministry’s decision. And this is a step in the right direction. Hats off Madam Minister!!

August 16, 2006 - Thieffee - Thieffee

August 11, 2006 - The New Untouchables 

The story is told about a boy who, whenever he committed any egregious act, his mother would insist that her son did not and could not commit such. He first began lying, stealing and in the end was involved in murder. He was tried, convicted and sentenced to death by hanging. Before being hanged he asked to whisper his last words to his ashamed mother. When she placed her ear to his mouth, he bit it off and stated “had you chastised me when I did wrong I would not have been here today. But that was too late!!! 

Recent reports of gunfire exchange between operatives of the presidential security service and including its deputy, which resulted in the death of an operative, create serious condition for concerns. The seriousness is aggravated by the implicit inattentiveness that the government has shown to this matter, especially since it involved the loss of life.  In any democracy, when officials are involved in matters that bring serious disrepute to their persons and the institution as a whole especially with the reckless loss of life, an in-depth inquiry is conducted to gather the circumstances as they evolved. At the same time those involved are either placed on administrative leave of absence or suspended during this period. And if the findings reveal involvement and/or guilt or even complicity, stringent measures are taken leading to dismissal and ultimately legal action. 

What is transpiring so far is far from the norm, even though Liberians expect much from the Sirleaf administration. To date the family of the deceased is pleading for justice, while those involved in this melee are escorting the President on her many tours. It seems they are the “new untouchables”!! What an irony!! Why did Liberians, especially those who are now in high places in this administration criticize Charles Taylor for letting Henry Cassell off the hook for the killing of Papa George, the taxi driver, when they are now providing cover for individual(s) whose actions are consistent with abetting a crime? Why would President Sirleaf even condone having an individual remain as one of her security directors when this individual was involved in an unwholesome act that led to the loss of life? This is a sickening precedent and just the beginning of what is yet to come! If nothing tangible is done about this, an even more embarrassing development would arise that would tarnish not only the image of the Sirleaf administration, but Mrs. Sirleaf as an individual for her refusal to act. Remember the story of the boy and his mom?

August 8, 2006 - Purge Liberia's Security Organs

Responding to questions about dealing with the many security organs that prevailed in Liberia and the problem they posed to building a free society, at a program held at the Sagamore Institute for Policy Research in Indianapolis, then presidential aspirant Ellen Sirleaf seemed skeptical about approaches that would be required to address this issue and wavered on tough would-be measures needed to cope with the problem these groups could posed to the new Liberia, as a result of their carte blanche under Charles Taylor. Her respond was quite understandable owing to her interaction with security forces during the Doe era. 

She understood the role these organizations played in censoring free speech; creating black lists; imprisoning perceived opponents and many more. What she was not prepared to have was a resurgence of similar practices under her aegis, which could be interpreted as reciprocity. It appeared from her respond that hers would be assigning responsibility to create security organs that would recognize individuals’ rights and freedoms, ensure the rule of law, and the problem will be addressed.  

While this is all good and dandy, the situation in Liberia has changed as they relate to security organs and their modus operandi. The list of many of these organizations comprises individuals who have participated in brazen abuses during the conflict in Liberia, and still carry nomme de guerre that still today sends fear into peaceful Liberians. Their actions are automatic and swift, without any single moment of thought and consideration that have the propensity to create a negative picture of the efforts of her government to uphold basic freedoms. What revelation is it for a presidential security officer to be referred to by the name “Standing Tall”? What memory does it brings back to Liberians who went through the war and were abused and afflicted by the many dead-body-bones and one-man-one? There should be no reluctance to purge the ranks of these organs, it is also important to consider the impact individuals’ actions can make on tainting Liberia’s democratic revival. Like the saying goes, “a word to the wise is enough.”

July 30, 2006 - The New Liberia

159 years ago, a republic was born! The birth of that republic was characterized with many inconsistencies and disparities, although defining its mission as a Christianizing one on a dark continent! The first of such disparity was the realization that one religion was superior over the other which necessitated the urge to win over converts. Then there was the classification of dark which translates into a negative perception of the abilities of individuals and groups that inhabited these areas. An array of other disparities including color accompanied this enterprise called Liberia – land of the free. 

Freedom in the view of those who initiated this enterprise meant writing off the vestiges of slavery and assuming a new reality that provided hope, independence, self determination, destiny and liberty. It also presented an opportunity to, in unity with the indigenous groups that inhabited the land, lay the foundations for equality and inclusion in the national polity. However, their approach was a far cry from what was anticipated, especially since the settler-native relationship became a replica of the plantation-styled massa-slave interaction. Not only did this relationship affect indigenous groups, it also accompanied relationships between dark-skinned and light-skinned settlers, the latter being off-springs of massa-slave affairs, who became consigned to commercial enterprise and government and the former to agrarian lifestyle within coastal settlements. 

An amazing flaw of this birth was its motto: the love of liberty brought us here. This exemplified an apparent disregard for the indigenous groups that inhabited the land, and thus, actions that were meted out against these groups, albeit inhumane, were ironically intended to achieve liberty. But for who was the question? The Sasstown wars, the beheading of chiefs by the Liberian Frontier Force for their refusal to pay taxes to a government that disenfranchised them, the imprisonment of indigenous elements from the opposition, the butt-naked parade, etcetera, created divisions within the society which still runs deep till today. As Liberia emerges from one of its darkest periods, the challenges are monumental. Nevertheless, addressing those issues that continue to divide the country, particularly those that were present from Liberia’s false start should form an integral part of the healing and reconciliation process, which should run consistently parallel with developmental initiatives being undertaken by the current administration. Reconciling differences that only grew out of the civil crisis would amount solely to veneering deep-rooted resentments amongst groups in the society that go far back, which could later resurface and again lead to strife in Liberia.

July 25, 2006 - Pass The Budget But....... 

Many Liberians were discouraged by the reneging of the House to deliberate the current fiscal 2006 – 2007 budget submitted to that body by the Executive branch. Their action was based upon requests made to the National Bank for a review of balances in the government’s coffers which met the resistance of the Executive. As much as a disclosure is necessary for the Legislature on the country’s finances, the Liberian Constitution requires the Executive to present account statements reflecting expenditure and income, to the Legislature within a specified period as defined in Article 58. Everyone is cognizant that the Constitution empowers the Legislature to control the purse strings of the country; however the Constitution is also mute on many issues and ambiguous on others. As a result, there are many gray areas that require the development and enactment of laws that would address these issues. 

Prior to the holding of elections in 2005, there were calls for a national conference intended to address an array of those gray areas; and the result of such a national dialogue would form part of the national agenda for the in-coming government. Such a conference would have also required the full involvement of candidates in the electoral contestation, and a commitment to ensuring that the conclusions and outcomes of the conference would be integrated into the national recovery agenda. The alarming proportion of corruption and graft in the Bryant transition, led Liberians to have a change of heart pursuing this initiative instead, in order to speedily do away with the extension of the Bryant kleptocracy! Notwithstanding, many of those who contested the elections merely addressed the endemic constitutional issues and today Liberia is faced with a run-away Legislature and an Executive that is striving to exert itself. 

It would be fool-hardy for the House to hijack the recovery efforts in Liberia and deprive Liberians of the needed services that they long for, and expect to remain relevant! What is needed is not a stand-off on budget passage. It is clear, however, that the system of checks and balance is broken and in a dire state of evaluation and promulgation of new legislations that would engender transparency and accountability. The Liberian Legislature today does not even have the arm that would fully and independently audit government expenditures and income such that they fall within and balance with legislative appropriations; neither is there any legislation that would require same. As a result, and to build on what may have caused a brief stand-off in the passage of the budget which may have basically centered around accountability, the Legislature would do well to address this issue by passing laws and creating the necessary institution that would receive statements from the Executive and audit same thereby ensuring full compliance with budgetary allotments. The recovery efforts must not be impeded but constitutional reform must be a hallmark of this Legislature that would ensure accountability and change and not business as usual.

July 20, 2006 - The Liberian Government's Double Standard

The recent ECOWAS Report on individuals in the previous interim administration, and their involvement in corruption, particularly the former Chairman Gyude Bryant and Vice Chairman, Wesley Johnson, has now set the stage for President Johnson-Sirleaf to make true her resolve to fight corruption. Many Liberians are amazed by President Sirleaf’s requirement of “airtight” evidence to prosecute the individuals implicated in this damaging report. What other evidence is required to make these allegations more “airtight”? Were there not evidence compiled by the ECOWAS to constitute their findings and conclusions in this report? As much as ECOWAS has submitted such a damning report is it not incumbent on a government that views corruption as a menace, to take the evidence and seriously consider and begin legal proceedings against those implicated? Obtain the relevant documentations from ECOWAS and corroborate same with documentations gathered from other sources including the UN, who also played a part in tackling corruption in Liberia during the Bryant era, and build your case. Bryant, according to a credible source in his administration, was cornered by the UN and presented copy of a sticky note that he had penned to the Finance Minister, Lusinee Kamara, authorizing the issuance of funds to him (Bryant), paid to his personal secretary!!  This note was attached to a letter from the Ministry of Finance to the National Bank of Liberia to pay the amount requested to the lady!!! This depicts the extent of how Bryant’s hand was deep in the cookie jar! The evidence is available; the report is clear cut; what other seal is needed to tighten ECOWAS’ conclusion that this administration seeks?  

With all of the given, President Sirleaf’s plausible condition to seek an “airtight” cause, seemingly creating roadblocks to stall the prosecution of individuals who perhaps share a camaraderie with her.  Most surprisingly, President Sirleaf is on record stating that she was presented with this evidence by ECOWAS when she took office and confronted Bryant with this report, also being knowledgeable of the involvement of her ambassador-designate to Great Britain, Wesley Johnson. How can government prosecute other low level employees for corruption and institute a different yardstick for Bryant and others? THIS IS DOUBLE STANDARD!! Government must make public it sincere and unswerving commitment to prosecute all those implicated in this report, and others involved in such practice, without fear or favor, and publicly inform the Liberian people of these efforts and not create justifications that would smear its ability to fight corruption at every level. 

“No more katakata” (corruption in Liberian parlance), was a campaign slogan of President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf during the recent general elections in Liberia. It was based on her stance for transparency and accountability that Liberians turned out in record numbers to elect her as Liberia’s president. Today Liberians hold her to her promises, particularly that which has to do with corruption in Liberian society. For too long the country has been wrecked by individuals who have compromised public trust by massively looting Liberia’s coffers for their personal enrichment. It’s time to see the iron in the lady!

July 14, 2006 - The Folly Of Snowe

Prior to UN Secretary-General’s arrival in Monrovia, Liberia, there were calls by individuals on the UN travel ban list, particularly those in government, to have the ban lifted as it restricted their ability to perform official responsibilities. Many Liberians, who found themselves on the periphery of the travel ban arguments, seemed supportive of this call without fully considering the merits. There were good reasons why individuals were placed on this list and the foremost had to do with hampering the process to achieving peace in Liberia. This overriding reason, when given full consideration within the parameters of sustaining normalcy in Liberia, is germane to ensuring that there is a meticulous process and thorough criteria put in place by the UN, to have individuals removed from the travel ban list. 

Let’s consider Edwin Snowe’s appeal to get off the list. Regardless of his relationship with the dictator, Charles Taylor, there were reports that Snowe maintained a bank account in a Middle Eastern country with a staggering balance, which was frozen by the UN! The veracity of this report raises a red flag!! How did he accumulate such an amount? How was such an account even setup? How many deposits were made to that account and by whom? What is the relationship of the depositor, other than Snowe, to Charles Taylor? These are just some basic inquiries that could provide clarity, especially when Snowe’s income cannot fully justify such accumulation. Snowe’s only approach to his removal has been to ride on the sentiments of a minute stratum of the society to push his cause, without being truthful to all Liberians on how such staggering amount was obtained. His failure to realize that international financial transactions are currently being monitored and the cooperation between banks, switching services and international agencies and governments is at an all time high, is not surprising. The US-SWIFT cooperation should be an eye-opener for Snowe, if he’s aware of this program and its use by the US on tracking terrorists’ funds!! 

Snowe’s removal from the travel ban list and his access to such ill-gotten funds, holding that the sole role he played was to serve as a front to these international financial transactions, could hamper the fragile peace that exists in Liberia. His access to such funds could be detrimental to the security of the state. That he is now involved in dubious deals with the Taiwanese, only validates the assumption that he could use his wherewithal to fund an insurrection in Liberia!  This is just a tip of the iceberg on what Edwin Snowe has in store for Liberia. It is a known fact of his brazen ambition to become President of Liberia!! Members of the Security Council are aware of how he obtained such funds.  It is for Mr. Snowe to present the truth to the Liberian people, and if this was a dubious financial transaction that is watermarked with Charles Taylor, such amount must be turned over to the Liberian government for developmental projects. Snowe’s inability to recognize the composition of the Security Council – the body that imposed these restrictions – and his clandestine “administrative fraud” with the Taiwanese envoy to The Gambia, is another unsurprising recognition of his folly, and makes matter even more difficult for him. However, like the saying goes, “a word to the wise is enough.”

July 10, 2006 - Impeach And Expel Speaker Snowe

When the framers of the Liberian Constitution set out to write the laws of the land, they recognized various branches of government and assigned functions to those branches, such that the exercise of these functions would dove-tail and create a functioning democratic society. Recent actions by individuals in high places in government indicate that something has gone wrong! Not only is something wrong but there is a vigorous effort to hide these actions which, for some good reasons, is not succeeding. As such there are many uncovered actions by individuals of the various branches of government whose revelations to the public are imminent. 

What has unearthed so far and captivated many is the recent revelation of criminal mischief on the part of the Speaker of the National Legislature, Edwin Snowe, that is being downplayed by some members of that body. According to credible sources the attempt by the Speaker to initialize contact with the Republic of China through its ambassador to The Gambia was, as it has always been, for selfish financial reasons. Taiwan has always used money in trying to lure countries, especially third world countries, to establish diplomatic relations; and in most cases it is the gullible at the helm of power that have fallen to this inducement. To justify their decision, “national interests” becomes the basis for such bilateral relationship on the part of the few countries that have such relationship with Taiwan. Notwithstanding, such is a government’s decision, initialized at the highest level of government, and not by an individual with a hidden agenda using the stature of institutionalized body. 

Despite the criminality of his action and his admittance to what he termed “administrative fraud”, the action by his peers is like a pat on the hand for someone whose Constitutional responsibilities are built upon good judgment. This is a grave violation of the Constitution and the rules of the House of Representatives. To be a part of a fraudulent scheme and serve as Speaker of the Legislature is not acceptable. Serving in such a position does not exonerate an individual from the weight of the law, and being part of a criminal activity with the acquiescence of that body, as their action to pardon indicates, only brings disrepute to the House and disqualifies it in the eyes of the Liberian people. What was needed was the setting up of a House committee to fully investigate the matter and have those involved provide swearing statements surrounding their participation, including the Speaker.  Those found perjuring would face the full weight of the law and if the Speaker is guilty, as he has already confessed, he should be impeached and expelled from the Legislature!! There may have been others perhaps in the Executive branch of government who may have been involved, and the action by members of the House only covers their involvement. There is still time to reconsider the action of those legislators who voted to pardon Mr. Snowe, in order to save the reputation and stature of this august body.

June 28, 2006 - The New Law School

Recently, a number of major activities occurred in Liberia worth mentioning: The inauguration of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the ongoing workshop organized by the Governance Reform Commission to develop approaches to fight corruption in Liberia. These events mean a lot for Liberia as they are intended to address some of those problems which seem intractable, especially reconciliation and corruption. These are undertakings that require national involvement and will, as any approach to rid Liberia of such vices must be done meticulously and with candor. The unflinching involvement of every facet of the society and the branches of government would reveal the preparedness of Liberians to forge ahead. 

Preceding these developments was the Tubmanburg retreat for members of the Liberian Senate, organized to review the performance of its leadership and select a representative to an international organization for lawmakers. The relevance of this undertaking is missing considering the urgent necessities of the Liberian people and society. The leadership question of the Senate has already been resolved; if there is a lack of confidence in the leadership, the solution is found in articles 38 and 47 of the Constitution. Also, it is the Liberian people who will review their performances during elections, based on the tangible contributions made towards the improvement of their livelihood. The seclusion of the senators to discuss matters only relevant to themselves and not the Liberian people signifies the level of consideration these individuals have given the people who elected them. 

What is even striking is the admittance by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate of their current inabilities to institute reform due to their lack of knowledge of the laws!!! Did the Liberian people send pupils to learn the law? When did the Senate become a law school? There is an institution in Liberia that teaches law in Liberia – Louis Arthur Grimes School of Law, University of Liberia. This is where the President Pro Tempore and others who fall in such category ought to be if they meet the academic requirements and not the Senate. Not only did he reveal their emptiness, his comments dangerously portrayed the impending ambiguities, conflicts and flaws that would characterize legislations emanating from this body. Liberian taxpayers cannot afford such a bill to first educate senators while they linger in poverty; this is shortchanging the people. If knowledge is required for change, then get involved with current efforts aimed at reconciliation and eliminating corruption and be part of the discussions, familiarizing with the issues for positive inputs and change.

June 21, 2006 - For "The People"

During the elections campaign in 1997, there were lots of political parties’ mottos which were intended to lure voters. One of those that stood out was “above all else, the people”, which belonged to the National Patriotic Party. Also in 1979 the slogan was “in the cause of the people, the struggle continues”, which later became the motto of the United Peoples’ Party. All along, “the people” have been placed at the center of political causes in Liberia and at the end they have benefited naught. In 1980 when “the people” were called out to demonstrate against the TWP oligarchy, they did which cost many their lives. Except for their indignation for the regime, which led to its brutal removal, the people benefited nothing. Their hope was to be raised from a state of abject poverty and neglect, but that became elusive.   In 1997, being confronted with fear and fatigue from a protracted war, “the people” were intimidated, and acquiesced in the selection of a party that placed them at the core of its platform.  

We recall the inaugural address when “the people” were asked to “dream big dreams” and how “classrooms would be computerized.” Did “the people” dream? Yes they did, but their dreams needed to be transformed into reality by the implementation of tangible developmental projects and programs, making the motto true and real. Perhaps it would have taken till 2024 to get all of their dreams become a reality, but the little things would have had to be implemented to show progress, like electricity, running water, etcetera – like the Chinese proverb “the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.”  Nevertheless, “the people” were told to “buy their own generators if they needed electricity”. Even when “the people’s” resources were used to at least generate electricity for Monrovia, it only electrified a few street lights in parts of Monrovia for security purposes and for just a few hours and that was the end. 

All of these occurred in the past, and now a new time for “the people” has come. In the 2005 elections “the people” spoke, electing a leader who promised to place “the people” interests first. Reports from Liberia show some movement in this direction; however there still remains a lot of work and effort to make the process more accelerative. This requires the involvement of every Liberian and every Liberian institution that would see the interests of “the people” as the common goal. The Executive must ensure transparency and uphold the rights and privileges of citizens and professionals, and be accountable for the actions of its officials; the Judiciary must exercise its powers within constitutional and legal proximities, not being judge and executioner; the Legislature must seek to consider the prevailing conditions of Liberia and work towards creating laws that would compliment the efforts of raising the standards of Liberia, not bickering over trivialities that diminishes its stature; the media must also show resolve by becoming a part of the national development cause; being responsible and engaging, upholding ethical values and shining the light on things that could stagnate growth in Liberia.  The action of all must have a common focus and must all be blended, complementing the other. All the little pieces have to be knitted together with diligence, care and respect to form this beautiful quilt – Liberia. And we are called to a noble duty to do that, and do it right this time for nobody else but “the people.”

June 15, 2006 - Downsizing For The Common Good

Downsizing Liberia’s bloated bureaucracy has now become a sticky issue to many Liberians. What this process endeavors to do is to shrink government’s inflated payroll listing, and free up resources that could be used for social services and other developmental projects for war-ravaged communities in Liberia. This is basically the most unambiguous reason for this exercise. With growing expectations, many Liberians look forward to the construction and rehabilitation of roads, provision of electricity and safe drinking water, rehabilitation of damaged school buildings and other infrastructures including hospitals and clinics; and the list goes on and on.  Sure enough this is why government exists.   

What is disconcerting though is when lawmakers distort the larger picture of this exercise, especially the overall benefits for developing the country, politicize and blur it with circumlocutions such as “technical implementation considerations” as reported in the Liberian media. What does “technical implementation considerations” mean? The bottom line is the provision of retirement or severance packages to former employees. From all indications the Liberian government seems committed to meeting up with its obligations under this exercise. Punning with ambiguities and not providing any clear cut alternatives or plan does not address the problem, neither does assuming elaborate job titles make a difference. For example, “Advisor to the Chairman on The Scrupulous Implementation of the Accra Peace Accord”, as if “Scrupulous” means “brazenly corrupt.” 

Freeing up resources would enable government to contract the services of reputable Liberian firms ready to implement reconstruction projects using the skills of many of the redundant – close one door, open another. Not only does this empower Liberian entrepreneurship, it also addresses a major concern amongst critics of this exercise on the availability of employment opportunities to absorb those redundant. These are some of the non-reverberated benefits of this exercise and government must do more to elucidate its downsizing plan and spell out the enormous benefits for Liberia to the public. The greater good must always be sought in this regard. Certainly, government cannot continue to remain the largest employer in Liberia, but must provide the enabling economic environment suitable for creating jobs for Liberians, which this exercise seems to be all about.

June 9, 2006 - The Speaker's Lecture 

When the founders of the University of Liberia established that noble institution in 1862, they selected a motto “Lux In Tenebris” (Light in Darkness), which is still relevant today. In their view and rightly so, the University of Liberia stood to become the torchbearer and mainstay for knowledge, elevating men and women from the dungeon illiteracy and broadening their horizon in the sciences and humanities. Yes, the light in a society on a continent that was considered dark!! Over the years, this great institution has turned out great scholars and acclaimed graduates who continue to make significant headways and contributions in the academia and other disciplines globally. Their works still reflect their academic foundation and highlights the accomplishments of the University of Liberia, and that make Liberians proud. 

However, when a faculty member of the oldest college – Liberia College – who happens to be the Chairman of the Department of Political Science, deviates from the founding principles of the University by inviting an individual whose academic credentials is highly questionable to lecture students of that department, it raises serious concerns. Paramount amongst those concerns is the content of what was delivered to the students, especially considering the topics that were discussed – Emergency Powers; Legislative Procedures and Contempt Charges!!! These are concepts that are wide-ranging and even within the Liberian context require serious research and analyses, especially for students at the introductory level of political science. The tenets and framework upon which they operate lie deep within Liberia’s constitutional and jurisprudential experience, such that to be left with someone with no background or experience in these matters and who has little or no trace of tangible academic achievement is a risk!!! 

At the end of the lecture, what did the students learn that can be applied to their course of study? The jury is out on that!!!! It is a farce to have Edwin Snowe lecture students of political science at the University of Liberia when, despite his position in the National Legislature, he is questionably an undergraduate student of the University. This is one of the many problems that is affecting the educational process in Liberia, where individuals who barely completed high school are now in the classrooms teaching Liberia’s young pupils, and those who made it through the University barely by the skin of their teeth are now instructors at the University. What a mockery of knowledge!!! The University should be the marketplace for upholding quality education, producing scholars, consigned to academic principles and the light in darkness. It is shameful to see this occurrence at our beloved University. A serious effort must be placed to expounding knowledge to university students by qualified academics and not persons who only bring disrepute to learning, so that at the end of the day Liberian students would be able to compete with other students internationally.

June 5, 2006 - Here We Go Again!!

A fortnight ago a reader of The Last Word, responding to articles on the column, expressed disgust and frustration over the members of the Liberian Legislature, particularly the House, and their inability to perform the peoples’ duties, as many of them are mere “flunkies”, according to the reader. This reader also opined that the Liberian people made a colossal mistake in electing these “quacks” into positions where they have not the slightest inclination of their responsibilities. 

In response to this reader it was stated that the people have spoken and their decisions cannot be reversed. This is the bitter side of democracy. Whatever has occurred is water under the bridge, and Liberians have to now work with what they have. However, actions by members of this body consistently bring embarrassment to Liberians, and diminish the important role that is enshrined for this institution. It is no wonder why this body is taken for a grain of salt, because it has lost its worth owing primarily to its leadership and also to the issues that tend to attract them. As such, the opinion of that reader continues to resurface and perhaps may be a general conclusion. 

Bickering about President Sirleaf designating one of her colleagues to act as head of state during her absence is unimaginable? Has this not happened in the past? Did any legislator have the temerity to raise any contention when Charles Taylor designated Roland Massaquoi to administer the state of affairs when he left the country? Did he even write the Legislature to inform them of his departure? Or were they not called to the Executive Mansion, especially members of the National Patriotic Party, and scolded whenever they differ with his decisions – case in point Taylor’s infamous meeting with NPP legislators at the Executive Mansion where he blasted and denigrated them for opposing his policies, primarily the one to demolish the Barclay Training Center.  

Again, we are in a new dispensation and it seems that there is a twisted sense of the interpretation of the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balance on the part of some legislators. Certainly, it is only out of expediency and respect that the President communicates with the Legislature on her departure from the country, and because of technological setbacks has to designate a colleague to administer the state of affairs. It is foolish to make a show about using government funds for travel, when the same members of the Legislature approved, “the budget” – HELLO. In the budget was appropriation for foreign travels in case you did not read the line items!!!! It is time that you step up or shut up. And this is the last word!!!!!

May 27, 2006 - Not A Nimba Problem

May 16, 2006 - Honorable Members Of The House Of Representatives

Your election as members of the House of Representatives of the Liberian Legislature occurred at a critical juncture in the nation’s sojourn - a moment when transformation and renewal tend to be the tasks at hand for every Liberian. Make no mistake, the Liberian people are not fools, neither did they not judge your abilities before selecting you. As a result, you owe a serious commitment to the people to ensure that their daily lives are improved and enhanced in ways that are consistent with the responsibilities of your office. A rather simplistic way to gather what those responsibilities are, would be examining our organic laws as enshrined in the Liberian Constitution. This document consists of a complete chapter on the Legislature (Chapter 5). This would make a good study guide and keep you circumspect in doing the Liberian people’s business, by enacting laws that would strengthen democracy, improve the lives of Liberians.  

Apparently, there are tools that you need; there are resources and resource persons that you also need to assist you in your work; there are laws that are archaic or for that matter obsolete to the times now that need to be amended; there are even constitutional provisions that need to be amended; there are concession agreements that have to be ratified by the Legislature; Liberia’s infrastructure has been damaged; roads need to be repaired and/or rebuilt; the Liberian treasury is empty and there is a need to begin rebuilding an economy that would address the needs of the Liberian people in terms of jobs and income; the tax laws need to be revisited and a tax structure fully implemented that will be service oriented as well; salary structure and minimum wage laws is also a priority; the creation of a fund by government that would provide financial aid to university students could be an issue that could be addressed by the Legislature; and the list goes on and on. All of these require a significant input from members of the Legislature!!! There is no time to sit and wait for the Executive branch of government to introduce a bill before the Legislature can act. You have to be able to examine and investigate current and past policies and see whether there are needs for enhancements and modification. This would entail a great input from your staff and from individuals involved in such undertaking, and would also require hearings that would provide more ideas and issues that would make new laws or policies more inclusive. YOU HAVE TO SET THE AGENDA NOW!!! 

Bickering over the relevance of a letter from the President inviting a member of your body to be a part of her travel delegation is preposterous and questions your preparedness to put ample time into initiatives that would generate results for a people whose level of anticipation is high. Such an action is akin to throwing a piece of meat amongst cats!!! The message it sends to the other branches of government only minimizes the clout that the Legislature possesses, and as a result tend to re-establish the primacy of the Executive over the branches of government. THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE!!! Perhaps the reason for such letter could have been a sign of consideration and respect for that august body by the Executive. Your inconceivable action only attempts to erode that respect, and would make that body a pariah. It is imperative that you live up to the letter of the Liberian Constitution and not be tingling cymbals!! Living up to the letter would mean, if nothing else but ensuring checks and balance in government! Liberia is on a new path of no return – a path that underscores democratic values and uplifts mankind. If you are not of the same thought and aspiration, especially in the Legislature, then God help us!!!!

May 9, 2006 - Legislature 101: Step Up, Or Step Out

It is appalling to hear Liberian legislators make statements that question their membership to that august body, or in fact tend to insinuate if they fully understand the constitutional authority provided them! Particular reference would be report of a statement made by George Mulbah a member of the House of Representatives from Bong County. According to local dailies, Representative Mulbah expressed his opposition to a legislation being introduced by the Executive to merge the Bureau of Maritime Affairs with the Ministry of Finance. While it within his purview and consistent with the principles of democracy to express his opposition to this legislation, his reasons as reported raises serious concern. And his reason amongst others which is “counter productive to the policy of transparence,” would be “empowering one agency to collect, allocate and expend government’s revenue.” 

Common sense suggests that the Constitutional provisions be elucidated to Honorable Mulbah and other members of the Legislature who have not put enough time to studying that great document and the powers it provides to them, in order to (1) provide perspicacity; and (2) strengthen the resolve towards achieving a more transparent society.

Article 34.d of the Liberian Constitution states that the Legislature shall have the power to: “………make appropriations for the fiscal governance of the Republic.” Subsection (ii) further states that “no monies shall be drawn from the treasury except in consequence of appropriations made by legislative enactment and upon warrant of the president;……An annual statement and account of the receipt and expenditure of all public monies shall be submitted by the Office of the President to the Legislature and published once a year.”  

There is no provision in the Constitution that gives the Ministry of Finance the power to, in the first place allocate government funds, nor expend same without appropriations made by the Legislature. Authority to collect revenues is consistent with legislations enacted by the National Legislature; any amendment of such laws would have to be passed by that body.  The Legislature is even empowered to ensure that there is accountability for funds appropriated, as annual statement provided by the Executive need not only be submitted the body and published, but audited to ensure that expenditures were made consistent with the items for which they were appropriated. This would necessitate the establishment an arm of the Legislature to audit receipts and expenditures of the government, similar to the Government Accountability Office of the United Sates. This would ensure greater transparency and accountability, and require expenditures to be consistent with line item appropriations. Within such premise would arise the need to have a single depository for government revenues where the Legislature would have periodic advice on government revenues which would also impact on appropriations for fiscal governance. Moreover, the need to have government institutions manage and account for their appropriations will also be paramount and would address the de facto authority the Ministry of Finance possesses for expenditure. 

This should be the endeavor of Representative Mulbah and his colleagues! All other reasons for the non-merger are hogwash, because there is no proof to indicate that vessels would leave the Liberian maritime registry due to a merger. There are very important factors that ship owners consider when signing with a registry and a robust inspection regime is high on the list, not merger with another government agency. There are fundamental issues that need to be addressed within Liberia’s Constitutional context and legislators have to be more inclined to these issues than trivialities. If the Ministry of Finance is “over-powerful”, there are avenues provided for by the Constitution that can curtail these excesses and allow for checks and balances – ENACT LAWS!!! The people have elected these individuals to do serious work, and if they cannot or do not understand their responsibilities they must step aside, so that the people’s business can go on!!!

May 5, 2006 - Time, Love And Politics  

An individual once remarked that “timing is important to politics as it is to love.” As such, one would see declarations made during political campaigning as endearing to win support and rally the base of a political party.  Most of the time they build sentiments, create expectations and in so doing electorates become edgy and highly anticipative. Immediacy becomes the expected, especially for delivering on promises made. Any delay or an inclination of neglect engenders discontentment which could affect the relationship. 

However, the absence of fulfillment or a perceived delay in the realization of a particular objective or goal may not depict neglect, even though time is essential. There are a number of factors that may need to be taken into consideration when promises are not timely fulfilled, especially in the exercise of government, as it would be “to love.” The working of government is gradual and accounts for deep thought and consideration in terms of availability, accountability, benefits, balance, and timing, among others. Tangibles do not occur overnight, but they are expected to occur. 

More importantly, in a society damaged, destroyed, and pillaged as a result of war, it takes time to get the engines of government functioning fully with recognizable results. There will be limited output based on availability, basically owing to the prevailing state of affairs, and perhaps the economy. There are lots of demands going after limited resources. Liberia’s pre-1980 financial picture was not very impressive, but could address a number of needed projects and services for the society. This is not the case presently!! A bloated bureaucracy, marred with unprecedented levels of corruption; a labyrinth of bureaucratic structures; a dismal credit performance; a colossal debt burden, amongst others are just a few of the challenges faced by the current leadership. 

The question then becomes: should these challenges inhibit the minimum performance of government in terms of providing just basic services incrementally, i.e., water, electricity, to parts of Monrovia? Are there not minimum funds to begin covering potholes? Can government not cover the cost of civil servants back-pay albeit in piece-meal? These are some areas where focus can be placed, and perhaps they are. However as with the earlier quotation, timing is very important and people have to begin to see results, and the minimum would suffice!! As much as the Liberians are prepared to understand the enormous burden placed on the country owing to the war and mal-administration of the past, a visible, timely and/or incremental response by leadership to the people in terms of services should also accompany the courtship. Liberia’s problems cannot be fixed in 100 days, but leadership can begin to make some efforts in this regard with minimum outcome, and time is of the essence!!!

 May 2, 2006 - A New Country Of Laws Not Men

With the outbreak of war in Liberia came the destruction of basic social institutions in the society, particularly the family. Children became adults in terms of the word but not the meaning, as adulthood carries responsibilities. Even when efforts to redeem the society were institutionalized through elections of 1997, they fell far from the norm as institutions, particularly the government, whose role to institute order and restore normalcy saw the continuance of disorder and chaos an enforcement tool especially for the “cock roaches”. The result was the saying: “we’een wan know” (in Liberian parlance we don’t care.) Little did Liberians realize that this unwholesome practice had permeated the fabric of a generation, who now views violence and disorderliness as a medium for redress, as typified in the actions of individuals purporting to be members of the disbanded Armed Forces of Liberia.  

Evidently, these tendencies and actions not only hamper efforts on the part of the leadership in Liberia to restore sanity to the country, but also send a disturbing and unwarranted signal to international partners who are bent on providing developmental support to war-ravaged Liberia. Liberia cannot allow unruly and indiscipline individuals to instill fear, disturb and disrupt the daily activities of peace loving Liberians who are determined to move ahead and improve their lives. Gone are the days when leaders declared that Liberia is “a country of laws and not men”, but only sat supinely and witnessed the harassment, intimidation and brutalization of peaceful citizens without guaranteeing any legal recourse or protection for the victims. 

President Sirleaf must be applauded for her boldness to call for the arrest and trial of those involved in instigating violence and chaos in Monrovia recently. Such trial must be speedy and those arrested must be given full legal representation and if found guilty must bear the full brunt of the law. THEIR RIGHTS MUST NOT BE VIOLATED. Such an action should send a message to their comrades that this will be the consequence of any similar action. There is a legal way to seek redress to every “justifiable” concern provided for in the Liberian Constitution, and procedural guidelines instituted to voice concerns and stage protests in the country. The government is also under obligation to ensure these rights are protected, but overall that the Liberian people are safe and protected. The time must come when the true meaning of the creed “country of laws and not men” must be upheld, AND SUCH IS THE TIME!!!!

April 28, 2006 -  Wrong Precedent For A Recovering Democracy

April 24, 2006 -