Analyses

People and institutions speak and act. Here, you will read my analyses of what people and institutions say and do, especially those considered important, whether in the Liberian society or elsewhere. Actually, these are my two-cent comments.

The Harry Greaves  Corruption Allegation

At a news conference held on August 24, 2006, LPRC Managing Director Harry Greaves told the nation that a member of the legislature had asked him for a fifty-thousand-dollar bribe in order for that body to exempt the LPRC from paying dividends to government during the 2006/2007 fiscal year. He vowed at the time that he would release the name of the legislator, if pressed. The accusation prompted the legislature to summon Mr. Greaves to name the legislator, but Mr. Greaves failed to name the person. He then apologized to the Legislative Branch for inconveniencing and disrespecting them.

Analysis: While it is true that the legislature accepted his apology, many believe that such a situation is not in the economic interest of the country, especially as it relates to the fight against corruption. There is the feeling that, indeed, the bribery allegation is true, but the same corrupt attitude on the part of government officials, as well as the usual cover-up that those involved so enjoy promoting, caused Mr. Greaves not to identify the person. It is situations like this that have made corruption become so entrenched in the Liberian society, especially in government.  Others are beginning to wonder whether Mr. Greaves could ever be trusted again, especially where he arranged a press conference to release the news about the bribery incident, only to apologize later for his statement. Still, there are those who believe that Mr. Greaves should be relieved of his position for creating undue embarrassment for the Executive and the Legislative Branches.

===================================================================================

===================================================================================

Citizens’ Watch Teams Means and Law and Order in the Country

Sometime ago, the Sirleaf-led government called on the citizens to form community watch teams in view of the rise in armed robbery and other crimes. However, some human rights advocates, including Mr. Dempster Brown, lambasted the government, especially the Justice Minister, for the move. Mr. Brown argued that the pronouncement meant that there was a breakdown of law and order in the country. Another group, The Foundation for Human Rights and Democracy (FOHRD), said that the call rendered the Ministry of Justice and the Police irrelevant and unwarranted institutions.

Analysis: While Mr. Brown and the others may have had some genuine concerns about the establishment of community watch teams, and while it is true that we respect their concerns, I think they did not pragmatically and realistically analyze the government’s pronouncement.  I believe that the government was being realistic with the situation, especially where the Police lack the necessary gear for their effective functioning. The government recognized the fact that the citizens are capable of taking steps to prevent crimes. It does not necessary mean that the government was asking the citizens to become lawless, or find weapons here and there and go about brandishing them in the communities. The government did not say it is not in the position to provide security, and so the citizens should take over. No! It wasn’t a God’s-for-all-and-everybody’s-for-himself call. The government was only asking the community to help the law enforcement officers in preventing crimes. The Police released two emergency telephone numbers: 9-1-1 for those using Cell-Com and Liber-Cell, and 3-5-5 for those using Lone Star and Comium. In fact, already, the government had released information indicating that it intended to work with the community watch teams closely and professionally in combating the wave of crimes threatening the citizens. Another point that’s worth mentioning is the advocates’ failure to state whether the citizens can play any meaningful role in the process at all, or not. They only excoriated the government for making the pronouncement. Were they suggesting that the citizens are not capable of protecting themselves in some form, manner or shape? Or, were they implying that the people cannot assist the government in fighting crimes?

Another simplistic approach to the issue was Mr. Brown’s statement that the pronouncement meant that there was a complete breakdown of law and order. What if the government had not made the pronouncement?  Would not making the pronouncement signify the existence of law and order? What logic! FOHRD’s statement also gave a wrong diagnosis of the government’s pronouncement. The pronouncement did not, in anyway, render the Justice Ministry and the Police irrelevant. These institutions exist and are functioning, even if prevailing situations incapacitate them to function effectively and efficiently. We should not give any unfounded theoretical analysis to a situation that is practically evident.

==================================================================================

==================================================================================

Taylor’s Inalienable Rights and the Special Court  for Sierra Leone

According to information obtained from Liberia, the Association for the Legal Defense of Charles Taylor once accused the Special Court for Sierra Leone, now convening in the Hague, of violating Mr. Taylor’s rights. They alleged that Mr. Taylor was being held incommunicado. According to news, the association comprises some of Mr. Taylor’s staunch supporters

Analysis: If this information is true, then I admonish the court to protect Mr. Taylor’s rights, because I believe that his rights should not be violated in any form, manner or shape. Having said that, it’s worth mentioning that it’s interesting to know that a man who so grossly violated other people’s rights was complaining of his rights being violated, especially of the very rights of whose violation he was complaining about. For example, Taylor’s security men, on April 24, 2002, arrested, tortured and detained Cllr. Tiawon Gongloe for bogus reasons. At some point, he was held incommunicado. Also, Mr. Taylor and his security forces arrested Mr. Sheikh Sackor and Journalist Hassan Bility in June of 2002 and imprisoned them incommunicado for months. Mr. Aloysius Toe was also treated in similar way. The very people who were complaining about Taylor’s rights being abused were around, and did nothing to condemn the wave of injustice prevailing in the country at the time. How laudable it would have been if these individuals had, also, robustly and unflinchingly, directed their legal defense towards the vulnerable people in the Liberian society.