The succession of a Nigerian General, Yusuf by his
countryman, Major General Suraj Alao Abdurrahman in June 2007, as Commander of
the Armed Forces of Liberia, is not only damning and denigrating for one of
Africa’s oldest nations, it defies all international legal wisdoms. Under Article
VII of the Accra Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), the Armed Forces of
Liberia along with other security agencies were to be restructured under a new
command. The call to restructure Liberia’s security apparatus came from
concerns held by a group of Liberian politicians, including Madam Sirleaf on
the “brutal role” of security units under previous Liberian governments. This
thirst to institutionalize Liberia’s security units was to ensure that, never
again in the history of Liberia, would any government or politicians use the
security to protect their political interests.
In all fairness, the rebuilding of new security machinery for
Liberia not only restored its lost dignity, but that process completely removed
the pariah status which it inherited from prolonged years of civil unrest. Nonetheless,
how worthy is the sovereignty of a nation whose security apparatus is headed by
a foreign national? There remains to be seen, how Nigeria would allow Ghana or
Liberia to head its security apparatus, because it was prosecuting a bloody
Biafaran War; or neighboring Sierra Leone or the Ivory Coast subjecting its sovereign
pride to a regional counterpart, from political differences?
The intentions of rebuilding a new Liberia, including its
security sector may have been well intentioned. But the subjugation of its
security responsibilities to foreign nationals puts the process aloof. Would an
Amos Sawyer or a Boima Fahnbulleh allow a UN sanctioned foreigner to head
Liberia because both men vigorously prosecuted a progressive struggle against
the Samuel Doe regime? Should Madam Sirleaf be excluded from the presidency of
Liberia because she admittedly, contributed ten thousand dollars to a rebellious
process which dissipated Liberia?
It can be said that, yes prior to the takeover of Liberia by
a military junta on April 12, 1980, the security sector served in détente, or
an ease of relationship with its political masters, one that resulted into a
trust-deficit. This strange relationship largely sanctioned a very popular
indigenous struggle. Some contended that, “the Liberian security sector was
used as instrument of coercion by politicians,” and not the reverse. Would a discharged
weapon which resulted to the death of someone be blamed instead of its user?
Should the courts find a vehicle used in a felony drive by, guilty, and not the
operator? Bluntly put, the security apparatus exists at the wills and caprices
of the state. In fact, where praises belong, the Sirleaf administrations, previous
and now have done well to institutionalize Liberia’s public sector, to include
the security. On the contrary, the condoning of Nigerians and other nationals
to head the Armed Forces of Liberia in particular, indignantly risks the territorial
integrity of the once proud lone star nation, Liberia.
The basis for this unlawfully ignoble arrangement, which
lends authority to a Nigerian national to preside over the Armed Forces of
Liberia, arguably came from the “Comprehensive Peace Agreement of Accra,” signed
by MODEL, LURD, and the then willy-nilly government of Mr. Taylor. Part IV,
Article VII (A&B) of the CPA mandated the disbandment of irregular forces
(MODEL and LURD), restructuring of a citizenry binding Armed Forces, one which
is proportionally represented with a new command. While this provision vaguely
mandated a Nigerian, Ghanaian, or other foreign national to serve in advisory
capacities, the intention was to mostly oversee the transitioning of the AFL
and other security units. But the CPA did not grant the subordination of the
AFL to the Republic of Nigeria, or any other ECOWAS member country.
Moreover, Urias Pour of the Liberian Policy Research Group argued
that “key stakeholders of the Liberian civic society, including the
Legislature, were excluded from the dialogues and vetting aspects of the
security sector reforming process.” Pour further claimed that, efforts to
reform the AFL and the Liberian National police without the full participation
of the Liberian people are fundamentally flawed, if they are to serve as pillars
of a very weak democracy.
To say the least, the reform process has not only moved at a
sluggish pace, it continues to condone the unconstitutional heading of the AFL
by Nigerian and Ghanaian nationals. Under the two term presidency of Madam
Sirleaf, the Armed Forces of Liberia continue to struggle with a number of
transformational issues, key among, is size. The current strength of the AFL
for a nation of almost four million people is ridiculously less than 2,500. In
addition, reports have pointed to the unattractively low wage to security personnel,
as the hallmark for a weaker security apparatus. Some of these reports argued
that, the prevalence of corruption within the security sector is largely to a
very unattractive severance package. But the argument can also be made, that a
third of the lofty benefits given to nationals from foreign nations, could be
given to Liberians with equal or better leadership skill set.
It can be said, that there is abundance of qualified
Liberians with post graduate education, including PhD, and extensive military
and, or security knowledge from the United States Armed Forces and others, who
can ably preside over the Armed Forces of Liberia, and other Liberian security
entities. Undoubtedly, some may believe that the presence of a Nigerian General as head of the
AFL is in itself, a way of playing it safe.
Yet, others may argue that, in the event of an insurgency, or civil
strife, the Federal Republic of Nigeria will commit Nigerian troops to quell
down any such rebellion. While such ambition may be considered worthy, under
international law, there is something called, pacta sunt servanda—this is a Latin phrase,
which means that promises or agreements must be kept. It is a private contract
which in tandem implies that non-fulfillment of respective obligations is a
breach of an international pact.
But history shows that, these types of private pacts are nominally unfulfilled.
The fact remains that, under such agreements, both parties have to constitutionally
evaluate the financial and human costs of committing troops to foreign crises. Under
a totalitarian administration, Nigeria may have little or no struggle in
meddling in a foreign strife. However, it may not be that easy under the
current democratic atmosphere, where containing its own Islamic insurgency
posed by Boko Haram continues to present Nigeria’s security apparatus, as a feeble
entity.
On the part of Liberia, this pact has never been ratified or approved by
our Legislative branch? And because of that, Madam Sirleaf is in violation of the
Liberian Constitution, which clearly grants the responsibility to head the Armed
Forces of Liberia under Article 86, to a Liberian citizen, who is to be
commissioned by the Liberian National Legislature.
Besides, under the same international protocol, there is a subsequent
law, which excuses parties to such pacts from execution. Under Clausula Rebus Sic Stantibus—things thus standing: is
such that whenever there is a fundamental change of circumstance, which was not
anticipated by the parties, other than what otherwise existed, may not be
enforceable. And unless the change is objectively essential to the
obligations of the agreement; and the instance wherein the change of
circumstances has had a radical effect on the obligations of the treaty, it is unenforceable.
For instance, under President Tolbert, a similar pact was signed between his
government and the late President Sekou Toure’s. What happened in 1980 at the
behest of a military junta takeover? Guinea could not fulfilled its side of a
similar agreement, because of the occurrence of a Liberian coup d’état, which was
not factored into the Tolbert-Toure’s Pact. Dejavu!
Are we implying that within one of the oldest nations, there is no
capable Liberian other than a Nigerian to head the AFL? Where in twenty-first
century Africa is this possible other than Liberia? Sometimes, I wonder whether
there exists any civil legal body in Liberia, to take on such
unconstitutionally irrational decisions. Such a move will protect Liberia’s brittle
democracy.
Nonetheless, a few weeks from now, a group of Liberians lead by The
Wish Center, a human rights organization, will sponsor a law suit in our
Liberian courts, with the hope of replacing Major General Suraj
Alao Abdurrahman with a natural born Liberian. Stay tuned.
Sources:
Edmond Gray is a Liberian national residing in Minnesota,
and can be reached at remiegray@gmail.com
.
No comments:
Post a Comment