KILLING FIELD

Baba Tunde Olateji, FrontPageAfrica Correspondent
 

Doukoue’, Ivory Coast-
 

Terror has visited Doukoue’ were scores of men, women, children and the elderly lay dead; some scrapped naked and burned alive; others hanged and dragged through the principal  streets amid wailing  with their hands tied behind them. Until that fateful event of the invasion and capture of Doukoue’ by forces  said to be sympathetic to Alassane  Ouattara, one of the protagonists in the country’s presidential dispute,  these peaceful and innocent citizens, mainly women, children and the elderly, were alive and happy.
Unaware of what was afoot, they came face to face with their  ‘liberators’--- men who have been  hired  to free them from the clutches of the  dictatorial regime of President Laurent Gbagbo  and  to  give them a new life; a new beginning and democracy that will never be. For many relatives of the victims, it was a colourful dream—a colourful liberation warmly articulated and supported by the international community in the name of democracy that never was! It produced pains, agonies, and deaths of scores of innocent women, children and the elderly burned alive with the charred bodies strewn across Duoukoue’.
But hours after their ‘liberation’, scores lay dead in the pools of blood. Their untimely killing is a telling example of what liberation means in African politics.
The mass killing has drawn ire from Ouattara supporters.
‘Liberated irony’
Sadie Toure, who sold pastries at a local store just before the post-election violence blames the international community for allowing the bloodshed to get this far.
Said Toure: ‘‘These innocent victims were alive until Doukoue’ was ‘liberated’ by forces allegedly  sympathetic to  Alassane Ouattara, one of the protagonists in the power struggle in La Cote’ d’Ivoire. Now  that their gruesome deaths have presented a rather  chilling example of  what is still in the offing, what other evidence does the international community want to stop defending Ouattara’s ill-fated  claims to the presidency and what  hope is there for those Ivoirians that do not   support brazen  his alliance  with rebel forces to take state power at all cost?’’
Toure says the victims were slaughtered; butchered and hacked in their droves  in cold blood and made to pay for whatever sins the regime in Abidjan headed by President Gbagbo has  committed for continuously holding onto state power.
Although far removed from the epic-center of power, poor and diseased these victims, their  massacre in Doukoue’ presents a rather precarious picture of the scale of terror and brutality associated with those who armed struggle as a means of installing  Alassane Ouattara as President of Cote’ d’Ivoire.  In truth, the Doukoue’ massacre clearly unmasks a new look into the inner workings of international politics and the grand designs of licensing instability, mayhem and murder.
A Gbagbo supporter who was an eyewitness to the massacre at Doukoue’ said Cote’ d’Ivoire is bleeding not because Ouattara was declared as winner of the presidential polls but because those who made such declaration decided to ignore and sidestep article 98 of the Ivorian Constitution which gives exclusive and instructive powers to the constitutional council not only to certify elections results but to make its decision binding and conclusive as to the outcomes of all elections results.
Ethnic cleansing vs. casualties
Those who have been murdered in Doukoue’ had hoped to see a new day; a new leadership but that hope has been dashed by those who ‘liberated’ them  from this earth into the abysmal paths of gruesome death in  the name of  freedom. Truly, they are freed but murdered in cold blood for reasons other than ethic cleansing and as casualties they are the prize of what Ouattara’s presidency means.
It is still not clear how and why many people were killed by those who went to liberate them. But one thing that is clear is that, their deaths have truly exposed the deep ethic divisions, mistrusts and suspicions between rival forces over the presidency.
A senior Ivorian official and Gbagbo supporter, speaking after seeing the scale of the mayhem said: ‘‘See by yourself the behaviour of the people of the man that Sarkozy, Obama and Ban ki moon wants as president of Cote d ivoire, you can see how they are violent and the language spoken in the movie is from Burkina Faso. This is what the international community wants for our country, actually they are broken houses, stealing all the goods of people, killing those who resist, I don t know how they will rule this country.  This is what Ivorians wanted to avoid for the country, the international community will come after as they did in RWANDA to apologize with compassion but all these poor men and women will not be there to hear the hypocrisies of the international community. What a world are we building for our children and the future? Is this the democracy they are building in Africa? May GOD help us! Indeed, his comments underline the traumatic expericen of the Ivorian people and reveal an awful ot of the motive of Ouattara and his supporters. |Just how long will the blood thirsty campaign, mayhem and murder  last to justify Ouattara’s claims to the presidency is a question that only those in the international community who have licensed this reign of  terror  to remove President Laurent Gbagbo from power  at all cost, can answer. In the meantime, just who the next batch of victims will be, we cannot say for sure.’’
UN eyeing greater role
Meanwhile, as the fighting intensifies, the U.N. special envoy to the country Y.J. Choi, on Monday  said snipers loyal to incumbent Gbagbo were firing directly at peacekeepers in the country prompting the UN to take a greater role in the crisis. "We are planning action, we can no longer condone (Gbagbo's forces) reckless and mindless attack on civilians and the United Nations blue helmets with heavy weapons," he told the BBC.
The UN envoy added that the 9,000 peacekeepers stationed in Ivory Coast don't have a mandate to remove Gbagbo from power but they are permitted to respond to military aggression with force.
Gbagbo refuses to step down despite international recognition that his rival  Outtara won a November election meant to unite a country divided by civil war.
Forces loyal to Ouattara are said to be on the verge of launching a major assault on Gbagbo forces in Abidjan, the commercial capital of Ivory Coast. French military forces took control of the main airport after Paris said it was considering evacuating its citizens from the country.
The International Committee for the Red Cross announced Monday that at least 800 people were killed in the Ivorian town of Duekoue last week.
Duekoue is a strategic area because of its proximity to the cocoa-producing areas of the country. Ivory Coast is the world's largest cocoa producer.
The International Crisis Group said recently the conflict in Ivory Coast bore the hallmarks of civil war.

ELLEN’S ‘APRIL FOOL’S PLAY

                                                 

Comments attributed to Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, warning that opposition politician Simeon Freeman will be arrested  and indicted for sedition if he proceeds with a planned demonstration appears to have been an April Fool’s joke, missed by reporters travelling with the President on her Southeastern tour, according to Presidential press secretary Cyrus Wleh Badio.

David B. Kolleh, FPA Staff Writer david.kolleh@frontpageafricaonline.com  (231 631 0032)

Monrovia

World leaders often bear the bulk of April Fool’s Day jokes but very rarely does a joke come from the mouth of a sitting president. That appears to be the case in Liberia amid a stirring controversy over what President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf may or may not have said about an opponent in this year’s presidential race – on of all days, April Fool’s Day.

‘‘The guys didn’t grab it,’’ Presidential press secretary told FrontPageAfrica Monday.

The statements attributed to the President, who completed a tour of the southeast Monday, suggested that plans were in the works to arrest the leader of the Movement for Progressive Change, Simeon Freeman, if he goes ahead with a planned protest against corruption.

The president was quoted as saying that she had received information that Freeman, who is also the Chief Executive Officer of DSTV, was inciting the public for a mass protest action and could have faced arrest and charged for sedition if the protest came to fruition. Sirleaf was reportedly quoted as saying that her administration will not allow anyone to undermine the gains that Liberia has made over the years.

As the comments made the airwaves, the Executive Mansion came out with a swinging denial suggesting that the President was simply making an April Fool’s joke.

April Fool’s Day jokes are not rare in political circles. In 1996, Taco Bell, an American fast-food chain placed a full-page advertisement in the 104-times-Pulitzer-Prize winner The New York Times announcing that they had bought the historic Liberty Bell. Taco Bell said they did this to help reduce America’s debt. Thus they were renaming Liberty Bell “Taco Liberty Bell”. When the White House was asked, then-press secretary Mike McCurry replied affirmatively and pulled another April Fools’ Day prank regarding the Lincoln Memorial. The White House announced the memorial to America’s 16th President sold with the new name Lincoln Mercury Memorial.

The same year, South African president Nelson Mandela was a victim of a prank when a British radio presenter named Nic Tuff pretended to be Prime Minister Tony Blair and called the South African President. Before Tuff literally hanged up, Tuff gave President Mandela a hint of his April Fools’ Day prank by asking President Mandela what he’s planning for April Fools. While leaders and governments have been victims of jokes, it is a rare for a leader to actually pull a joke on April Fool’s Day especially in an election year and on an opponent for the presidency.

April Fool’s Day jokes have become a norm especially for newspapers and media organizations. In 2004, for example, a U.S. publication reported that President Bush had announced that the 2004 presidential election will be canceled due to the war on terrorism and other scheduling conflicts.
The article even quoted a supposed brief statement from the Oval Office in which Bush said, ""A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it," adding, "My administration is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."

Following the report of the April Fool’s Joke by the Executive Mansion, it now appears that the decision by the President to make an April Fool’s joke of what they said is a burning national concern, which the arrest orders of Mr. Simeon Freeman contender in this year’s elections, Civil Society leaders and ordinary Liberians have condemned the action by the President.     

 The Executive Director of the National Democratic Institute (NDI) Dan Saryeh described the action of the President to order the arrest of Mr. Simeon Freeman and later retract her decision as a mockery to the office of the President.

“This is….. I don’t even know how to describe it, for the President of Liberia to make a statement on such a sensitive issue that borders on democratic norms and values, especially as it relates to arresting a Politician who had said he will stage peaceful demonstration and then later come back after few hours to say that it was an ‘April Fool’” I mean that’s ridiculous,” Mr. Dan Saryeh of the NDI said.

“The last time this same government was cracking down on someone for using what was considered a disrespectful term on the President’s office.  I am also of the view that the President’s office must be respected and will not support anyone making comments that will disrespect her office, but in the same vein I don’t think that office is for joking and making ‘April Fools’” NDI Executive Director told FPA.

 Saryeh in an FPA interview said that he was baffled at the statement because it puts the Presidency at the mercy of the Public, in that, members of the Liberian public will not take serious the President if she was to make a future statement and expects the public to respect such statement, she could be shocked that people will become skeptical over her statement.

“To be true to anyone, and I can say that anywhere and anytime, we must disengage any action that tend to bring the Presidency to public disrepute, and I feel very strongly that the comments by the President was very, very irresponsible and does not resemble what she represents.” Saryeh said.

 Martin B .M. Kula, a student advocate at the University of Liberia, thinks the action by the President has created too much embarrassment for those of them who admire her.

“Comrade, I must admit we are troubled by the statement calling for Mr. Freeman’s arrest and at the same time retracting the statement. If the President had thought Freeman planned demonstration will create insecurity he must be stopped. But with the pronouncement by the President, it now makes it difficult for the requisite security agencies to enforce an arrest if Mr. Freeman’s action during the demonstration violates the law.”

It was in Camera

During his appearance on the Truth Breakfast show Monday Morning, Information Minister Cletus Sieh justifying the action of the President said, though the President made the comment it was not intended for the public, because according to him it was done in camera and a common joke that should not be taken seriously.    

“The Cabinet retreat was done in camera, the press was banned from covering it, and in fact no journalist was inside. Besides it was just a joke and not meant for the public, instead it was meant to remain inside, I don’t know how it came outside but it did somehow,” Minister Sieh further said of the President comment.

Though maintaining that what the President had said was just a joke, the Information Minister was quick to warn that government will not hesitate to take tough action against anyone who tries to violate the laws of the state by getting themselves involved in illegal activities.

Even WEAH Has A Relative

Under-fire Chairman Fromayan maintains that with a uniquely transparent system in place, chances of cheating are by far impossible. But apparently more convincing is that some of his very accusers, including Weah have relatives on the Commission which in no way still guarantees turning voting results in their favor.   

Nat Bayjay, nat.bayjay@frontpageafricaonline.com (231-77-402737)

Consistently coming under what are becoming sustained attacks and condemnations mainly from opposition figures and some civil actors, the man sitting in the hot seat of the electoral body is not deterred by them. In fact, James Fromayan seems more propelled by the criticisms and condemnations over his alleged credibility issues.

More revealing is that one of his critics, Ambassador George Weah of the Congress of Democratic Change (CDC), has a relation to one of the Commissioners which the Chairman says can in no way guarantee voting results being turned in his favor unless merited.

Says Fromayan: “Let’s ignore that. Mr Weah who is one of those always accusing me, my deputy is a blood relative of his. They’re cousins. He himself came here and when we were taking him around to other commissioners’ offices and in David Menyongai’s office and my deputy was there. She [Commissioner Elizabeth Nelson] asked him, ‘Do you know that we are related, I mean cousins?’ And he said ‘Yes’.”

Since he assumed the Chairmanship of the electoral body in 2006 following the exit of former Chairman Frances Johnson-Morris, Fromayan continues to be accused of having a close tie with the incumbent. His appointment to the Chairmanship came two years following his appointment as a co-chairman where he supervised the general administration of the Commission and assumed leadership role in the absence of the then Chairman.

Weah and Charles Brumskine’s Liberty Party have been in the forefront of calling for the Chairman’s resignation something that has seen the former issuing more calls and sometimes threatening remarks that “We will not accept any more cheating from the Elections Commission under Fromayan”.
Weah had earlier categorized the 2005 presidential election which eluded him as fraudulent amidst international observers’ thumbs-up to the process.

In an FPA exclusive, the 61 years-old head of the National Elections Commission (NEC) spoke of how it is practically impossible for commissioners sitting on the Commission to cheat based on a transparent voting system in place at the NEC: “The point to underscore here is that there is no way anybody here can help another person here out there who’s in the race.”

Fromayan argues that with a unique system in place, Weah’s fear that a Fromayan led NEC will result into cheating for the incumbent. “The argument is always that we will cheat for the incumbent. How? We have a system in place where commissioners don’t check ballots. If we were checking ballots exclusively and sealed up from the public and journalists and come with the results of who wins this legislative seat or presidential slot, then that would make sense to any reasonable person,” said Fromayan.

Fromayan maintains any close tie he may have had with now President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf was strictly political when faced with the choice of choosing a political merger or alliance in the aftermath of the late President Samuel Doe’s banning of the Liberian People’s Party (LPP).

Maintaining that he never worked for Sirleaf personally but only “collaborated back in 1985 prior to the elections” as a founding member of the Liberian People Party, he said: “I never worked with Ellen. I worked with an association in D.C. headed by Sawyer where Sirleaf was a board member. When our party was banned by Mr. Doe prior to the elections, we had options to support other parties that had similar idea that we had. So, we gave our support to the Liberia Action Party at that time. Madam Sirleaf was member of that party and so was Jackson Doe who was the presidential candidate.”

With no regrets and no apology, Fromayan believes that there is no credibility problem hanging over him: “I got no regrets for that.  I owe no apology for that because I don’t see how this has anything to do with credibility problem. So, how will that now translate to my chairmanship after I have shown you how the system works? Even if you brought President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf’s brother or son as chairman, as soon as he ascribes to the procedure laid down there is nothing [he can do to cheat].”

He stated in clear tones that no relation serving on the Commission can result into cheating in favor of a candidate who does merit it: “Or better still, Senator [Blamo] Nelson will be running again. Does that mean that his wife [Commissioner Nelson] who is here should leave because the Senator will be contesting again? She was here before the man ran and won on his own merit. What needs to go in these people’s heads is that they must look at the system.”

Challenging his critics who he said need to bring their credentials to match his, he added: “I want them to bring credentials in the past and in the present. Let’s match credentials and see who is credible from the past up to now. My records are known for what I stood for. The very people who are calling people by names now…some were in their closets when we confronted dictators in this country. It is today easy to criticize somebody because there is nothing that will come after you. If some of them-like I was thrown behind bars at Belle Yellah where I spent 10 months-were having a regime of that type like Doe or Charles Taylor then. Some of them were men enough at the time. I have performed to the best of my ability. So, if people are talking let them bring their own track record of what they have done in the past.”

Addressing himself to the issue of conducting the pending National Referendum which has become Fromayan and his Commission’s latest criticism, he thinks on the contrary that there are constitutional violations: “It came from them as lawmakers to the President. They took the action for this to be acted upon for a referendum to take place. They took the action in August of 2010 for the referendum to be held. Up to August of this year is one year. If you read the Constitution, that is what it clearly says and this is different from other laws. Other laws will wait for the printing of them into handbills but this other one has a special time constraint and the Constitution makes mention of it.”

National Referendum has been slated for August 23, 2011, two to three months to the holding of national elections depending on the outcome of the referendum’s portion that calls for the change of election date from October to November.

The NEC had originally sounded the impossibility of conducting any national referendum few months to national elections. Brushing aside that it was a suddenly overturned-decision, he explained: “But we were faced with a problem which has to do with the very outcome of the elections because our partners as well as the government said there was no money for massive run-off if the law stands as it is. They would not be able to make the money available for run-off for the 64 seats in the House-actually it will be 73-as well as the 15 senatorial seats. So, it will be too much money spending. It was against that backdrop that they told us this was not possible. They wanted us to re-think our decision in view of the fact that money will not be available for the conduct of a run-off involving all of those legislative seats and a presidential run-off. The bitter pills we had to swallow were that it would make no sense to conduct an election if we will not be able to conduct a run-off. Then it will be incomplete because if you conduct an election and no run-off if it arises, then it will make no sense.”

While all eyes are fixed on seeing how a Fromayan-led NEC would handle the two huge tasks of conducting both the National Referendum and the general elections in between two to three months, he insists: “But as commissioners, we have dedicated ourselves to this. We have to over work. So, we are working simultaneously to ensure that the presidential and legislative elections and the referendum are possible. The work is going hand in hand. If you go in there [various departments of the Commission] now, we will see our staffs doing the work. The procurement aspect of the materials needed for the Referendum will be just about the same time- to make sure that materials like ballot boxes, voting screens, ballot papers and just name them will all be here on time to conduct these elections. Once we are done with the Referendum which is another election, the same materials will be used for the conduct of the elections. So, we are prepared to undertake these tasks which require time.”

‘THE GUYS DIDN’T GRAB IT’:ELLEN’S ‘APRIL FOOL’S PLAY

Comments attributed to Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, warning that opposition politician Simeon Freeman will be arrested  and indicted for sedition if he proceeds with a planned demonstration appears to have been an April Fool’s joke, missed by reporters travelling with the President on her Southeastern tour, according to Presidential press secretary Cyrus Wleh Badio.

Ellen goes 'jolly' on them

Simeon Freeman-MPC, did he get the joke?

David B. Kolleh, FPA Staff Writer david.kolleh@frontpageafricaonline.com  (231 631 0032)

-Monrovia

World leaders often bear the bulk of April Fool’s Day jokes but very rarely does a joke come from the mouth of a sitting president. That appears to be the case in Liberia amid a stirring controversy over what President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf may or may not have said about an opponent in this year’s presidential race – on of all days, April Fool’s Day.

‘‘The guys didn’t grab it,’’ Presidential press secretary told FrontPageAfrica Monday.
The statements attributed to the President, who completed a tour of the southeast Monday, suggested that plans were in the works to arrest the leader of the Movement for Progressive Change, Simeon Freeman, if he goes ahead with a planned protest against corruption.

The president was quoted as saying that she had received information that Freeman, who is also the Chief Executive Officer of DSTV, was inciting the public for a mass protest action and could have faced arrest and charged for sedition if the protest came to fruition. Sirleaf was reportedly quoted as saying that her administration will not allow anyone to undermine the gains that Liberia has made over the years.
As the comments made the airwaves, the Executive Mansion came out with a swinging denial suggesting that the President was simply making an April Fool’s joke.

April Fool’s Day jokes are not rare in political circles. In 1996, Taco Bell, an American fast-food chain placed a full-page advertisement in the 104-times-Pulitzer-Prize winner The New York Times announcing that they had bought the historic Liberty Bell. Taco Bell said they did this to help reduce America’s debt. Thus they were renaming Liberty Bell “Taco Liberty Bell”. When the White House was asked, then-press secretary Mike McCurry replied affirmatively and pulled another April Fools’ Day prank regarding the Lincoln Memorial. The White House announced the memorial to America’s 16th President sold with the new name Lincoln Mercury Memorial.

The same year, South African president Nelson Mandela was a victim of a prank when a British radio presenter named Nic Tuff pretended to be Prime Minister Tony Blair and called the South African President. Before Tuff literally hanged up, Tuff gave President Mandela a hint of his April Fools’ Day prank by asking President Mandela what he’s planning for April Fools. While leaders and governments have been victims of jokes, it is a rare for a leader to actually pull a joke on April Fool’s Day especially in an election year and on an opponent for the presidency.

April Fool’s Day jokes have become a norm especially for newspapers and media organizations. In 2004, for example, a U.S. publication reported that President Bush had announced that the 2004 presidential election will be canceled due to the war on terrorism and other scheduling conflicts.
The article even quoted a supposed brief statement from the Oval Office in which Bush said, ""A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it," adding, "My administration is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."

Following the report of the April Fool’s Joke by the Executive Mansion, it now appears that the decision by the President to make an April Fool’s joke of what they said is a burning national concern, which the arrest orders of Mr. Simeon Freeman contender in this year’s elections, Civil Society leaders and ordinary Liberians have condemned the action by the President.
     
 The Executive Director of the National Democratic Institute (NDI) Dan Saryeh described the action of the President to order the arrest of Mr. Simeon Freeman and later retract her decision as a mockery to the office of the President.

“This is….. I don’t even know how to describe it, for the President of Liberia to make a statement on such a sensitive issue that borders on democratic norms and values, especially as it relates to arresting a Politician who had said he will stage peaceful demonstration and then later come back after few hours to say that it was an ‘April Fool’” I mean that’s ridiculous,” Mr. Dan Saryeh of the NDI said.

“The last time this same government was cracking down on someone for using what was considered a disrespectful term on the President’s office.  I am also of the view that the President’s office must be respected and will not support anyone making comments that will disrespect her office, but in the same vein I don’t think that office is for joking and making ‘April Fools’” NDI Executive Director told FPA.

 Saryeh in an FPA interview said that he was baffled at the statement because it puts the Presidency at the mercy of the Public, in that, members of the Liberian public will not take serious the President if she was to make a future statement and expects the public to respect such statement, she could be shocked that people will become skeptical over her statement.

“To be true to anyone, and I can say that anywhere and anytime, we must disengage any action that tend to bring the Presidency to public disrepute, and I feel very strongly that the comments by the President was very, very irresponsible and does not resemble what she represents.” Saryeh said.
 Martin B .M. Kula, a student advocate at the University of Liberia, thinks the action by the President has created too much embarrassment for those of them who admire her.

“Comrade, I must admit we are troubled by the statement calling for Mr. Freeman’s arrest and at the same time retracting the statement. If the President had thought Freeman planned demonstration will create insecurity he must be stopped. But with the pronouncement by the President, it now makes it difficult for the requisite security agencies to enforce an arrest if Mr. Freeman’s action during the demonstration violates the law.”

It was in Camera

During his appearance on the Truth Breakfast show Monday Morning, Information Minister Cletus Sieh justifying the action of the President said, though the President made the comment it was not intended for the public, because according to him it was done in camera and a common joke that should not be taken seriously. 
 
“The Cabinet retreat was done in camera, the press was banned from covering it, and in fact no journalist was inside. Besides it was just a joke and not meant for the public, instead it was meant to remain inside, I don’t know how it came outside but it did somehow,” Minister Sieh further said of the President comment.

Though maintaining that what the President had said was just a joke, the Information Minister was quick to warn that government will not hesitate to take tough action against anyone who tries to violate the laws of the state by getting themselves involved in illegal activities.
       

HAT TRICK

LFA Resumes Inter University League; UL And Stella Maris Get Hat Trick Each.

A.    Macaulay Sombai, macaulay.sombai@frontpageafricaonline.com

The Liberia Football Association (LFA) on March 31 resumed the inter-university league with the University of Liberia (UL) thumping the African Methodist Episcopal Zion University (AMEZU) 3-1 at the Antoinette Tubman Stadium in Monrovia.

UL's Samuel Thompson kicked-off the 2011 season with a hat trick while Jones Nimely got Zion's consolation goal.

The African Methodist Episcopal University (AMEU) came from 3-2 down to crushed Stella Maries Polytechnic 5-3 in the last game.

Stella Maris' Clarence Moo thought he had scored the tournament's second hat-trick but Teku Nahn, Gardea Youh, Isaac Capehan and Darius Johnson helped AMEU with their comeback victory.

The tournament will continue this week at the David Kuyon Sports Stadium in Gbarnga, Bong County and in Monrovia.

NEC CHAIR FROMAYAN SPEAKS ON ELECTION FOUL

Nat Bayjay, nat.bayjay@frontpageafricaonline.com
FPA: Of recent concern is the huge debate and controversy surrounding the holding of the National Referendum for which the NEC continues to come under barrage of criticisms. Why is the sudden decision on National Referendum when you had previously told me during a press conference at your headquarters that it was practically ‘impossible’ to conduct it before the elections?
Chairman Fromayan: No, the decision was not sudden. I must say you’re right that we did say that given time constraint we wouldn’t force ourselves to hold a referendum and conduct elections at the same time. But we were faced with a problem which has to do with the very outcome of the elections because our partners as well as the government said there was no money for massive round-off if the law stands as it is.
They would not be able to make the money available for run-off for the 64 seats in the House-actually it will be 73- as well as the 15 senatorial seats. So, it will be too much money spending. It was against that backdrop that they told us this was not possible.
They wanted us to re-think our decision in view of the fact that money will not be available for the conduct of a run-off involving all of those legislative seats and a presidential run-off. The bitter pills we had to swallow were that it would make no sense to conduct an election if we will not be able to conduct a run-off. Then it will be incomplete because if you conduct an election and no run-off if it arises, then it will make no sense.
This is an election that Liberians are looking forward to and we must undertake this task with all of our abilities. If we’re working eight hours a day, then we have to put in 12 hours a day to make sure we carry the two tasks through. After all that, we resolved that we were able to handle the cost of carrying out the two elections. But as I said, it is with real cost---cost not just in time of finances but the time that it will take from us.”
FPA: Is it politically motivated because there are constitutional concerns and possible violations? Specifically, Article 92 talks about the proposed constitutional amendments being accompanied by statements published in an Official Gazette a year to the referendum. From the date of the referendum coming from the National Legislature in September of last year to August of this year is less than a year.
Chairman Fromayan: Firstly, the Constitution says the time of the election takes effect as of the time the Legislature takes action. The Legislature took action last August.
FPA: Do you mean the time the legislators signed the Joint Resolution or the time they began debating it?
Chairman Fromayan: From the time they agreed, the meeting that they had.
FPA: Was the agreement about the passage?
Chairman Fromayan: It came from them as lawmakers to the President. They took the action for this to be acted upon for a referendum to take place. They took the action in August of 2010 for the referendum to be held. If you read the Constitution, that is what it clearly says and this is different from other laws. Other laws will wait for the printing of them into handbills but this other one has a special time constraint and the Constitution makes mention of it. Other laws are made with no time bound but this has a time constraint to be acted upon in one year. That makes this particular law to be different. The argument is always that we will cheat for the incumbent. How? We have a system in place where commissioners don’t check ballots. If we were checking ballots exclusively and sealed up from the public and journalists and come with the results of who wins this legislative seat or presidential slot, then that would make sense to any reasonable person.”

FPA: Don’t you believe, as others do, that the referendum will be greatly hampered in that you have a huge illiterate population to deal with. Most of them find it even difficult identifying images or pictures, lest to mention being confronted with the wordings ‘YES’ and ‘NO’.
Chairman Fromayan: You’re quite true in terms of the complication association with the four prepositions [of the referendum]. Again, these are the challenges to all of us including you the media. We need to work with civil organizations, religious groups as we have done in the past like some of the strategies that we used during the voters’ registration period. We used variety of groups to create awareness among our people which included senior professional players, student groupings like LINSU, FLY. We need to do this to expand this that a lot of the messages are clearly disseminated. There is massive illiteracy among our people. In order to make them understand that they are not going to see individual faces to vote for, we need to provide more civic education. We already created this through our partners. Unlike the real elections, politicians might not have that vested interest to say they are going to carry on voters’ registration because it is not determined which position they would get. We are happy that the referendum is coming before the elections because if we had done it the other way around, then the turnout for the referendum might have been a lot more difficult. There will be no incentives but since the main elections are at the tail-end, that apathy will not be there.
FPA: Are you aware that some of the politicians and civil actors have already begun calling on Liberians to march against or protest against the conduct of the referendum? All four of the prepositions of the referendum are being criticized with much emphasis on the Chief Justice’s extension from 70 to 75.With the country’s life expectancy not more than 60 years (57 generally, 55 male and 59 for women as updated by the World Index Report’s 2011 report), what is the necessity of this amendment and three others?
Chairman Fromayan: Firstly, I must tell you that a referendum is an election. There got to be people for or against a particular preposition. So, if you’re against, you will campaign against a particular preposition and campaign in favor of the one you support. So, in the final analysis, it is a combination of the two will yield whatever result that will come out. We’re not deterred by that.
To address the preposition on the Chief Justice and Associate Justices’ ages, that did not come from the Elections Commission and it was included as part of the package. The other one that did not come from the NEC is the 10 year residential clause [for president] that is causing controversy. The other two main prepositions that came from us have to do with the absolute majority and the run-off requirements for a candidate to be elected to any public office. We felt that there is an economic burden to them. I have gone around and seen other elections. They don’t have that requirement for other offices besides the presidency. It doesn’t make sense for someone running to be representative gets 48% of the votes and someone will subject to go to a run-off with another candidate because you don’t have 50% plus one of the votes. To go for run-off, it requires two weeks which is much of a work for us here at NEC. That is why we thought we needed a referendum to address this issue.
“It was against that backdrop that they told us this was not possible. They wanted us to re-think our decision in view of the fact that money will not be available for the conduct of a run-off involving all of those legislative seats and a presidential run-off. The bitter pills we had to swallow were that it would make no sense to conduct an election if we will not be able to conduct a run-off. Then it will be incomplete because if you conduct an election and no run-off if it arises, then it will make no sense.”
FPA: That is probably where you will need to do a lot of campaign from a NEC point of view, talking about the two that came from you.
Chairman Fromayan: Well, obviously that serves our own interest and I don’t think anybody has come against with the exception of one or two persons who will talk about retaining that. It has not happened in Guinea. It has not happened in Ghana. Then you will be talking about the traditional chiefs and other electable persons.
FPA: Fear is that a candidate might just win a high percentage in one part of an entire county and low percentage in other parts; for instance, more votes in Foya and not necessarily winning in Voinjama and other districts in Lofa. To represent the people, he or she tells them that his or her votes were gotten in one place and that the others don’t…….
Chairman Fromayan: Not even a president will win the entire nation but he or she goes on after the elections to be the president of everybody. You’ll now have a responsibility to everybody. That is what makes you a leader. So, your support cannot go in one direction.
FPA: Personally, what is your perception on the residential clause for Liberian presidential candidates? Others feel it is an attempt to prevent others from outside the country from contesting the Presidency.
Chairman Fromayan: I can only speak to the origin of this particular law. Since it is in the referendum, people will decide. Views expressed here are not necessary those of the other commissioners but I’m saying here that this law was inspired by the late President Samuel Doe through the Constitutional Committee at the time aimed at getting at his opponents that he forced into exile to not get involved in the political race. Honestly, it was a bad law because laws are ought to be made to serve the supreme interest of society. But if you see the background to a law, then you will know why it found its way into the Constitution.
FPA: Falling below the projected 2.1 million voters to 1.7 million voters, what are the implications? What do you think went wrong?
Chairman Fromayan: Projections not exact. At the final analysis, we should be contended with what we have. We have 1.7 million which is a remarkable achievement over 2005 [1.3 million in 2005]. So, we can say yes, we did a good piece of job. We couldn’t drag people to register. We had adequate time. In fact, we adjusted the time to one additional week just to make sure that people turn out. Sometimes you went to populated areas like New Kru Town and West Point but always met polling centers empty. This had nothing to do with civic education. But to me, the population that registered is not bad; that is a sizeable number. Let’s just hope during the voting time, they will turn out in mass.
FPA: Available statistics available suggest poor turnouts in succeeding elections. For instance, the 1997 elections had relatively huge turnout of almost 89% of registered voters than the 2005 elections. As a matter of fact, the11 October 2005 First Round had a turnout of 74.9% of registered voters (1,012,673) thought to be impressive. But the 8 November Runoff witnessed a sharp decrease to 61.0% (825,716 of registered voters). Then came the Montserrado County By-election which was dubbed the litmus test for this year’s national elections. The By election was marred by another voters’ apathy. Are there reasons from a NEC point of view responsible for such? Are there possible ways of correcting such because we might witness another seven or eight months from now?
Chairman Fromayan: I must tell you that if you have 60% turnout, that is not bad by world standard. Statistics from countries in the West where they have all the means to educate people and all the resources, their turnouts are not one of the highest. I mean they are very low. In places like Australia, there are incentives to vote where if you don’t vote they penalize you. It’s true that in 2005 the number reduced from 1 million to some 800,000. In by election, the incentives are not much but in presidential election, the heat is there. This time we will have 73 seats up for grasp with 8 to 10 candidates in some cases fighting for one seat because every day we are hearing about aspirants. Then we have 15 other senatorial seats. So, the momentum will be high as compared to one by-election where there is not much at stake. Sometimes, national elections can build its own momentum.
FPA: You complained in the past of NEC being ‘heavily constrained’. What is the total amount that the NEC has to work with for these elections and the National Referendum including that of the US$17.5 million provided by the US Government?
Chairman Fromayan: Whenever we talk about money from donors, we need to be clear because people out there think when you say US$17.5 million from the U.S.; it is given to the Elections Commission directly. No. This is money intended to be spread over electoral circles, over five years and managed by the International Foundations for Electoral System (IFES). Not any of that money from there is controlled by us. We also have our other international partners that are using the Basket Fund that is supervised by the United Nations Development Program, like the EU, Japan and others. The money they bring is put in that Basket Fund and not handled by us--- the bulk of the money for elections. The money that is handled by us is strictly operational-general running, field offices, staffs and others including money for poll workers. We had to pay 7,400 poll workers for this gone registration process provided by the government. Out of a budget of US$49 million, Government’s component is US$18 million and you can subtract to get the remaining which is the Basket Fund I talked about. The rest of it comes from the international community.
FPA: Let’s look at NEC’s credibility and your own personal criticisms of having UP connection. How credible is a Fromoyan led NEC? Will you give in to resigning as being called requested by the opposition Liberty Party and the Congress for Democratic Change (CDC)?
Chairman Fromayan: Well, Nat, I think individuals who will call our credibility into question will have to bring their credentials. I want them to bring credentials in the past and in the present. Let’s match credentials and see who is credible from the past up to now. I had graduated from the University of Liberia [Bachelor of Arts in Political Science in 1980 and chose to return to Lofa to contribute. When the school [Voinjama Multilateral High School] thought I was capable, I was called to be the Principal where I managed a school of over 1,000 students. I worked at the Ministry of Education as an acting minister of Education for seven months.
My records are known for what I stood for. The very people who are calling people by names now…some were in their closets when we confronted dictators in this country. It is today easy to criticize somebody because there is nothing that will come after you. If some of them--- like I was thrown behind bars at Belle Yellah where I spent 10 months--- were having a regime of that type like Doe or Charles Taylor then. Some of them were men enough at the time. I have performed to the best of my ability. So, if people are talking, let them bring their own track record of what they have done in the past. So, what is the issue here of credibility?  I have not been sacked in any position that I served in before.  I have served to the best of my ability.


FPA: All of the credentials you mentioned are purely academic to a larger extent but you did not measure the point where you allegedly worked with the incumbent in the past. Some people fear that whatever loyalty you might have had with her in the past might be transferred in favor of her during the outcomes of the elections.
Chairman Fromayan: Again, Nat, these are issues that we have talked about again and again. I never worked for Madame Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf before. We worked with an association called Association for Constitutional Democracy in Liberia based in Washington, DC when we were in exile in Washington, D.C. headed by Dr. Amos Sawyer. Madame Sirleaf was a board member of that association. We were not actually working for pay for that identical association because I had gone to America to apply for political asylum. 
When you talked about political work in the past, we [Sirleaf and I] collaborated back in Liberia in 1985 prior to the elections when I was founding member of the Liberian People Party---I’ll say this time and again---headed by Dr. Togpa Nah-Tipoteh.
Never worked with Ellen, worked with an association in Washington D.C. headed by Sawyer where Sirleaf was board member. When our party was banned by Mr. Doe prior to the elections, we had options to support other parties that had similar idea that we had. So, we gave our support to the Liberia Action Party at that time. Madame Sirleaf was member of that party and so was Jackson Doe who was the presidential candidate.  I got no regrets for that.  I owe no apology for that because I don’t see how this has anything to do with credibility problem. So, how will that now translate to my chairmanship after I have shown you how the system works? Even if you brought President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf’s brother or son as chairman, as soon as he ascribes to the procedure laid down there is nothing [he can do to cheat].

Let’s ignore that. Mr. Weah who is one of those always accusing me, my deputy is a blood relative of him. They’re cousins. He himself came here and when we were taking him around to other commissioners’ offices and in David Menyongar’s office and my deputy was there. She [Commissioner Elizabeth Nelson] asked him, “Do you know that we are related, I mean cousins?” And he said “Yes”.
Will they cheat for them? I’m only making this point to say that if a society has a family person does not mean you have the means to cheat for them. The point to underscore here is that there is no way anybody here can help another person here out there who’s in the race.
Or better still, Senator [Blamo] Nelson will be running again. Does that mean that his wife [Commissioner Nelson] who is here should leave because the Senator will be contesting again? She was here before the man ran and won on his own merit. What needs to go in these people’s heads is that they must look at the system. Let’s look back at the 2009 Montserrado County By election. Was it me who made [Senator] Geraldine Doe-Sheriff to win? If I was making the choice exclusively, was she going to be the one that I would choose over Professor Wilson Tarpeh and Clemenecau Urey? I have known Tarpeh. We worked together at the University of Liberia. We’ve known one another from the Liberian People’s Party and more than that he is competent. If for some reason I was the one making that choice---as they want it to appear like----where the Chairman decides who should be, then Commany Wesseh would not have lost election under me. He is like my brother, not biological brother but politically. We went over 30 years together.  Would I have chosen [Senator] Nathaniel Williams over Commany Wesseh if that was the case? This is a man [Wesseh] I have known from 1975. We have been friends from the University of Liberia. He was a student leader and I was an editor for the campus’ newspaper. We worked together in the Student Unification Party. Yet, he lost an election under me. Why doesn’t anybody want to talk about this? You think the presidency is the only place where you want to cheat as a chairman?
Even Professor Dew Mayson is the closest to me. We all ate on the same table together. Does that mean that now he is in the race, I will cheat for him too?
FPA: The issue of how transparent is the electoral process always sparks out. Could you kindly explain why there is no cause for anyone to worry about the transparent nature of ballot counting?
Chairman Fromayan: But that is even beside the point, Nat. We have a situation where nobody makes unilateral decisions. We are seven on the board not because I’m Chairman. I could even be a commissioner and still stand my ground. How can one cheat in a system that we have in place? That should be the fundamental question that those talking about credibility should be asking themselves. The argument is always that we will cheat for the incumbent. How? We have a system in place where commissioners don’t check ballots. If we were checking ballots exclusively and sealed up from the public and journalists and come with the results of who wins this legislative seat or presidential slot, then that would make sense to any reasonable person. But where ballots are taken to the different centers where parties’ agents, independent candidates’ agents and observers are expected to be there, then the ballot boxes are opened before voting and nothing is done in darkness, how can anybody cheat? Everything is done in full view of observers and parties’ agents. At the end of the day, if 500 ballots were there before voting, they will be counted again at the end of the day for including spoiled, used and unused ones which will amount to the same 500. Besides, the winner is announced right there. If John Brown got 250 votes in a particular center, will Fromayan change that? How? That is the fundamental issue that these people need to be asking themselves about.
FPA: A relatively less-hectic Montserrado County Senatorial By-Election proved too hectic for you in November of 2009. The first round was characterized by late opening of polls among others. Compared to the huge task of conducting the national elections, how capable is the NEC?
Chairman Fromayan: The lesson learned from there manifested itself in the second round. Otherwise, it would have been disastrous. As you correctly put it, this is all about learning lessons as you go down the route. But again, within the space of two weeks we were able to go back on the drawing board to put a plan in place that made the second round a success to the extent that some of our harshest critics to keep quite. The sincere ones admitted that we did well the second round. That is how it is ought to be. So, we learned that lesson. It’s a lesson for the biggest one.

FPA: When does the registration of independent candidate end? Is it separate from the general registration of political parties?

Chairman Fromayan: No, it is not. We did that in 2005 and it took us to court in the Marcus Jones’ case. The Court ruled against us on grounds that we had two separate sets of rules applying to those aspiring for the same position. Again, from that we learned our lessons and vowed to not give two different timings for both independent and parties’ representatives. We will the same time and don’t want to have the same case of somebody pulling us to court.

FPA: One complicated issue is the delineation of constituencies. With nine additional seats derived out of the Joint Resolution, how is the NEC going about on this? Is the Resolution proving embarrassing for the NEC as many criticize the National Legislature for apportioning the additional nine seats?
Chairman Fromayan: No, they did not apportion. They came out with a figure. We did that. They only came out with 9 additional seats. What they did was, with the 9 seats, they try to address the question of imbalance that had been occasioned as a result of the Joint Resolution. We take the Joint Resolution as a law that was passed into handbill. We had to use it as a formula to go to the electoral process. Without that formula, there is no way you would have demarcated constituencies. You know that over two years we were at that Capitol Building asking for Threshold consistent with the Constitution. Then the Joint Resolution came and with it obviously we have go to voters’ registration before delineating. The Joint Resolution called for the retention of the 64 seats. This meant an imbalance with the counties with larger populations. That is how they derive those nine additional seats to address the imbalance and thought for us to do the allocation. We did the allocation. Electoral districts have not been carved out.  The old ones are desecrated according to our own standpoint. We are going to have a fresh delineation of electoral districts.

FPA: How soon, Sir because a lot of representative candidates are entering the race and making declarations of intent without knowing the exact locals they would be contesting for?
Chairman Fromayan: They are buying pigs in the bag. They probably need to give it some time. It is not late for someone to declare his or her intention but given the situation we see ourselves in we believe that right after the exhibition which will be in a matter of few days, we will immediately begin the process of delineation.
FPA: Legal issues continue to rock the Commission. Does the Commission go into these decisions deliberately or unconscientiously? Is the Legal Department not really doing its work or is it mere political pressure?
Chairman Fromayan: No, I will not say that the Legal Department is not doing its work. I mean in a democratic setting you can’t always have it right.
FPA: But you seem to always be having it wrong with your numerous court cases.
Chairman Fromayan: No, that is not the record shows. If we lost one case, that doesn’t make it ‘most cases’. We are not talking about winning so many cases in court. As I stand here, there are some that didn’t need to go to court. For instance, we have political parties claiming that we ought to be five here instead of seven. Instead of trying to seek clarification, at this mid-day you’re questioning the composition of the Commission. We are of the view that that needed not to go to court. You could have asked us. The law is there that created this seven-man commission--- that increased the number to seven. But in the absence of that, if you get up and go to court, there have to be other motives. You have dealt with this commission that created you as a political party but it is at this day damned to be illegal. Then you’re a by-product of an illegal group. Some of these issues, Nat is that we cannot rule out that people will always take us to court. We need to strengthen the legal section as much as possible because we know that the cases will just be too much. Our international partners are helping us to get some additional legal practitioners.
FPA: You recently toured some counties. What were the challenges you saw? What are prospects for these elections and referendum?
Chairman Fromayan: Let me start with the prospects which are good. Elections like other challenges are not like manna. Anything you do there are challenges and you must make sure you put all you have into it to make it work. Elections….. Unlike others who just sit and criticize, are just given 1/20th and see the kind of work it entails, you will get to know. Did you come here to see the data center during and after the voters’ registration? There are rough terrains in most cases. Taking vehicles to places and sometimes materials have to be air-lifted. UNMIL has drawn down significantly. In the end they have to cut down on some of those places and we had to hire trotters. Some of the kits weighed 48 kilos. Imagine you have to tote 48 kilos on your head and some of those distances are over 8 to 12 hours of walk. Some cases go for two days. So, just imagine what we go through because election is for the entire country. You have to deploy temporary workers because the staffs we have here [at the Commission] can’t go anywhere. They can’t even cover the least county, let alone Montserrado. We need to train the temporary staffs in a short period of time and they are going to be the ones out there. The issue of logistics has always been the problem.  When those issues are addressed, you can go to bed relaxed knowing that elections are possible.  That is why we are prevailing on government for the use of the military trucks and we are telling political parties to go along with the idea of using military trucks because they are government properties and they will enhance the capacities of the Commission. Whatever trucks our partners are bringing in should be backed by military trucks and pickups. We need massive movement of materials and personnel. Some of the areas you go to in Gbarpolu you have to go through Lofa. Some of the areas in Bassa require you going through Bong. Some of the people who don’t see what we go through whenever they talk one wonders. You don’t do these things overnight. This election is not one that is being supported by the international community like in 2005. They had everything at their disposal. There were no questions over pickups and trucks. UNMIL trucks were used but this is not the case now. During the voters’ registration we didn’t use UNMIL trucks.  Our donors, through the Basket Fund, provided some trucks and pickups to add to our fleet. When these issues are addressed…..first we did our national warehouse. The National Headquarter is a gift from the Americans but we got the national warehouse of our own initiatives. We didn’t even stop there. We went in the rural areas and began to replace containers used in 2005 with warehouses. We have 19 mini-warehouses being constructed in our 19 magisterial centers across the country. In addition to that, we are also building bigger offices to replace the smaller ones, particularly in the Southeast. Our office in Bassa is the second to this one. The one in Tappita is also better. We are putting in what we have with the available resources because people will always complain. When people don’t complain, then you are not working. But there are others who are appreciating what we’re doing.
FPA: Where does Chairman Fromayan go after election work?
Chairman Fromayan: Well, Nat I tell you. I wish the elections were over tomorrow. I have young twins and their bigger sister. I will need more time to be with them. But until then, this is a mission that we are on. We must carry through. We owe it our country to ensure that there is free, fair and transparent election. That is why we are calling for massive international observation to lend credence to the outcome of the elections. If that task is behind us, obviously you want to go and have a lot of rest with the family. This is not that I won’t be able to work again but there is lesser job to do.
I want to leave that legacy [of conducting successful second successive elections]. In the face of all that, the present generation will judge us for what we are going to do. Posterity will judge us. If nine by-elections are anything to go by, there should be records because those criticizing us have never come out to say there have been frauds in any of these elections. Even in the Montserrado by election with the entire poll opening late, no one reported frauds. If polls open late, they open late for everyone. We offered an apology for that at the time. But elections are not 100% precision and that nothing will go wrong. Even about two years ago, I saw on the BBC television in an industrialized nation, the ballots were not enough! And I was surprised and began to laugh. They just can’t cope with that. But these are things that happen. We will not shy away from our responsibilities.
But I wish to emphasis here that nobody has any reason to believe that the NEC will not conduct credible elections. There will be no basis to believe so. The country deserves what we all have long advocated for---some of us for over 25 years to see democratic society prevails in this country. My deputy [Cllr Nelson] and I have been advocating for this. Other commissioners are all putting their best in it. We can’t have responsibilities and neglect them.
Finally, I want to urge political parties, civil society groups to continue to collaborate and cooperate with the Commission to achieve this national task. Nobody will be doing James Fromayan a particular favor. I just happen to be the Chairman. Whatever misconception people may have out there, our doors are always open. I’m a simple guy. I interact with people. It is only this time that I’m not teaching at the UL due to the workload. I’m a down to earth person. Positions come and go but society remains. We just want to ask the media to help us because sometimes you conduct press conference and some of the stories that come out of it you wonder if they are quoting you directly.

LFA And I.E Mourn Falling Colleague

The Liberia Football Association has been hit again with the death of its deputy secretary-general for administration.

Abayomie Caulcrick died at the weekend in Monrovia, having reportedly suffered from stroke.

There has been no news from the family or the LFA about the exact cause of death but he was bedridden for more than one month up to his death.

Prior to his new job at the FA, Abayomie served as executive committee member during the regime of Izetta Wesley before he and others were unconstitutionally removed for their critical stance against Izetta.

His huge support for Musa Bility during the FA elections was rewarded with that appointment.

Before going back to the FA, Abayomie served as Assistant Youth & Sports Minister for youth services.

He was a member of the 2010 graduate class of the Ibrahim Babaginda School of International Relations at the University of Liberia.

Meanwhile, Invincible Eleven Majestic Sports Association are mourning the death of Francois Junius, who passed away on April 1.

Francois was elected as vice president for administration in April 2010 as part of the elections that brought Richard Tolbert on board as president.

He was part of a die-hard group of IE fans, known Concerned Few, that overemphasized the need for the club to have a democratic election since 1997 following several ‘behind the house moves’ that brought different leadership on board.