Donate

Thursday, November 13, 2014

President Obama Praised for Steps Against Ebola in Liberia

By Oral Ofori
 
Al Smith, a former federal contractor with the US Department of Justice and a Liberian immigrant has commended US President Barack Obama for the efforts made towards curbing the spread of the deadly Ebola virus in Liberia and other affected west African countries.
 
President Barack Obama
President Barack Obama
The US based Security Consultant, who has also worked for the US Department of Defense and the White House Visitors’ Center as a federal contractor says he is really impressed by the level of medical, professional and logistical support given Ebola affected countries by the American government and people. He feels positive affected countries like Mali, Guinea and Sierra Leone can eventually win the fight against the disease.
 
In a chat with this writer in Washington DC at his former work place of the White House Visitors’ Center on Veterans day, Al Smith disclosed he last visited Liberia in July of 2014 where he noticed that even though the country has been calm after the civil wars of 1989-1996 and 1999-2003 respectively, post-war clouds still loomed over it. “People there are still recovering almost a decade after the wars ended so it is very heartbreaking to see what Ebola is doing in Liberia” he says.
 
According to Al Smith, “it is up to us as individuals to put a lot more effort into spreading awareness and living very hygienic lifestyles because Ebola is very preventable and thankfully not air borne”.
Al Smith is educated at Corinthian Colleges which include Everest College and Everest University. He holds a degree in Criminal Justice & Homeland Security and is a beneficiary of several trainings from the US Department of Criminal Justice Services and Metropolitan training Academy in keeping with the standard training requirement by the Department of Homeland Security.
 
In a related development, Bill Rogers, a Liberian athlete based in Texas, USA, who is also a humanitarian and founder of the Bill Rogers Youth Foundation lamented the extreme pressures Ebola is placing on the already weakened Liberian health systems. The athelete plans to be “focusing my energies now into helping my people recover from the stress, trauma, stigma and stereotyping caused by Ebola through my relief efforts and counseling”.
 
Bill Rogers is working through his foundation to establish solid rehabilitation for Ebola survivors and their families. He was full of praises for Cuba, China and other nations currently providing support and personnel in west Africa to combat the disease.
 
There are and have always been bigger issues in these Ebola hit west African nations says Rogers, which is why it is sad that it has taken this disease to bring to light problems like poor infrastructure, poverty, government mismanagement, corruption and greed.
 
In November 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) and governments of respective countries placed at 13,592 the number of suspected cases with 5,408 deaths recorded as a result of the 2014 Ebola outbreak. WHO has warned that there could be as many as 10,000 new Ebola cases per week by December 2014.
 
Both men encouraged Liberians and people worldwide to continue doing their part in supporting ongoing efforts to defeat the deadly disease to avoid the scary predictions of the from WHO becoming reality.
 
Source:
Oral Ofori of #TheAfricanDream

Sunday, November 9, 2014

U.S. Department of Defense Dedicates Safe Havens for Ebola Healthworkers in Liberia

 
By: William Q. Harmon
 
President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and United States Ambassador to Liberia Deborah Malac have dedicated a state-of-the-art 25-bed Ebola field hospital constructed in Charlesville, Margibi County, by the United States Department of Defense (DoD) to provide care to healthcare workers, both international and Liberian, who may be infected with the Ebola virus

Known as the Monrovia Medical Unit (MMU), the facility would be considered as a safe haven for healthcare workers in the country who are on the frontlines of the fight against Ebola. The construction of the field hospital was financed by the American Government and implemented jointly by the U.S. military and the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL).

The dedication ceremony of the facility was held in Charlesville, near the Roberts International Airport in Margibi County last Wednesday, November 5, 2015. The MMU, which is primarily for healthcare workers as well as the 4,000 U.S troops expected to be deployed in the country, is in addition to 17 Ebola Treatment Units (ETUs) that are under construction across the country as a result of the U.S. intervention in Liberia.

The facility is being staffed by a team of specialized officers from the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) Commissioned Corps, which is playing an integral role in the overall US government response. The USPHS Commissioned Corps is part of the US Department of Health and Human Services.

President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf joined U.S. Ambassador Deborah Malac to dedicate the newly constructed 25-bed field hospital to be used solely for the treatment of healthcare workers who may become infected by the Ebola virus disease.

Speaking during the ceremony, President Sirleaf said the hospital represents a major contribution in the fight against the virus in Liberia.  It also represents a true spirit of partnership between both governments.


“This facility represents a major contribution to the country’s fight against the further spread of the deadly Ebola virus disease that has hit our country so hard. This represents a true spirit of partnership and leaves hope for a structure that will enable Liberians fare for themselves when the partners shall have left after Ebola.”

She described the US government as a partner who recognizes and responds to the needs of the Liberian people and that the fruit of the partnership reaches out to the people it is meant to benefit.
President Sirleaf lauded healthcare workers for their sacrificial services to the country and its people by confronting a disease they knew very little about.  She expressed happiness that those healthcare workers who may be infected can now receive quality care and treatment with a high hope of survival.

She also lauded the American government and people for coming to the aid of Liberia at a time when international response to the Ebola crisis was at its lowest ebb.  She expressed the hope that the country is well on its way to beating back the further spread of the disease.

The Liberian leader noted that Liberians themselves are the main force preventing the further spread of the deadly virus, due to their adherence to measures announced by the Government, and for supporting all the measures meant to tackle the further spread of the disease.

Ambassador Malac, said the current role of the U.S. Government in Liberia’s fight against Ebola, including the construction of the treatment facility, is a symbol of the strong U.S.-Liberia relations and partnership.

“The U.S. is proud to be supporting Liberia and it is expected that our support will go further than the emergency period and interventions. I am glad that healthcare workers who may fall sick to Ebola can now get quality treatment right here in Liberia,” the Ambassador emphasized.

She indicated that Liberia had made progress and will continue to make progress in the fight against Ebola until the virus is finally eradicated from the country. She thanked the AFL and Liberians in general for their cooperation with the U.S. and other partners working in Liberia.

Since the outbreak of the virus, health workers have been the hardest hit with over 70 falling prey to the disease. These include Medical Doctors, Physician Assistants and Nurses. The construction of this facility, though it may be considered belated, will serve as a ‘safe haven,’ for these health workers who are still on the frontlines and dedicating their lives to the service of humanity.

Providing an overview of the facility, the Acting U.S.  Deputy Surgeon General, Rear Admiral Scott F. Giberson, noted that the MMU is multifunctional and was reconfigured to meet the mission requirements specific to infectious disease treatment in Liberia.

“Although this is a clinical care unit, not usually intended for an infectious pathogen, the DoD and the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) Commissioned Corps worked in partnership to reconfigure the facility to function as an Ebola Treatment Unit (ETU).

“In addition, experts from Medecin Sans Frontieres (MSF) were consulted on the reconfiguration, illuminating the multi-sector approach in support of the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia and the United States Agency for International Development Ebola Disaster Assistance Response Team, which is overseeing the overall U.S.  Ebola response in the region,” he said.

Admiral Giberson said seventy officers, with diverse clinical and public health backgrounds, will bring safety and security to the brave men and women who are serving as frontlines heroes, and continue efforts of USAID, DoD, the government of Liberia and international partners to build capacity for additional care in the country.

Monday, October 20, 2014

THE ABC’S OF A STATE OF EMERGENCY


THE ABC’S OF A STATE OF EMERGENCY By ANC

Given the big debate now underway in Liberia about the state of emergency, and the President’s powers under a state of emergency, we provide below some basic information about what a state of emergency is, how it is declared or revoked, the powers the President has under a state of emergency, and the role of the Legislature in approving and revoking a state of emergency or modifying actions the President takes under a state of emergency.  Drawing on the legal expertise of our members, we undertake this effort as a public service and hope it contributes positively to the current national debate about the legal, constitutional, and political issues pertaining to a state of emergency.  If having read this you have any questions, we will be happy to answer them.

1.      WHAT IS A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

A state of emergency exists when the president declares that the country faces a serious problem such as a war, threat of war or civil unrest and that he or she needs certain powers not granted to the President in the Constitution to deal with the problem the country faces.   Article  86(b)

2.      HOW DOES A STATE OF EMERGENCY BEGIN?       

A state of emergency can begin simply by a declaration by the President that there is a state of emergency.  The Constitution says the President “may” make the declaration of a state of emergency in “consultation with the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.”   Article 86(a)

3.    SO DOES THE PRESIDENT NEED THE SPEAKER AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE TO AGREE BEFORE A STATE OF EMERGENCY IS DECLARED?

No, the Constitution does not say the President needs their approval.   All the President has to do is consult or inform them. 

4.    WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE PRESIDENT DECLARES A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

After the President declares a state of emergency, he or she can begin to suspend or limit certain rights that individual Liberians enjoy under the Constitution.  The President can also exercise or use powers that the Constitution does not give him but that he believes are necessary to deal with the problems that caused him to declare the state of emergency.  Article 86(a)

5.  WHAT ELSE HAPPENS AFTER THE PRESIDENT DECLARES A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

No later than 7 days after the President declares a state of emergency, she is required to call members of the Legislature (the Senate and the House of Representatives) together to explain to them why she decided to declare a state of emergency.   Article 88. 

6.   WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE PRESIDENT CALLS THE LEGISLATURE TOGETHER AND EXPLAINS WHY SHE DECLARED A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

No later than seventy-two hours after the President calls the Legislature together to explain why she declared a state of emergency, the Legislature must vote to decide whether to approve the declaration of the state of emergency.  Article 88.

7.                  HOW MANY MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE NEED TO APPROVE THE STATE OF EMERGENCY?

Two thirds of the members of each house of the Legislature need to vote to approve the state of emergency.   The Senate has thirty members (two from each of the 15 counties).  Two thirds of thirty is twenty.  Therefore, at least twenty members of the Senate will have to vote for the emergency.   The House of Representatives has seventy-three members. Two thirds of seventy-three is 48.6.  Therefore,  at least forty-nine members of the House of Representatives will also have to vote to approve the state of emergency.   Article 88

8.  WHY DOES THE CONSTITUTION REQUIRE SUCH A HUGE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF BOTH HOUSES OF THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROVE A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

The constitution requires not a simple majority (which is anything more than 50%) but what is called a supra majority (a big majority) to approve a state of emergency because, like we stated above, when the President declares a state of emergency, she can take away certain rights that individual Liberians have and she can also exercise powers that the Constitution does not give her.   So the Constitution does not want to make it easy for the President to have such powers. 

9.   WHAT RIGHTS CAN THE PRESIDENT TAKE AWAY AND WHAT KINDS OF POWERS CAN SHE EXERCISE DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

The best way to answer this question is to look at what the Constitution says the President cannot do during a state of emergency.  That is what rights the President cannot take away and what powers she cannot exercise during a state of emergency.  

10.    OK.  WHAT RIGHTS CAN THE PRESIDENT NOT TAKE AWAY AND WHAT POWERS SHE CANNOT EXERCISE DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

The Constitution says that during a state of emergency, the President cannot take away the writ of habeas corpus.   Article 87

11.  WHAT IS THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS?

A writ is a summons or an order from a court requiring that a person does something or refrain from doing something.  Habeas is Latin that means “to have.”  Corpus is also from the Latin and it means the “body.” So the writ of habeas corpus is  a summons or an order from a court that is directed to a person, usually a police officer or the warden of a jail, that says “you have the body of Saye Johnnie, and you are required to bring the body of Saye Johnnie to the court and to show the court why you should continue to hold Mr. Saye Johnnie or to keep him in jail.” 

12.  WHY SHOULD THE COURT FORCE A POLICE OFFICER OR A JAIL WARDEN TO BRING THE BODY OF A PERSON IN JAIL UNDER THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS?

A long, long time ago, governments, could jail someone simply because they did not like the person and just keep the person in jail without charging them with breaking any law.  Of course, they could not charge the person with breaking any law, since they jailed him not because he broke the law, but just because they do not like him or because he criticized them, or because he is their political opponent.   Therefore, under our Constitution, anyone arrested or detained must be charged and brought before a court within forty-eight hours (two days) after his arrest or detention.  See Article 21(f).  If the person is not charged and brought before a court, then the person’s lawyer can ask the court to issue a writ of habeas corpus to force the government to bring the person before the court and show what crime the person committed and why he should continue to be in jail.   See Article 21(g). If the government cannot say what crime they believe the person committed, then the court will order them to free the person immediately. So you see the writ of habeas corpus is a very important thing that prevents the government from just jailing its opponents or people who criticize it or people it just does not like.  That is why the Constitution says the writ cannot be suspended even during a state of emergency.

13.     OK. WHAT ELSE THE PRESIDENT CANNOT DO DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

The Constitution says that during a state of emergency, the President cannot do the following things: (1) he cannot suspend or abrogate the Constitution; (2) he cannot dissolve the Legislature; (3) he cannot suspend or dismiss the Judiciary; and (4) there can be no constitutional amendment.  See Article 87(a)

14.  WHY DOES THE CONSTITUTION PUT THESE RESTRICTIONS ON THE PRESIDENT DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

The Constitution recognizes that the President may need lots of powers to deal with the problems the country faces during a state of emergency.  But the Constitution does not want the President to be a dictator during a state of emergency so that is why it puts some of these restrictions on the President during a state of emergency.

15.   PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW EACH OF THESE RESTRICTIONS MAY PREVENT THE PRESIDENT FROM BECOMING A DICTATOR?

Ok.  Let’s begin with the one that says the President cannot suspend or violate the Constitution during a state of emergency.  As we just pointed out, the Constitution puts certain restrictions on the powers of the President even during a state of emergency.  If the President could suspend the Constitution during a state of emergency, then the President will be able to do those things that the Constitutions says he cannot do during a state of emergency, such as to suspend the writ of habeas corpus.

16.    NOW EXPLAIN THE NEXT ONE. WHY DOES THE CONSTITUTION SAY THE PRESIDENT CANNOT SUSPEND THE LEGISLATURE DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

Well, as we stated above, no later than 7 days after she declares a state of emergency, the President has to call the Legislature together to approve the state of emergency.  If the President could suspend the Legislature when she declares a state of emergency, then there will not be a separate body that can vote on whether the President was right to declare the state of emergency in the first place.    Also, the Constitution gives the Legislature the power to revoke a state of emergency at any time or to modify the measures the President takes under the state of emergency. See Article 88.  If the President could suspend the Legislature during a state of emergency, then the Legislature will not be able to revoke the state of emergency if the Legislature thinks it is no longer necessary nor would the Legislature be able to modify the measures the President has taken if it does not agree with them.

17.   GOOD.  PLEASE TELL US ALSO WHY THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THE PRESIDENT MAY NOT DISSOLVE OR SUSPEND THE JUDICIARY?

The judiciary includes the courts that can decide whether the government is acting properly.  For example, as we stated earlier, during a state of emergency, the President may not suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and a person detained for more than 48 hour without a charge can ask the court for a writ of habeas corpus to force the government to tell the court why they have the person in jail. If the judiciary or the courts were suspended during a state of emergency, then people will have nowhere to go when the President exercises powers that is not given her by the Constitution during a state of Emergency, or takes away rights, such as the right to a writ of habeas corpus, that the Constitution says she cannot take away during a state of emergency.         

18.   FINE. NOW, PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THE CONSTITUION SAYS THERE CAN BE NO AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

Amendments to the Constitution are big things because they bring about changes to our basic and fundamental laws.   Therefore, the people who wrote our Constitution rightfully wanted for any amendment to the Constitution to be fully debated and for everyone to voice their opinion on any amendment and for as many people as possible to vote whether or not to approve an amendment.  As we have noted, a state of emergency is declared when the country faces a major problem such as a war.   Also, as we will see, during a state of emergency, the President may suspend certain rights, like the right to free speech or the right to travel or to assemble.   The framers of the Constitution believed (rightfully) that because amendments to the Constitution are such an important things, we should not have them during an emergency, when people’s rights to speak out against or in favor of the amendment may be restricted, or when their right to assemble with other people who share their views about the amendment is restricted, or when their right to travel to campaign for or against the amendment is also restricted.

19.  THANK YOU.  SO YOU HAVE TOLD US WHAT RIGHTS THE PRESIDENT CANNOT TAKE AWAY AND WHAT POWERS SHE CANNOT EXERCISE DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY.  PLEASE TELL US NOW WHAT RIGHTS THE PRESIDENT CAN TAKE AWAY AND WHAT POWERS SHE CAN EXERCISE DURING A STATE OF EMERGENCY?

Well, except for those rights that the Constitution says the President cannot take away (the right to writ of habeas corpus) and the powers the President cannot exercise (such as powers to suspend the constitution, dissolve the Legislature, and suspend the Judiciary), the President can suspend most other rights including the right to free speech, the right to travel, the right to assemble and petition the government, and the right to freely practice your religion, etc.   However, as stated above, the Legislature has the power to modify the measures the President takes under a state of emergency. Therefore, if the Legislature does not agree with the President’s decision to suspend certain rights under the state of emergency, it can vote for the President not to continue to suspend those rights.

20.  BUT HOW CAN YOU SAY THE PRESIDENT CAN DO ALL THESE THINGS WHEN THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT  SPECIFICALLY SAY SO?

We can say so because of something known as “exclusio unius est inclusio alterius.”  This is Latin, which means the “exclusion of one is the inclusion of others.”    It is what lawyers call a “canon” or method of constitutional interpretation that says if you expressly exclude  something, then you mean to include those other things that you did not exclude .  So, since the Constitution expressly excludes or lists those powers (power to suspend the Constitution, Judiciary, and Legislature) that it says the President cannot exercise or those rights (right to writ of habeas corpus) she cannot take away during a state of emergency, then it means that the rights and powers it did not exclude or list are included among the rights the President may curtail or the powers she may exercise.

21.  WELL, WE TALK ABOUT HOW A STATE OF EMERGENCY CAN BEGIN.  PLEASE TELL US HOW IT CAN END OR BE MODIFIED OR CHANGED?

Like we said, a state of emergency exists once the President declares it, but she must call the Legislature together within 7 days to vote to approve or deny the State of Emergency.   You should remember that the President needs two thirds of the members of each of the two houses of the Legislature (Senate and House of Representatives) to approve the state of emergency.   So let’s say the President declares a state of emergency today.  Then 7 days later she convenes the Legislature to vote on it.  If the President does not get two thirds vote of each house approving the state of emergency, then it automatically ends.   Article 88

22.   I SEE.  BUT WHAT IF THE LEGISLATURE APPROVES THE STATE OF EMERENGENCY WHEN IT IS FIRST DECLARED BUT LATER WANTS TO REVOKE OR TERMINATE IT. HOW CAN THEY DO SO?

The Constitution simply says that “where the Legislature shall deem it necessary to revoke the state of emergency or to modify the measures taken thereunder, the President shall act accordingly and immediately carry out the decisions of the Legislature.”   See Article 88.    Therefore, it seems that under Article 88, the Legislature may at any time vote to revoke a state of emergency or to modify things the President has done under the emergency powers she assumes when she first declared a state of emergency.

23.  WHEN THE LEGISLATURE DECIDES TO REVOKE A STATE OF EMERGENCY OR MODIFY MEASURES THE PRESIDENT HAS TAKEN THEREUNDER, HOW MANY MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE NEED TO VOTE TO DO SO?

The Constitution is very clear that two thirds of the Legislature has to approve the declaration of a state of emergency or it is revoked. That means if over one third of the Legislature votes against a state of emergency, then it are revoked.  See Article 88.  The Constitution is less clear on how many members of the Legislature must vote to modify what the President has done under a state of emergency.  However, the most reasonable conclusion one can reach from reading as a whole Article 88, the section of the Constitution that deals with revoking and modifying a state of emergency, is that two thirds of the Legislature must vote in favor of what the President is doing or else whatever the President is doing will be modified as the Legislature decides.   To put this another way, if  one third of the members of the legislature plus 1 additional member vote to modify what the President has done under a state of emergency, then the President must carry out what the Legislature has decided.

24.   NOW, LET’S LOOK AT THE STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED IN LIBERIA.  YOU SAID THAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THE PRESIDENT MAY DECLARE A STATE OF EMERGENCY ONLY WHEN THERE IS A WAR, A THREAT OF WAR OR A CIVIL UNREST THAT CREATES SERIOUS PROBLEMS FOR THE STATE.  WE DID NOT HAVE A WAR. WE DID NOT FACE A THREAT OF WAR.  WE ALSO DID HAVE ANY CIVIL UNREST.  ALL WE FACED WAS EBOLA, WHICH IS SERIOUS, BUT IS NOT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE CONSTITUION LISTED AS GROUNDS FOR DECLARAING A STATE OF EMERGENCY.  SO HOW COME THE LEGISLATURE APPROVED THE STATE OF EMERGENCY?

You are quite right.  We faced a health emergency which, by itself, is technically not a civil unrest.   But in her letter to the Legislature informing them about the need for a state of emergency, the President said the “Ebola virus disease, the ramifications and consequences thereof, now constitute an unrest affecting the existence, security, and well-being of the Republic amounting to a clear and present danger.”  The argument can be made that while the diseases did not constitute a typical case of “civil unrest” it amounted to some sort of unrest that created a clear and present danger for the country and the Legislature agreed with the President.

25.   WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF THE LEGISLATURE MODIFIES THE MEASURES A PRESIDENT HAS TAKEN UNDER A STATE OF EMERGENCY OR ROVOKES A STATE OF EMERGENCY AND THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE LEGISLATURE AND INSIST THAT THERE IS A STATE OF EMERGENCY OR THAT SHE WILL  NOT MODIFY WHAT SHE IS DOING UNDER THE STATE OF EMERGENCY?

If this happens then we will be in what people call a constitutional crisis.  That is when the Legislature and the President cannot agree on what the Constitution says and they also disagree as to who has certain powers under the Constitution.   This is not good for the country because it can cause instability.  In such a case, either the Legislature or the Executive, or both of them may ask the Supreme Court to decide who is right.   The court will then look at the Constitution and try to determine what it says regarding who—the President or the Legislature—is correct.   Under our system of government, the Supreme Court has the final say on what the law or the Constitution says on an issue.  So, both the President and the Legislature will be forced to follow what the Supreme Court says.

26. WHAT IF THE SUPREME COURT REFUSES TO DECIDE THE CASE BROUGHT BEFORE IT REGARDING WHETHER THE PRESIDENT OR THE LEGISLATURE IS RIGHT?

There is something called the political question doctrine, under which the Court may refuse to decide a case involving conflicts between the Legislature and the Executive branch.  The political question doctrine applies when a case raises an issue that is so political in nature and there is no guidance in the Constitution on how to resolve the issues raised by the case.  In such a situation, the Supreme Court will decline to hear the case and say that it should be decided by the political process and not the courts.   It is not likely that the court will apply the political question doctrine in a case where there is conflict between the President and the Legislature regarding their respective powers under a state of emergency because the Constitution clearly spells out the powers of both the President and the Legislature under a state of emergency.  All the court has to do is look to the plain language of the Constitution and decide the case.   If, however, the Court refuses to decide the case, then we will be in a real constitutional crisis. 

27.   WHEN YOU SAY THE COURT MIGHT SAY THE CASE SHOULD BE DECIDED BY THE POLITICAL PROCESS WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

That means the case will be decided say by an election that results in the removal from office of members of the Legislature who disagree with the President or the removal of the President herself.  The other way the political process may apply here is by way of the impeachment process.  But all of this is also not good for the country. The next election that could remove the President from office or the Legislators who disagree with her, could be several years away.  That means that the country will be stuck and doing nothing until the election is held.  Even the impeachment process may take a long time to complete.  It also means that the country will be stuck and nothing much will happen in terms of the government making critical decisions until the impeachment process ends. 

Sunday, August 31, 2014

President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf: On the Hot Seat By: Theodore Hodge


President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has always been a media darling. She is perhaps the most well known and loved leader on the African continent. Her ascendancy to the Liberian presidency has been hailed in the Western world as the greatest thing to happen on the continent ‘since sliced bread’.


Thanks to her incredible talent of self-promotion, she has played a major role of propelling herself up that glorious ladder. She wrote a memoir and titled it “This Child Will Be Great”. According to her, upon her birth, a soothsayer took one look at her and prophesied, “This child will be great…” Her mother, as all mothers tend to do, ate it up. After all, who doesn’t want to be the bearer of a great child? Ellen Johnson was told this prophesy at an early age. It perhaps psychologically prepared her to face the world with confidence and optimism about her future. She set out to manifest her destiny; it was greatness by hook or crook. Along the way, the Western media has helped her propel toward that perceived destiny of greatness. And by all accounts, she has succeeded.

But as we all know too well, ‘what goes up must come down’. Is it possible that this once great child is falling from grace? Perhaps she will not fall and land flat on her face or buttocks, but one thing is certain: She has lost quite a bit of steam; the balloon is losing some air and faces eventual deflation. She has come down a few notches. And what’s her reaction to this new turn of events? She is now lashing out at her favorite friends, the INTERNATIONAL media. Excuse the colloquialism, but as they say in some quarters, “who would have thunk that?”
In a recent interview conducted by Katie Couric, she was asked about a Doctors Without Borders report that hinted that the Ebola crisis has reached ‘catastrophic’ levels and the quarantine policy aimed at the community of West Point has led to ‘virtual anarchy’. What was her response? She lashed out: “There is no anarchy! The international media must stop this! They are spreading false rumors! We are simply protecting the people from themselves.”

No matter her shock and dismay, one thing was clear: She was now on the hot seat. The international media, after giving her a free ride on the magic carpet for so long, has finally begun to ask some tough questions… she is not familiar with the territory. Though it saddens some of us that her tough moment has come while a catastrophic event looms in the horizon, it was fun to watch her twitch on the hot seat for a change.

Katie Couric is not the only journalist to put her on the tough spot. Foreign Policy Magazine has all but laid the blame at her feet. In one article, they left no stones unturned to come to the conclusion that the Ebola crisis is an outcome of bad policy, specifically, corruption. The New York Times has recently published an op-ed on the political fallout propagated by the crisis. Other Western media outlets are similarly laying the blame where it belongs: At her royal feet.

Maybe she will stop spending millions of dollars the nation needs on lobbying efforts. She spends tens, perhaps hundreds, of millions of dollars on giant media firms to polish and promote her image. She details how an American giant pollster, media consultant and lobbyist named Larry Gibson helped her win the campaign for president. Larry Gibson was (is) indeed a giant in the field; he is said to be an “exceptionally talented architect of numerous successful political campaigns, including Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign in the state of Maryland and three successful campaigns for Kurt Schmoke, the first black mayor of Baltimore, MD USA.”  That’s according to the book, “This Child Will Be Great”.

You couldn’t get any bigger than that! Madam Sirleaf was not taking chances. She hired the best to assure her success. The irony is she hired a powerful media consultant to help her become president of the folks in West Point, New Kru Town, Gbarnga, Zwedru and Buchanana… now she bemoans the international media?

From a recent report by the UN Mission to Liberia comes this grim assessment: “The epidemic SHOWS no sign as yet of stabilization and reduction. State authorities remain unable to respond in a significant manner and the international response remains limited.”

The report CONTINUES: “It is evident the Liberian authorities are not able to address the present state of the country. Consequently, it can be anticipated that many additional EVD (Ebola) cases will arise in the coming days.”

Isn’t that a clear indictment of the Liberian administration? Now, this doesn’t come from some hothead provocative and radical commentator, it comes from the UN. The Liberian state is essentially a UN satellite state; without the UN it would have clearly become defunct and failed. The UN has quite a stake in the successful revival of the country, so it would not be logical for it to mount a deliberate, baseless, propaganda attack against the country.  We must therefore assume that the UN is calling it as it sees it: The government of Liberia is not in full control of the situation. Even worse, the government does not have the capacity to actually control the crisis effectively.

First the international media, now the UN Mission… but the most biting criticism comes from even closer quarters. Dr. Jean Jacques Muyembe, a Congolese physician who helped identify the Ebola Virus in the 1970’s is in Monrovia to advise the government on how to handle the epidemic. He said, “Putting the army and police in charge of the quarantine was the worst thing you could do…You must make the people in the quarantine zone feel that they are being helped, not oppressed. The quarantine is going to worsen the spread of Ebola.” That seems to be commonsense except to the president, her Information Minister and Defense Minister. They must be a different breed to have thought such a draconian measure of using the army with shoot-to-kill orders was even worth considering.

Amidst the media onslaught, what is the president’s reaction? Her office has announced that the president does not intend to hold any interviews any longer. Really? The country depends on international aid and charity, and the president will not grant any interviews? Isn’t this when the media darling ought to come and work her magic with the press? Wasn’t this child born to be great? Now she’s retreating into a hole in the cave because the international media is spreading false rumors against her?

One thing is certain, we haven’t seen the end to this unfolding calamitous affair. But you can bet your last dollar that this president is facing the darkest moment of her presidency. This is not her finest hour. How she survives to once more steer the wheel of state will be a great testament to her claim to greatness. The verdict is out, but perhaps not for too long. Perhaps she will survive the leadership crisis and gloat one day, “I told you I was destined to be great…” Or perhaps she will go down in infamy. I’ve already said this Ebola crisis will be her Waterloo, her Achilles heels. We shall see.
Author: Theodore Hodge can be reached at imthodge@gmail.com