10 September 2007
Since the Management of the Liberia Agricultural Company (LAC) took the controversial decision three years ago to evict thousands of villagers from their homes in districts #3 and 4 in Grand Bassa and Rivercess counties, that region of Liberia has not known respite.
LAC had huffed and puffed; the threatened villagers had flexed weak muscles in resistance and got inhumane backlash from their own government; and some members of human rights community and the Buchanan-based Resilient Elders of Grand Bassahave taken matters up to the law; but nothing significant changed, save for LAC management to slow down its expansion program.
But now, the Liberty Party is stepping into the imbroglio with an open letter, calling for renegotiation under the banner of reconciliation, justice, and national growth under the rule of law. The Analyst Staff Writer reports:
Liberty Party House Representative for Grand Bassa County, J. Byron Brown, has prevailed on the Sirleaf Administration to renegotiate the terms and conditions of the Concession Agreement of the Liberia Agricultural Company.
He said the renegotiation was imperative especially in view of the change in circumstances and laws, treaties, and conventions. This imperative, he said, was publicly acknowledged a year ago on September 7, 2006 when President Sirleaf met the Resilient Elders of Grand Bassa.
"You will recall that at a meeting with President Johnson-Sirleaf on September 7, 2006, which you, Elders of Grand Bassa and River Cess Counties, and the Concerned Citizens of Grand Bassa attended, the President made a decision, which was clear and unequivocal.
"Her administration would not tolerate the ugly practices of the past - no Liberian would be evicted from their ancestral homeland to plant rubber trees.
The President also took a decision in the interest of encouraging investment in the rubber industry, LAC would be given additional, but uninhabited land upon which to expand its plantation through a process of negotiation with the Government, and confidence building meetings between LAC and the people of Grand Bassa and River Cess."
"Pursuant to the decision of the President, you, on behalf of the government, and the Elders issued a joint Press Statement, dated September 9, 2006, affirming that the native people would not be evicted from their ancestral homeland.
Of course, the directive of the President has been ignored by LAC, of which you are aware, as they continue to expand their plantation by evicting peaceful and law-abiding citizens."
Rep. Brown's statements were contained in a September 6, 2007 "Open Letter" he addressed on behalf of the Liberty Party to the government of Liberia through Agriculture Minister Chris Toe.
"We believe that the Concession Agreement of the Liberian Agriculture Corporation (LAC), which was entered into on March 3, 1959 (the "Agreement"), would by reason of logic, also be renegotiated," Rep. Brown said.
If the government saw the need to review and renegotiate agreements signed as recently as 2005, he told Minister Toe, there would certainly be the need to renegotiate one signed in 1959.
He said besides President Sirleaf's public acknowledgement of the need to renegotiate the 1959 agreement, the Joint Government of Liberia-United Nations Rubber Plantations Task Force report submitted to President Sirleaf on May 22, 2006 indicated that years of government's complacency and LAC's negligence have created conditions that are threatening the survival of villagers in the area.
"The government should renegotiate agreements to update and standardize them where necessary to ensure compliance with Liberian law and international principles of responsible business practices," the open letter quoted the joint report as recommending.
LAC has not budged an inch from its original determination to evict the people from their land by force, the letter said, notwithstanding the findings of the joint report, the President public acknowledgement, and contentions by the local communities that LAC expansion program was not only illegal but was also threatening their right to reside on their ancestral land and destroying their farms and crops.
"Since 2004, LAC has continuously stepped out of its Concession Area into areas inhabited by the native people of Grand Bassa and River Cess, and forcibly evicted the people, contrary to the terms and conditions of the Agreement".
"This has been and remains a source of contention between LAC and the Bassa-speaking people, which is not healthy for our fragile peaceful environment," the Party's open letter said.
LAC has been insisting that under the agreement it signed with the government of Liberia, the land in question was part of its concessional holdings reserved for its expansion program. Under this provision, LAC insists that it has the right to evict both squatters and individuals illegally occupying the land and threatening the company's expansion program.
Its recent efforts to evict what it called squatter villagers in order to plant more rubber trees in the concessional areas therefore, the company said, was no violation of the right of any citizen or group of citizens as have been alleged.
But in the letter, the party said LAC's argument was based on legal illusion and that it was time the entire agreement is reviewed so that the rubber company will negotiate the additional holdings alluded to in the agreement.
The reason, the letter noted, is because since September 2, 1960 LAC has forfeited the right under the current agreement to venture outside the present operation area because it had neglected to select areas for the expansion.
It quoted a recent report of former Justice Minister Frances Johnson-Morris as indicating that LAC stood no legal ground for its present determination to evict the local population and destroy their crops and properties.
"Clearly, under the Agreement LAC was given eighteen (18) months to make the determination regarding land suitable for its development operations. That time has since expired. Therefore, the eviction of t he citizens from their villages and the expansion of LAC is arbitrary as it is not supported by the Agreement," the Liberian attorney general was quoted by the party as saying in a legal opinion to President Johnson-Sirleaf.
The open letter was however quick to clarify that expiration of the time set in the agreement did not mean that LAC has forfeited the right to augment its concessional areas by 300,000 additional acres of land.
It meant rather, according to the open letter, that the company must now negotiate to get this portion of land which it failed to select within the timeframe allowed under the Agreement.
The party said it therefore agrees with President Sirleaf that LAC should be granted additional land by the government to enlarge its Concession Area, but only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the law of the land, and regional and international treaties and conventions on human rights to which Liberia subscribes.
"But the granting of additional land to LAC should be done only by means of a renegotiated Concession Agreement or at least upon a review of the Agreement," the party said in the open letter, indicating that the additional land to be granted to LAC does not have to be contiguous to its present plantation.
"The 1959 grant of rights accepted that the Concessionaire's 'Development Areas' did not have to be contiguous, that is the logic of 300,000 acres in two different locations," the party said, relying on Article II of the agreement that authorized LAC to select land in Grand Bassa and Rivercess counties and along the Tappita-Webo Road.
If this land was intended to contiguous such that LAC is today insisting on evicting the people of compounds #3 and 4 in Grand Bassa County, the party argued, then the government would not have granted concessionary right to another company within the area.
That, it said, would have been a violation of the LAC agreement for which LAC would have sought redress under the laws of Liberia or under international jurisprudence but that the company did not do that.
"In 1965, Government granted land, a few miles from the area that LAC selected as its Concession Area to another concessionaire - LIBINC (Palm Bay) - for operating a palm plantation.
LIBNIC's Concession Area certainly falls within the first half of the Prospecting Areas that runs from St. John River, which forms the boundary between Grand Bassa and Bong Counties, to Cestos River, which forms the boundary between River Cess and Sinoe Counties," the party revealed.
It said even under the legal illusion that LAC is operating, it was important to note that it has no right under the agreement to evict anyone body, so-called squatters or indigenous people.
"If LAC still has an unrestricted right to the entire Prospecting Area, as it claims, why would it discriminate in its eviction of "squatters"? LAC would also evict LIBINC and every "civilized", western-educated, person who acquired portions of the Prospecting Areas," the party noted.
It then argued further that the people of districts #3 and 4 would not have qualified under LAC's description of "squatter" because they did not come to the area in question after LAC selected it for its expansion program thereby restricting its use to LAC according to the agreement.
"The native Bassa people have occupied the land on which they lived in Grand Bassa and River Cess Counties from prior to the founding of the Republic of Liberia up to now.
Therefore, in accordance with Liberian laws and international treaties, and conventions, LAC should forthwith cease its forceful eviction of native Liberians from their ancestral homelands," the party said, adding that in any case, LAC, a private business entity has no right to evict Liberians from their ancestral homeland.
Rather than the company taking upon itself the right to empower workers' groups and thugs to evict Liberian citizens, the party argued, it was the government of Liberia under Article IV of the agreement that has the right to take measures to "prevent squatters" from settling on LAC's development areas if the settlement impedes the company's operations.
Where the so-called squatters were already settled, the party said, it was the duty of the government under Article IV of the Agreementto "evacuate" and not to evict them.
"The Agreement provides further that, 'LAC will not request the government to evacuate villages existing within the Development Areas unless such villages or their inhabitants impede the operations of LAC under this Agreement,'" the party quoted the agreement as saying, indicating that the agreement is "unambiguous".
It said the government took upon itself the right to evacuate squatters settling on LAC's land following the sealing of the agreement because it is the government that has the responsibility of finding suitable alternative housing and means of livelihood for the people who might be so evacuated.
"The government would, however, be obliged to evacuate villages only if the villages or inhabitants thereof were to 'impede the operations of LAC'. You will note that the Agreement calls for the government to "evacuate" and not "evict" the villagers.
"You will also note that by usage, the Agreement defines "squatters" to mean villagers that settled within an area after that area had been selected as a Development Area, not those villages that existed prior to the coming of LAC," the party emphasized.
It said the difference between eviction and evacuation and the situation leading up to and encompassing LAC claims that its operations are being impeded needed to be understood so that the appropriate decisions can be take on behalf of the people of Bassa and Rivercess counties and on the side of reconciliation, justice, and national growth under the rule of law.
"LAC may not invade the sanctity of people's homes, and then claim that the villagers are impeding its operations under the Agreement. And no good government would evacuate an entire village to facilitate the planting of rubber trees especially when comparable large tracts of uninhabited land are available," the party noted further.
It then indicated that any forceful eviction of the people in the districts from their ancestral homeland by a private company, especially at a time when about 20% of the population is homeless, is a violation of the African Charter on People's Rights and the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
"In addition to making the villagers homeless," the party said, "the destruction of villages seriously and adversely affects food security. As villages are destroyed, farms are trampled, and food supply is disrupted.
The sole source of food for the evictees is their farms, which is destroyed along with their villages. Also, urban cities such as Buchanan depend on food from those farms. The action of LAC, if allowed unchecked, would aggravate the already dismal food security situation in Liberia."
The party said in case the Liberian government thought the eviction of thousands of villagers and the destruction of the ancestry life of the Bassa-speaking people was in national interest, then as provided under the agreement and consistent with the principles of good governance, it must identify the areas, construct houses prior to evacuating the citizens to be affected, and provide assistance for them to grow their farm for a new beginning.
"But we would ask our government to kindly complete the construction of the new communities for the people before their houses are demolished and they are made homeless," the party said through its member of parliament J. Byron Brown.
But will the government and LAC listen in view of past contentions and the government's apparent siding with corporate interest while playing dilly-dally with its citizens, is the question observers are asking.
For instance, they wondered, will LAC concede the argument that it had lost its right to claim land outside its present concession areas as argued by the Liberty Party and submit to renegotiation when the government, which is party to the agreement, is not pressing the case of negligence and therefore forfeiture and renegotiation?
Article 7 of the Constitution of Liberia sets these bases for social justice and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit happiness in Liberia:
"The Republic shall, consistent with the principles of individual freedom and social justice enshrined in this Constitution, manage the national economy and the natural resources of Liberia in such manner as shall ensure the maximum feasible participation of Liberian citizens under conditions of equality as to advance the general welfare of the Liberian people and the economic development of Liberia."
But analysts and political observers say it is complacency, combined with the lack of political will on the part of successive past Liberian government administrations since Pres. Tubman to stand against corporate interests and illegal corporate undertakings that robbed the nation and its people of the benefits and beauty of capitalism.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2007 The Analyst. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
