Chance to live in peace again
 

 Editor's Note: We apologise for attributing this story to Ms. Gloria Scott. 
It is an error.Ms Scott was Elections chief under Taylor and was later appointed Chief 

Justice by the warlord president. The speech was delivered by Ms. Francis Johnson-Morris, of course,
 the head of the Elections Commission.

Elections Chief Hints Slashing Numbers of Mushrooming Parties for 2005 Polls

1 May 04

Alas, the National Elections Commission(NEC) is taking shape, with its head, Ms.Francis Johnson-Morris , the respected former Supreme Court Chief Justice, promising a departure from the past of corrupt elections and hinting the number of political parties, 18 for now, may be reduced to meet the rising request of Liberians.

In her speech delivered in Monrovia and posted on The Perspective website,Frances Johnson-Morris , also former head of the Catholic Justice and Peace and Commission, admitted that the Constitution is unequivocal on the right to form a political party, but that some provisions of the document have been suspended, and that her Commission has been “empowered” to undertake electoral reforms.   

“The Liberian Constitution unequivocally provides for multi-party democracy. Under the circumstance, it would have amounted to a breach of the Constitution had the erstwhile Elections Commission (ECOM) attempted to limit the number of political parties. However, with the suspension of relevant provisions of the Constitution in the context of the CPA, and the subsequent empowerment of the NEC to undertake electoral reform, we wish to assure our fellow Liberians and our partners in this business of our determination to take advantage of this window of opportunity to lay a new foundation upon which Liberia’s new electoral system will be built….”

She described her responsibilities as “Herculean”, and for good reasons. Organising credible elections in a country with many eligible voters still in refugee camps and with the expected guns from rebel leaders hidden requires “Herculean” efforts.  Amongst factors needed for success, she said,  “are the speedy implementation of the current Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation and Reintegration Program as well as the resettlement of internally displaced persons (IDPs) to their original communities, and the repatriation of refugees from neighboring countries and beyond. The availability of resources to implement other activities in accordance with the timeline is also essential.”

The promise to repatriate refugees before the 1997 polls was never kept, because, amongst other reasons, Charles Taylor warned that not even “Angels” would save the head of the elections commission, the late journalist G. Henry Andrews, if he postponed the process. Moreover, the West African peacekeeping force simply issued an edict saying 95% of the rebels were disarmed. There was no demobilisation, no disarmament sites, no rebels to be counted. Thus the stage was set for another round of war, particularly as the declared winner, Charles Taylor, opted for cycles of vendetta against ethnic Krahns and ethnic Mandingos.

Then there is the challenge of elections in a country with no history of credible elections despite its reputation as Africa’s oldest republic. Digging into history, Ms. Johnson recalled:

 “The election of 1927, as history has recorded, is still the most rigged ever. At a time when the total number of eligible voters in the country did not exceed 15,000 the winner of the election received 240,000 votes while the loser got 9,000 votes. Perhaps, if there had been an independent elections Commission, the opposition would not have taken the case all the way to the League of Nations. The case almost cost Liberia her independence”.

One example of this culture of rigged elections, she said, was the 1985 elections used as the justification for the Charles Taylor wars:

“A classic example of this type of situation in the electoral history of Liberia is the 1985 National Elections. It can be recalled that before the ballots were counted following the polling, President Samuel K. Doe set up a 50-member Commission instead of the then Special Elections Commission (SECOM) chaired by a seasoned diplomat, Emmett Harmon, to count the ballots.

“On the day of the announcement of the election results, President Doe, led a battalion of the AFL to the Unity Conference Center in Virginia, the venue of the program and sat right behind the Chairman of the elections commission. I need not tell you in whose favor the results were announced.”

She stopped short in passing judgment on the 1997 elections, saying only that it was “characterized as free and fair by the international community…” and indeed so. It was said to be the most “observed” elections in recent times, except that no one observed how resources were stolen and mortgaged to ensure victory for the most violent man, Charles Taylor, threatening to shoot if he did not win. 

The number of voters in 1912, a mere 15,000 in a national lection, is revealing. About 600,000 voted 85 years later, in the 1997 elections, and this was thought to be the lowest number of Liberians to ever to cast ballots in electing their national leaders. But it should be recalled that there is the likelihood that in 1912, people of the “Hinterland”, native Liberians, did not vote and only the propertied had the right to vote. (History has to be checked for exact date of extending universal suffrage to “country people.”) And it seemed then that no one expected nor demanded anything better. The contestants simply did not contest, even where it was clear the results were false:

“ Up to 1927, the results of only one election were protested. This was the election of 1869 in which the ballots cast had more words on them than when they were given to the voters for marking. It is highly unlikely that the protest of 1869 would have been fairly attended to by the Legislature since its membership was made up largely of one political party. The Department of state and the Legislature determined the results of the election of 1869

“There was only one contestant in the presidential election of 1871. Controversy over that election led to the forced removal from office of President Edward James Roye. Perhaps if there had been an independent judiciary the constitutional crisis of 1871 might not have erupted and President Roye removed from office by force. There is no evidence that the judiciary played a determining role in the outcome of the election of 1871. ”

Ms. Johnson is a well-intentioned person, but conducting credible elections in a country without the skills, the resources and infrastructure will test her resolve because others before her miserably failed the test. One key demand, that of  convincing vying presidential candidates to lump their resources together in the national interest so that some of these personal clubs called parties can merge with like-minded pals since there is basically no ideological distinction amongst the parties, except empty rhetoric,  is quite another. 

But Ms Jonson is credible, and when she talks about electoral reforms, the hope is this will be extended to the election of local leaders such as County superintendents.  But she is aware of the demands of many that the number of parties should be reduced despite what the Constitution says. After all, the Constitution is clear on the crime of waging war against the state and yet this has been done from 1980 onward not with punishment, but rewards for the criminals. She says:

“At this juncture, we wish to address ourselves to one of the election-related issues which of late have generated so much concern in many quarters. The question of the proliferation of political parties as we approach the 2005 post-war elections seems to bother many Liberians. Already, there are 18 registered political parties in the country with strong indications that more are to follow later. Most Liberians are of the conviction that the current multiplicity of political parties is unhealthy for a country with a population of less than three million people. They argue that the situation has the potential to confuse the electorate as to who the best candidates are.”

Another issue is arresting the zeal of the presidents-to-be to wait until the whistle is blown. Many cannot simply wait. Some are already declaring victory and preparing for the victory celebrations, although she is now issuing warning to  “all those political parties and groups which have thus transgressed the Elections Guidelines and have further posted placards, flyers, banners and portraits of presidential candidates on public buildings, light poles or other conspicuous places in furtherance of their illegal campaigns to demonstrate their commitment to fostering a fair process in 2005 by proceeding to remove these public relations materials within 48 hours or face the full weight of the elections law.”

The role of the media,  “especially as it relates to its participation in the conduct of free, fair, transparent, credible and democratic elections come 2005”, cannot be “overemphasized”,  she declared, and that is, “ In order to be relevant to the process, the media, especially the independent media, guided by the theory of social responsibility, must be seen to be objective and unbiased in its reportage of issues relative to the electoral process. It is our pledge that in our quest for transparency in the entire electoral process, we will seek to forge partnership with the media, as with the rest of the civil society organizations. In order to sustain this partnership, it is essential that the media remains responsible in its coverage of the electoral process and not take on a partisan posture.”

Any dream that her task will be easy? Not so, as she “assure(s) all Liberians and our partners in the international community of our unflinching commitment, determination and dedication to the task before us. Indeed, we shall be courageous in taking the necessary steps that would better serve the interest of the Liberian people, over and above the interest of any individual or groups of individuals. For us, no sacrifice shall be too great to make in seeking to achieve our goal of ensuring free, fair, transparent, credible and democratic elections in Liberia in 2005.

“To achieve this daunting task, fellow Liberians, adequate support to the Commission and the preservation of the independence of the Commission can not be over-emphasized. We call upon the Liberian National Transitional Government and our international partners to lend us their support in this regard.”

Any idea that the elections will be conducted by UN and other international institutions, she warned, is false. It will be a Liberian affair with backing by the international community in terms of resources.

 “Our perspective on this role of the UN and other members of the International Community finds support under Article XXIX of the Agreement wherein, among other things, the parties call for “the urgent establishment of a consolidated United Nations Mission in Liberia that will have the resources to facilitate (emphasis is ours) the implementation and coordination of the political, social, economic and security assistance to be extended under this Agreement.” Again, the parties, under this article called on ECOWAS, in collaboration with the UN, AU, EU and the ICGL, to set up a monitoring mechanism in the form of an Implementation Monitoring Committee (IMC) in Monrovia that will ensure an effective and faithful implementation of the Peace Agreement by all the parties.”

Success must necessary, “if Liberians are to abandon the culture of violence which has now firmly taken root in our society over the lat two decades.”

Her warning: “We are at a crossroads. Judging by our bitter past experiences in relations to the myriad problems which over the years have attended the conduct of our national elections, and the consequential destruction of our nation’s fabric, the conduct of the 2005 general and presidential elections provides a golden opportunity for us to make a difference. The decisions we make and the actions we take in furtherance of these decisions in regards to the pending election will determine our destiny as a nation and people following almost two decades of fratricidal civil war. To sustain the gains we have made so far at this turning point of our nation’s history, we must avail ourselves of the opportunity to tread a new path devoid of those vices that have the proclivity to plunge us into another round of violence.”

--Tom Kamara 

_________________