Peer Reviewer 1:
On a whole, the Reporters Notebook gives a general picture of how corruption is rife within the Liberian society, but it leaves out one or two important areas, contains some minor factual errors, and is not clear or a bit fair in one or two instances.
One area which is not covered by the report is the judiciary. Corruption within the judiciary is no secret here. The U.N. Mission in Liberia, in one of its quarterly reports, accused the system of being corrupt. The Mission cited instances whereby citizens here were being denied justice due to lack of money.
Another point is corruption at grassroot levels, especially the case of the market women who stuffed empty salmon cups (cups used locally to measure rice by the kilogram) to reduce the quantity actually paid for by the consumer.
The issue concerning the annual salary of civil servants needs further clarifications. The amount quoted is the annual salary of the least paid civil servant, and I think a sentence explaining this would have done it all.
As regards the issue of the Sinkor Trading Company importing five kilograms less of the 50-kilogram-bags was an allegation raised by a political party and denied by the company. The company later took journalists at its warehouses. Let it be known that the allegation involved re-bagging, which resulted into the reduction by five kilograms. Re-bagging is a common practice here by most importers -- even the World Food Program re-bags its supplies to separate the spoiled grains from the good ones. I think the report would have been fair had it presented both sides of this story.
Peer Reviewer 2:
I agree with what the reporter mentioned about the Sinkor Trading issue, but I wish to add that this event was a public relation exercise designed by both the management of Sinkor Trading and the government, after they received public criticism for the manner in which Sinkor trading won the bidding for the importation of rice. I agree that the management of Sinkor Trading is well-connected, which is obvious if we look at the way in which they won the bidding process. The fact that something like that could occur under the new government demonstrates a lack of transparency, and that the present administration is doing exactly what the previous regimes did.
Regarding the Haddad case, when the current regime came to power it decided to strangulate former President Taylors entire financial base. Getting to Haddad in such a manner was the beginning of a governmental campaign aimed at turning public opinion against Bridge-way and K&K, in order to take them out of the rice market. The tax allegation has been put to rest, while a deportation proceeding against K&K is still ongoing.
Concerning benefits to legislators, this regime discontinued the policy of previous administrations, through which cars were bought for the legislators. Now they have to take loans to buy their own cars. Although in the past we accused them of using many SUVs, I find that the legislators are more entitled to drive such vehicles in comparison with ministers and various department heads, simply because they represent people in areas with bad roads and they have to be able to access those regions.
On the question of budget cuts, the author needs to clarify how much the government allotted for health care, education and civil service, and how much was actually approved by the legislature. I agree that the budget of Phebe hospital was cut, but the reporter doesnt mention what the rationale behind it was and where that amount was transferred.
The author also needs to clarify if the salaries earned by senior government officials and lawmakers respectively include allowances and/or benefits. It would also be important to know if senior government officials who are in the government based on special arrangements earn the same amounts.
I agree that the LMA is corrupt and that, as a result, there have been changes in their leadership and constant conflicts among its members. Notwithstanding, the author needs to clarify if market fees for selling goods are calculated per table or based on the quantity of the goods one sells.
Peer Reviewer 3:
If the task of the reporter was actually to provide a street-level view of corruption in Liberia, then the Notebook substantially romanticized with the issues in many respects.
Firstly, the essay brushed over a couple of contemporary corruption issues, such as the general perception of ordinary Liberians regarding the commitment of the new political class to concretely deliver on a promised anti-corruption fight. Peoples wish to see their government minimize, if not obliterate, this pandemic is being compromised on the altar of cultural, social and political considerations. The reporter needed to mention how both the executive and legislative branches of the government played lip-service to the fight against corruption, described by President Sirleaf as the public enemy number one. President Sirleafs switching of dismissed corrupt government officials from one public agency to another, coupled with the legislatures repulsion towards an anti-corruption bill, has attracted massive public misgivings. Two officials of the Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy were dismissed a few days after President Sirleaf bemoaned high level corruption at the ministry. But following the dismissal, the government announced that it had evidence to dismiss, but had no evidence to prosecute the dismissed officials. The governments disposition triggered mammoth public reaction.
Secondly, the reporter did not give readers outside the country, who lack the background of the reported stories, the fair indicators they need to know before fully understanding and appreciating the magnitude and dynamics of corruption in Liberia. For instance, in reporting the Sinkor Trading rice monopoly saga, the reporter left out or brushed over some basic background facts, thus raising a couple of questions for pensive readers outside Liberia, as well as Liberian readers who did not follow the development. While the lengthy recounting of the situation is not unnecessary, the reporter should have however explained what makes rice a cash cow and political currency and why most Liberians in the street, and others reading the report, regard or should regard the awarding of the contract to Sinkor Trading and the subsequent perversion of monopoly by the STC as an element of corruption in public governance. Given the enormous public interest the controversial rice deal generated during the period, the reporter should have gone a little deeper to support the indicated notes of family and political links between President Sirleaf and STC Manager Allen Brown. Critical elements of the Liberian public saw the STC rice monopoly award as a replication of the culture of political cronyism and the traditional correlation between cronyism and political upheaval in Liberia, particularly with rice, the nations staple, always being at the center. Liberias first major political crisis, which underpinned the bloody toppling of the 133 oligarchic Americo-Liberian rule, was the rice riot of 1989, which came as a result of the governments plans to hike the price of the staple food. It was then highly suspected that officials of the government, principally President Tolberts brother, who was a businessman, were the beneficiaries of the deal.
It is an open secret that Allan Brown supported President Sirleafs bid for the presidency, and that as a longtime business partner of Sirleafs he operates a couple of hotel resorts in which Sirleaf reportedly holds a lion share. Thus, some Liberians understand that the governments awarding of monopoly rights and the governments public relation stunt greeting the arrival of STCs first consignment of rice at Free Port happened because of political patronage and perpetuation of cronyism. It is also necessary to note that the perversion of the monopoly right given to STC also came in the form of continued high price for the commodity, contrary to the statement in the report that the corporation offered a low cost. In fact, it was in response to the hike that the government announced in mid July 2007 that the import of a huge consignment of rice was not only to offset the prevailing hike and scarcity, but to make rice affordable for the Nations Independence Day celebration, amid irking pervasive hardship. Moreover, during the bid or reapplication process for the rice importation monopoly, the Bridgeway Corporation, a previous known importer of the commodity, claimed it had offered to sell the same grade at US$19.00, US$2.00 less that what STC has proposed. The government did not deny the claim.
While there might be some amount of public disdain regarding Liberian legislators increment of their remunerations in the wake of other demanding priorities, it would be fair to balance such a report with the argument which both the legislators and others propound in defense: that low and irregular pay for Liberian legislators -- in a sense the financial insecurity and low morale of lawmakers-- was a prime source of the legislators utter subservience to the presidency in the past. That aside, however, there has been a bribery scandal rocking the sitting legislature, the 52nd, for which international stakeholders, specifically the International Contact Group on Liberia (ICGL), continue to call for an independent probe. The deposed speaker of the House, Edwin Snowe, accused some of his colleagues during the reporting period of receiving bribes from some unnamed powerful government officials to unseat him. He had also persistently accused President Sirleaf for opting to oust him, but his claims were denied by the presidential aides. The protracted shelving of investigation into the alleged bribery scandal not only keeps the reputation of the House in question, but gives the Liberian public a rather odd impression of their representatives.
Worth noting about the report on Liberia Petroleum Refinery Corporation (LPRC) are a few missing things. First, media reports that President Sirleaf was one of the founders of the entity while serving in the True Whig Party Government. It was therefore widely thought that she would use her presidency to subtly reclaim her entitlements, rights and influence which past hostile political regimes might have denied her for several years. It is suspected that the change of the administrative structure of LPRC, which shed major administrative departments off the structure and made Harry Greaves the sole head, was sanctioned by President Sirleaf. Second, during the passage of the 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 national budgets, there was a standoff between the executive and the legislature over mainstreaming the LPRC into the budgets as a revenue-contributing agency. The legislature refused to believe that LPRC was insolvent, when it officially reported huge profits before and even during the leadership of President Sirleaf. Third, regarding the oil deal, the two human rights activists named by the reporter alarmed of attempted bribery, which they said Greaves lured them into during their visit at LPRC to make inquiry about claims by Greaves that he had documents proving him right that the deal was commercial and not bilateral. Greaves responded to the claims that the brown envelope which he gave the two activists contained a gift of gas coupons and not cash, as they had alleged. He said the gift was pursuant to LPRC tradition of generosity towards visiting guests.
In the absence of policy enforcement and price control mechanisms, school-based corruption and arbitrary price hike amongst both big and small businesspeople continues to be a near-indelible source of corruption and exploitation. The reporter should have mentioned how the prevalence of corruption in the Liberian school system is both the result of the lack of a comprehensive code of conduct and the strong drive for sex and luxury, a product of the 16 years of civil conflict which rendered many Liberian paupers. Regarding the private sector-based corruption, this is largely caused by the virtual lack of price control, further patronized by the lack of coins. Every commodity jumps to 5 Liberian dollars (US$0.08), then to L$10.00 (US$0.16), to L$15 (US$0.19) and so forth. Items costing anything less that those denominators are rounded up simply because the government is yet to put into circulation coins it reported minted several months back. Businesspeople, including shopkeepers, taxi-drivers and merchants, hiding under the canopy of this inadequacy, have the latitude to exploit and abuse end consumers.
Peer Reviewer 4:
In sharp contrast to all the international hype about the new Liberia that President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf is building, this report reminds us how difficult it may be to have a clean break with the past. The many problems in Liberian society did not vanish with Taylor. They are still there, and judging by this report the new regime also has to reward allies by hiring them in key positions. It would, however, not be fair to Johnson-Sirleaf to assume that she would be able to create a new and non-corrupt Liberia from day one. This is a society in which corruption, nepotism and patronage are deeply integrated. For generations Liberians have learnt to live with such practices, and it will take a long time to change this. We also need to recognize that Johnson-Sirleaf does not exist in a vacuum. In order to win the 2005 elections she needed support, and deals with influential people and families had to be made. There is no question about this. The question, however, is what she is doing with the power now granted to her: will she seek to increase the credibility of her anti-corruption rhetoric by also exposing and punishing key allies, or will her presidency be a continuation of past practices, albeit with a more human and moderate face? Taking into consideration the experience from neighboring Sierra Leone, high-level corruption will only increase if it is not adequately addressed from the beginning. International stakeholders should not take it for granted that the General Economic Management Program (GEMAP) will be sufficient, so they should actively address the issue both through a critical dialogue with the government and through empowering civil society capacity to address the matter.
Peer Reviewer 5:
The rice issue is indeed a key political concern that has flared up for years in the context of corruption allegations.
President Taylor periodically received quarterly donations of 100,000 50-kg bags of rice from the Taiwanese government as a humanitarian gesture for suffering Liberians. The donations were diverted by Mr. Taylor and either given to the Bridgeway Corporation to be sold on the market or, sometimes, supplied to Taylors armed men of the notorious Anti-Terrorist Unit, ATU.
President Ellen Johnson Sirleafs failure to undo the monopoly in the sale of rice on the market became controversial because she did squarely the opposite of what she had promised in her long years of political struggle. Instead of squashing the rice monopoly, she transferred it to a friend, Allen Browne, of Sinkor Trading. The transfer of the monopoly apparently infuriated Lebanese merchant George Haddad, who then launched a counter media attack on the government.
A clarification from my point of view: The Sinkor Trading Company (STC) has never sold rice at a low cost. The price of a 50-kg bag has risen from US$19 during the Taylor reign to US$26 now.
Global Integrity uses a