STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOP)

REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (SOP)

INDEPENDENT NATIONAL COMMISSION ON HUAMN RIGHTS (INCHR)

Adjacent Zone 3 Police Station, Congo Town

Table of Contents

PART I.........................................................................................................................................4

1.1 Background:.........................................................................................................................4

1.2 Code of Conduct ................................................................................................................4

1.2 Organogram.........................................................................................................................4

PART II`........................................................................................................................................4

2.1 Introduction...........................................................................................................................4

2.2. Interpretation........................................................................................................................5

2.3 Statement of Common Purpose and Values...................................................................6

2.4 Condition of Service............................................................................................................7

PART III.........................................................................................................................................7

3.1 Personal and Professional Conduct................................................................................7

3.2 Accountability:......................................................................................................................8

3.3 Prudent Use of Information:...............................................................................................8

3.4 Public Comment...................................................................................................................9

3.5 Conflict of Interest.................................................................................................................9

3.6 Public Resources:...............................................................................................................10

3.7 Security..................................................................................................................................10

3.8 Bribes, Gifts, Benefits, Travel and Hospitality.................................................................10

3.9 Complaints and Disputes involving Commissioners and Officers..............................11

3.10 Conduct of investigation...................................................................................................11

13.11 Discipline and Sanctions................................................................................................11

3.12 Responsibilities of Officers who leave the Commission.............................................12

PART IV.........................................................................................................................................12

4.1 Administrative Structure of the INCHR.............................................................................12

4.2 Commissioners’ Oversight..................................................................................................13

PART FIVE:....................................................................................................................................13

5.1 Procedure for External Communication:...........................................................................13

PART SIX.......................................................................................................................................14

6.1 Procedures for Managing Disagreements Internally:.....................................................14

6.2 Grievance Procedures for Secretariat Staff.......................................................................15

6.3 Grievance Procedures for Commissioners:.......................................................................15

PART SEVEN:................................................................................................................................16

7.1 Procedures for Receiving and Investigating Complaints:...............................................16

PART EIGHT....................................................................................................................................16

8.1 Standard Procedure for Hiring Personnel:.........................................................................16

PART I

1.1 Background:

The INCHR is a nascent institution with a mandate to promote and protect human rights in Liberia, arguably, a sufficient condition for consolidating Liberia’s hard-earned peace and democracy. Since its formal establishment in October 2010 (when its Board of Commissioners was commissioned by the President of Liberia), a number of internal disagreements blamed on lack of clear procedures have been occasioned (some were expressed publicly via media sources) thus at times prompting the interventions of external actors from civil society organizations and some eminent persons.

Realizing the negative perceptions overt disagreements pose to institutions, especially for those institutions with high public standing, the need to draft more exacting procedures aimed at fostering a professional and strong corporate culture in the INCHR remains salient. Crucial to enjoying full autonomy in the Commission is the existence of a cohesive and self-regulating organization which will as far as possible handle its challenges internally and avoid the use of external actors.

In a nutshell, this is an endeavor which seeks to build strong internal systems; limit the involvement of external actors in settling internal disputes in an organization that demands high public trust; upholds and reinforce its autonomy and moral authority [a critical mandate superior to statutory mandate]. 1.2 Code of Conduct

Guiding Principles: Public service is sustained by the trust the public reposes in the office or the office holder(s). Hence, the Commission recognizes that public perception is superior to legislative authority which defines the powers of an institution.

1.2 Organogram

PART II

2.1 Introduction

1. The INCHR was established by an Act of the National Transitional Legislative Assembly (2005). The Commission has general competence to protect and promote human rights in the Republic of Liberia according to the Act, the Constitution and other relevant international instruments that seek to promote human rights.

2. The work of the INCHR would be seriously undermined if any Commissioner or any officer of the Commission acted in a manner which the Commission itself or any member of the public found reprehensible or to be the result of bias, dishonesty, conflict of interest or revenge.

3. The Commissioners and officers of the Commission are employed in the Liberian public service and they are accordingly obliged to comply with all provisions of the Liberian public service specifically those provisions governing autonomous agencies. Because of the special nature of the Commission’s work and the duties of all Commissioners and officers of the Commission, it is necessary that a specific and more exacting code of conduct be established for Commissioners and officers of the Commission, in order to promote highest degree of probity and public confidence in the work of the Commission.

4. This Code of Conduct therefore goes beyond a mere prescription that set out clear principles and requirements that specifically apply to the Commissioners and officers in the service of the Commission; it is a set of espoused values which all Commissioners are obliged to observe and uphold. This code of conduct takes cognizance of the Commission’s and the Transitional Justice Working Group/Civil Society Organizations Agreed Minutes of 17th September 2011. The code acts as deterrence to any form of unprofessional conduct and seeks to create an environment that is beyond reproach; a bastion for the promotion and protection of the fundamental rights of individuals or groups. It further provides a statement of common purpose and values that should be observed to ensure that every activity of the Commission is carried out or achieved in a professional and efficient manner. It also explains how the principles are to be applied.

5. This Code of Conduct applies to and is binding on every Commissioner and employees of the Commission and is to be complemented with the Commission’s standard operating procedures.

2.2. Interpretation

In this Code of Conduct, unless the context otherwise requires:

1. “Commission” means the Independent National Commission on Human Rights of

2. Liberia established by the INCHR Act 2005 and applicable Amendment(s);

3. “Commissioner” means a member of the Board of Commissioners (BOC) of the INCHR;

4. “Chairperson” means the Head of the INCHR;

5. “Vice Chairperson” means the person elected by two-thirds of fellow Commissioners to serve as a deputy to the Chairperson according to Art.IX (5) of the Act.

6. “Executive Director” means the person recruited and appointed by the BOC to head the INCHR Secretariat;

7. “Director” means a person employed to head one of the five (5) Departments within the INCHR’s Secretariat;

8. “Officer” means the Executive Director, staff, consultants, human rights monitors, experts or any other person in the employ of the INCHR whether or not such employment is full or part time, paid or unpaid;

9. “Secretariat” means that component of the INCHR established to render technical, professional, administrative and clerical support to the INCHR in implementing its mandate and functions.

10. “Standard Operating Procedures” mean published orders and rules that provide for the operating procedures relating to:

a. Employment procedures

b. Financial matters of the Commission

c. Procedures for services other than personnel

d. Complaints procedures

e. External communication procedures

f. Grievance/dispute management procedures

2.3 Statement of Common Purpose and Values

1. The overarching purpose of the INCHR is to successfully fulfill Liberia’s obligations to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms by ensuring that each citizen or resident enjoys fully all inalienable and fundamental rights and liberties.

2. The Commission recognizes that the true measures of its success will be how it vigorously pursues and diligently exercises its powers in

a manner that is honorable and legal and inspires or promotes continuing public confidence and support. Accordingly, the Commission undertakes that it will work promptly and with the highest standards of diligence, objectivity, integrity, professionalism and fairness and without undue infringement of a person’s recognized rights or privileges.

3. The INCHR further recognizes that it is accountable to the public that it serves and will strive to elicit its support from the public primarily in order to effectively promote and protect human rights.

4. In furtherance of this purpose and to maintain set values, the INCHR pledges that its name and powers will always be used with restraint and with an awareness of their potential effect on the lives of the people it owes a duty. The Commission along with its Commissioners and officers individually and collectively promises and unequivocally proclaims that the authority and powers of the Commission shall never be used to gain personal advantage or promote any individual interest.

5. Commissioners and officers of the INCHR pledge themselves to establish and sustain effective and congenial relationships with individuals and a variety of organizations outside the Commission. ABSOLUTELY, discrimination, and partiality, either within the Commission or in dealings with people and organizations outside the Commission will never be condoned, acquiesced, or tolerated.

6. INCHR’s work will not be compromised or affected by any personal interest. Public resources will always be used efficiently and effectively. The security of information and the protection of persons working or dealing with the Commission will be protected at all times.

7. In conclusion, the INCHR as a human rights organization, affirms, declares, and shall at all times maintain a zero tolerance for any sort of unethical behavior whatsoever. Never will the Commission give protection that yields impunity.

2.4 Condition of Service

1. The INCHR is an autonomous agency of the GoL which is financed by legislative appropriations. Commissioners and officers of the Commission are employees of the GoL who are subject to all rules appertaining to public servants established and existing now or hereafter, subject to such limitations which are enshrined in the INCHR Act of 2005 and its subsequent amendment(s).

2. All Commissioners and officers of the INCHR shall perform their duties and serve the Commission on a full-time basis [No Commissioner or officer of the INCHR shall, while in the employ of the Commission, accept another employment, except in such case as teaching a public school [gratis] provided that such engagement does not conflict with the Commissioner’s or officer’s required work with the Commission.

3. INCHR’s Commissioners and officers must be familiar and act in accordance with the provisions of the INCHR’s Act (2005) and its amendment(s), the constitution of Liberia, Commission’s Standard Operating Procedures, condition of service, and any other personnel circular relating to the affairs of the Commission. Particular emphasis should be placed on the imperative to respect all victims, and strict adherence to protect their integrity and confidence at all times. The Commissioners of the Commission shall ensure that there is no conflict between legislative and policy requirements and the Code of Conduct.

4. All officers of the Commission will be required to undergo such training as the Commission deems necessary for the efficiency and effectiveness of the operations of the Commission. Commissioners and officers are required to attend a yearly Ethics retreat. Officers’ performance assessments will be prepared annually by their supervisors.

PART III

3.1 Personal and Professional Conduct

1. INCHR’s Commissioners and officers shall at all times fulfill the duties imposed on them by law, especially the INCHR (2005) and its Amendment by serving the public and by upholding the law consistent with the highest degree of responsibility required by their institutional profession;

2. Commissioners and officers shall at all times respect human dignity and human rights of all persons without discrimination on grounds of race, sex, marital status, nationality, ethnic or national origin, physical or intellectual impairment, religious or political conviction and by acting at all times with honesty , commitment and diligence, integrity and impartiality;

3. In furtherance of fairness in discharging the work of the Commission, as far as possible, Commissioners and officers of the INCHR shall take all reasonable steps to see that the information upon which they base their decisions or actions is factually correct and that all the relevant information has been obtained;

4. No Commissioner or officer of the INCHR shall divulge any sensitive/classified information that comes to his/her attention or into his/her possession, unless authorized in the performance of his legitimate duties;

5. Officers shall obey all lawful instructions issued to them by their supervisors, but shall decline to comply with orders they know or ought to know to be unlawful.

3.2 Accountability:

A Commissioner or officer of the INCHR will be held personally responsible for his own acts or omissions. Supervisors are required to report [take appropriate action] for work-related acts or omissions of their subordinates that come to their attention. Although supervisors are not personally held liable for the acts of their subordinates, they are however strongly encouraged to report as far as possible any unethical behavior of their subordinates or colleagues that come to their attention. 3.3 Prudent Use of Information:

1. Crucial to the INCHR’s mandate is to monitor the aggregate human rights situation and to investigate complaints brought to its attention. These tasks demand absolute protection of sensitive and confidential information by all who have access to such information. Officers are strictly required to use such information only in the performance of official duties, never for personal gain or the benefit of any third party. Any breach of confidentiality shall result in immediate disciplinary action against the person concerned as defined by the Board of Commissioners;

2. INCHR’s officers shall be prudent in discussing sensitive information with other officers of the Commission or members of the public. There will normally be no reason to discuss sensitive matters with any officer who is not directly concerned or involved with the matter to which the information pertains;

3. No officer of the Commission shall influence the findings or outcome of any investigation. All information [research, findings, surveys, etc.] shall be factual;

4. An officer of the Commission shall not use privileged information gained in the course of his/her official duties:

a) In ways which are inconsistent with the officer’s obligation to act impartially;

b) To gain improper personal advantage or for any other reason.

5. Such use of information for improper advantage includes:

a. Releasing information on planned investigations or inquiries if knowledge beforehand to the public will undermine the successful conclusion of such investigation or report.

b. Exchanging confidential information with officers of other organizations, unless necessary and authorized in furtherance of official duty [necessary to achieve Commission’s priorities];

c. Taking advantage for personal reasons of a person(s) on the basis of information about such person(s) held by the INCHR;

d. Providing information from official records to any person outside the Commission for reasons not directly related to the work of the Commission.

3.4 Public Comment

1. The official spokesperson of the INCHR is the Chairperson or his/her designee. However, official comments on behalf of the Commission shall address an agreed agenda of the Commission. Hence, no Commissioner or officer of the Commission shall make official comment on matters relating to the affairs of the Commission without authorization. Media inquiries to the Commission shall be addressed to the Chairperson or his/her designee. However, comments about general principles of human rights which are factual are authorized. In such a case, the person making the statement must issue a disclaimer ‘’stating that the views expressed are his/hers and do not in any way represent the official position of the Commission”;

2. Although the INCHR seeks to be a public-focus institution, any other internal discussion about the INCHR’s work shall be confined to material that is in the public domain. This applies [only] to public reports and discussion papers, annual reports, public information material and public addresses;

3. Commissioners and officers as part of their duty to promote and protect human rights as such may make comments on general principles on human rights; however, caution shall be exercised in ensuring that their personal views are not construed as official position of the INCHR. The expression of personal views about the Commission’s work has a potential to adversely affect the Commission’s standing with the public, affect its reputation or the

exercise of its functions [in all situations, ask yourself: Is my position serving the best interest of the INCHR?]

3.5 Conflict of Interest

1. Consistent with Article XI(7), Officers or Commissioners shall declare an interest at the earliest opportunity in any matter under investigation or procurement in which any person who is the subject of such investigation or procurement is an associate, relative or friend as the case may be. Such declaration shall be made in a Board of Commissioners Meeting or in writing to the Chairperson within twenty-four hours of such knowledge coming to their attention;

2. If during the course of any duty (investigation, inquiry, monitoring) an officer/Commissioner encounters information which involves people, organizations or activities which the officer has a personal interest , such a fact must be reported promptly to the Executive Director in the case of Secretariat staff or Chairperson in the case of a Commissioner. A determination whether or not the party concerned continues with the activity must be made within 72 hours/3 working days.

Nature of such conflict:

a. An inquiry or investigation involving a familial relation, friend, associate or company which the party concerned had an interest;

b. An officer involvement with procurement [for personnel, services other than personnel] involving any relation stated in a) above.

c. An inquiry or investigation involving any of the relation stated in a) and b) above.

3.6 Public Resources:

1. There is an imperative to use all resources (human, financial, material) held by the Commission efficiently such that waste does not occur and in the best interest of the INCHR.

2. Procedures for the purchase of services other than personnel will be consistent with GoL’s laws governing the subject; particular emphasis must be placed on the Public Procurement Commission Act (PPCA) and its procurement manual;

3. A Commissioner or officer of the Commission shall not use any property belonging to the Commission for private purpose. However, reasonable use for private purpose is allowed provided that such use is infrequent, and does not interfere with the Commission’s work;

4. INCHR’s motor vehicles assigned are GoL property assigned to the Commission: their use must not contravene GoL policy relating to the use of Government-Owned Assets/Vehicles. There must be responsible use of GoL Vehicles at all times. The cost of repairs for damage resulting from the irresponsible handling of GoL Vehicle shall be the responsibility of the Commissioner or staff concern based on the determination of the Commission;

5. In the case the Chairperson authorizes INCHR’s assigned vehicles for private use; a fee must be paid for liberty mileage accrued. Only authorized INCHR personnel may drive its vehicles duly assigned.

3.7 Security

1. Security of information and premises is vital to the INCHR’s effectiveness and to the personal safety of its Commissioners and officers. All are obligated to personally contribute to an enhanced security environment.

2. All officers of the Commission shall endeavor to properly familiarize themselves with established procedures relating to the removal and proper destruction of confidential and sensitive documents. These include hardcopies and electronic copies of files.

3.8 Bribes, Gifts, Benefits, Travel and Hospitality

1. A Commissioner or officer of the Commission shall not solicit or accept any money, gift, benefit or hospitality from a member of the public except in accordance with the Code of Conduct Act;

2. Spouses, children or immediate dependents of the INCHR Commissioners and officers shall not accept any offer from any individual or organization that is the subject of an official complaint, report or investigation by the Commission;

3. INCHR’s Commissioners or officers will ensure that relations mentioned in 12.2 above are made aware of these requirements and their applicability to them.

3.9 Complaints and Disputes involving Commissioners and Officers

Commissioners:

1. A complaint made against a Commissioner or any dispute involving a Commissioner will be promptly reported to the Chairperson. If the Chairperson considers the complaint to be valid, he/she shall immediately convene a meeting with the Board of Commissioners, sitting as a body, to look into the complaint, with a view of resolving it,

as soon as possible. In an event a complaint or dispute involving a Commissioner is a grave misconduct, [beyond the control of the Commission], the Chairperson shall refer same to the President.

2. Disputes between Commissioners emanating from divergence of opinion on issues shall be referred to other Commissioners /colleagues [internally]. If dispute is not resolved internally, same shall be referred to the Civil Society including eminent citizens. As far as possible, disputes of this nature shall not come to the attention of the President. [Remember, a failure or inability to achieve internal cohesion disturbs your autonomy]

Officers of the Secretariat:

A complaint made against, or dispute involving any officer of the Secretariat will be reported immediately to the Executive Director. If the Executive Director considers the complaint or dispute valid, he/she must take administrative action that befit the conduct complained of. If the dispute concerns the Executive Director, the Vice-Chairperson along with other Commissioners shall investigate the allegation and make recommendation(s) befitting the conduct complained of to the Chairperson. 3.10 Conduct of investigation

A complaint or dispute brought to the attention of the Commission will be adjudicated in accordance with best practices: a person who is the subject of the complaint shall be informed of the complaint against him and be given the opportunity to respond to the Complaint. Particular attention shall be paid to the Civil Service Standing Order where the case warrants suspension or termination. 13.11 Discipline and Sanctions

1. Disciplinary action shall be taken against an officer who violates any provision of the INCHR’s Standard Operation Procedures and Code of Conduct;

2. Absolutely, any criminal activity concerning an officer shall be referred for prompt investigation to the Ministry of Justice;

3. The sanctions to be applied will depend upon the seriousness of the breach of conduct and may include:

a) Appropriate counseling

b) Record of behavior kept on Commissioner or official personnel file

c) Suspension without pay

d) Dismissal

4. An employee of the Commission who is found not guilty of an allegation for which he/she was temporarily suspended or terminated shall be reinstated with all entitlements. 3.12 Responsibilities of Officers who leave the Commission

1. Confidentiality obligation of every Commissioner or officer of the Commission goes beyond his/her tenure of employment and continues even after the end of his or her service with the Commission for a period of five years;

2. An officer or Commissioner who leaves the Commission shall not engage in any of the following:

a. Make public or otherwise use, any confidential knowledge or information gained as a result of his/her employment in the Commission;

b. Distribute, publish or release any confidential information about the Commission;

3. A Commissioner or officer who no longer works for the Commission shall return in timely manner any or all properties or documents of the Commission in their possession.

4. This Code of Conduct may be amended or modified from time to time based on the judgment of the Commission [if necessary to address the Commission’s needs].

PART IV

4.1 Administrative Structure of the INCHR

1. Theoretically, the INCHR is one institution with two distinct but collaborating components namely the Commission and the Secretariat. In this context, the Commission is comprised of the Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, five other Commissioners and their personal staff [assigned technical assistants, special aides, secretaries, and drivers]. The mandate of the Commission is policy formulation, direct representation of the INCHR to the Executive, Judiciary, Legislature, national, and international organizations.

2. The Secretariat comprises technical and administrative/ support staff other than those directly assigned with the Commissioners. The Secretariat headed by the Executive Director and assisted by Department heads/directors that provide day-to-day substantive technical and administrative support to the INCHR in furtherance of its (INCHR‘s) smooth operations.

3. Each Commissioner shall recommend his/her driver, Office Assistant and Technical Assistant for employment by the Commission. Although these personnel are directly supervised by their principal, they report through the Secretariat.

4. Consistent with Article XIII of the INCHR Act, the INCHR has five administrative departments:

a. Department of Administration and Budget

b. Department of Planning, Internal Monitoring and Evaluation;

c. Department of Complaints, Investigation and Monitoring;

d. Department of Legislative Assistance, Treaty Matters and Law;

e. Department of Education, Training and Information

4.2 Commissioners’ Oversight

1. Departmental Oversight: Commissioners shall exercise oversight over the five administrative departments of the INCHR. Ideally, thematic oversight is based on strong conceptual understanding of the subject matter being overseen. The INCHR’s five departments are managed daily by departmental heads under the supervision of the Executive Director. Operationally, the Department head liaises and consults with the Commissioner with the thematic oversight. Commissioners’ thematic oversight affords them the opportunity to be abreast of activities in the organization so that they can better communicate developments emanating from the INCHR to external peers.

2. Geographic Oversight: In order to keep abreast of the INCHR’s programs and activities in the fifteen counties, a Commissioner has geographic oversight. This ensures that a Commissioner in charge of a particular region is fluent with human rights issues and all the programs and activities managed irrespective of their thematic nature. This also represents an opportunity for the Commissioners to be fully engaged with departmental heads [build links between Commissioner and technical units].

3. Thematic Oversight: Based on emerging human rights themes, the Chairperson may assign Commissioners to exercise thematic oversight.

PART FIVE:

5.1 Procedure for External Communication:

1. Guiding Principle: External communications are to portray the best image of the sender/ Commission: the imperative to ask oneself, “is this in the best interest of the Commission?”

2. Purpose: This document sets to establish the required procedures and processes officers of the Commission (both employees and Commissioners) must follow when they intend to communicate with persons outside of the Commission.

3. Routine Official Correspondence:

a. Correspondence relating to day-to- day official matters of the Commission such as a reply to letters written to the Commission shall be written by the Executive Director on behalf of the Commission [discussing the contents of such correspondence with concerned department supervisor before writing ]

b. A clearance page with a clear trail shall be attached to a letter. This will enable concerned persons to a correspondence to give their approval. For example, an outbound correspondence (letter or memo) emanating from a department should have the signatures of the drafter, the supervisor of the department if the drafter is a person other than the supervisor.

c. An outbound letter that requires the signature of the vice chairperson shall be signed by the drafter, cleared by his/her supervisor, the Executive Director then finally approved by the vice chairperson.

d. An outbound correspondence originating from a department that requires the signature of the Chairperson shall be cleared by the drafter, the Executive Director, the department’s oversight Commissioner, the vice chairperson then finally approved by the chairperson [this process enables meeting of the minds, the opportunity to raise questions, or the possibility to make relevant modification]

4. Press Conferences:

a. Before a press conference is held, the contents of the substantive nature of the conference must be cleared by the Board of Commissioners.

b. If during the discourse (questions and answers), a response which does not represent the views of the board of Commissioners is made

or implied, a statement of correction shall be made by the person who made the statement.

c. As far as possible, there shall be no open rebuttal of statements or views expressed by a Commissioner in the media (newspaper, radio and new media/internet).

6.1 Procedures for Managing Disagreements Internally:

1. Guiding Principle: “It is good idea to seek external mediation; but note that the involvement of external actors in settling internal disputes undermines institutional autonomy”, hence, see the consequences of external mediation.

2. The work environment brings together persons from diverse backgrounds in many respects. Irrespective of any diversity [status, different values, beliefs, wishes, needs] there is an obvious imperative- ‘we ought to co-exist harmoniously’’. Consistent with this imperative, these simple procedures are drafted to serve as a guide which must be followed if a member of the Team has a grievance against another member of the Team or colleague.

6.2 Grievance Procedures for Secretariat Staff.

1. An employee who has a disagreement/dispute with a colleague shall first discuss same with the concerned colleague. If honest and frank discussion with said colleague fails, he/she shall report same to other colleagues in the Commission. [Complain to peers first].

2. If peers intervention fails to amicably settle the grievance, he/she shall report the grievance to a line supervisor. [A line supervisor who receives a complaint shall as far as possible try to settle the dispute between the parties]

3. If the grievance is not settled at the level of the line supervisor, then the line supervisor shall refer same to a department supervisor [a department supervisor shall make all honest effort to resolve the dispute in a way that promotes peace and mutual respect between the parties]

4. If all honest efforts are exhausted by the department supervisor but the parties are unwilling to reach a settlement, then he/she shall report same to the Executive Director [for Secretariat staff, the intervention of the Executive Director must concern an offense of a serious nature, which will require some disciplinary action]. Except the complaint will

result in termination, all disputes between Secretariat staff should not be reported beyond the Executive Director.

5. If the Executive Director determines that the dispute in question may warrant a termination, he/she shall report same to the Vice Chairperson or Chairperson.

6. A dispute between the Executive Director and another employee of the Secretariat shall be reported to the Vice Chairperson [who will meticulously handle the dispute in a way that accords fairness to the parties]

7. If the Vice Chairperson fails to resolve the dispute, he/she shall refer same to the Chairperson for a final determination.

8. A dispute between a staff and a Commissioner shall be referred to the vice chairperson.

9. A dispute between a staff and the vice chairperson shall be referred to the chairperson.

10. Dispute between a staff and the chairperson shall be referred to the board of Commissioners excluding the chairperson

6.3 Grievance Procedures for Commissioners:

1. A Commissioner who has a dispute/grievance with a fellow Commissioner shall discuss his grievance with said colleague [both must explore the beauty of a frank discussion]

2. If a frank discussion fails, the complainant shall report his/her grievance to other colleagues. Bear in mind [honest apologies are usually worth more than unbridled pride, listen to your friends’ position]

3. If other colleagues fail to settle amicably, a complaint shall be filed to the Vice Chairperson –where he/she is not the subject of the complaint [please choose to see the dividends of colleagues or peers judgment].

4. If the Vice chairperson fails to settle the dispute amicably, she/he shall refer the case to the Chairperson.

5. If the Chairperson is the subject of the complaint, the complaint shall be made to the board of Commissioners [six Commissioners excluding the chairperson]

6. If the board of six Commissioners fails to resolve the dispute, the dispute shall be referred to mediators from the civil society or eminent persons who the Commission reposed confidence in [bear in mind that any complaint from a commissioner against another Commissioner to

the Executive, Judiciary or Legislative undermines the Commission’s autonomy]

PART SEVEN:

7.1 Procedures for Receiving and Investigating Complaints:

Guiding Principle: One of the most important functions vested in a human rights Commission is to receive and investigate complaints from individuals (and occasionally, from groups) alleging human rights abuses committed in violation of existing national and international laws. [Refer to the Complaints Handling Manual of the INCHR] PART EIGHT

8.1 Standard Procedure for Hiring Personnel:

1. Purpose: This document seeks to establish procedures for hiring staff for the Independent National Commission on Human Rights. It describes in detail the steps and various forms that the Commission will use in conducting its employment. 3.Guiding Principle: A professional workplace requires personnel with requisite skills and attributes who can successfully perform the tasks required of them: ‘’the INCHR strongly espouses this basic principle and henceforth shall use same as its sole criterion for hiring personnel who wish to work for the Commission’’. 3.Objective: The objective of this section is to create a predictable and consistent policy for hiring personnel for the Commission in a manner that will engender transparency and professionalism in the Commission and greatly mitigate the likelihood of any incidence of conflict of interest in the employment of personnel.

I. Requisition for Job Search Approval

a. Approval to Commence Hiring Process

The hiring process is commenced by the Executive Director making a written request to the Board of Commissioners that a search be conducted for a person to fill a new or existing position of employment. Such a request is to be made by the head of department on a Job Search Request Form (INCHR Form 001) from the Human Resources Officer.

If the BOC approves a job search, then the Executive Director shall direct the HRO and the department requesting the staff to develop a concise job description for the position under consideration.

If the job search request relates to an existing position of employment and, after reviewing the most recent official job description for such position, the Executive Director is of the opinion that the job description does not need to be updated or otherwise revised, then he/she shall state that the position should be advertised as is.

If the job search request relates to an existing position of employment but the Executive Director is aware that the most recent job description for such position needs to be updated or otherwise revised, then he/she must either attach a written modification for the position.

If the job search request relates to a new position of employment, then the HRO must either (a) attach a proposed draft job description for the position, or (b) state the proposed job title, major duties and responsibilities, and supervisor of the proposed position.

II. Verification for Availability of Funds:

The HRO shall liaise with the finance office to verify the availability of funds. No position shall be advertised without verifying that there is sufficient fund available to pay for the duration of the position.

III. Development of Job Description

Prior to the formal announcement and advertisement of the vacancy, the HRO shall develop a complete and accurate job description for the position, which shall contain at least the following: (a) duties and responsibilities of the job; (b) required education and work experience; and (c) all other special qualifications or requirements of the job.

The Human Resources Officer shall finalize a job description for the position, and send a copy of the job description to the relevant department to be reviewed and finalized.

IV. Vacancy Announcement

The Human Resources Officer shall develop a written vacancy announcement and advertisement for the position. The vacancy announcement and advertisement shall include a desired profile for the person to occupy the position. However, nothing within such profile, or the remainder of the announcement or advertisement, shall be inconsistent with the existing or developed official job description for the position. The vacancy announcement and advertisement may specify the salary range for the position to be filled. Further, the advertisement shall state that “the Commission is an equal opportunity employer” and the following:

• It is the official policy of the Commission that no person shall, on the grounds of disability/handicap, gender, religion, creed, ethnic background political affiliation, or age, be excluded from participation, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program, activity, or employment. The Commission will make reasonable accommodations for qualified disabled applicants or employees.

• Optional: Give notice that the Commission reserves the right to withdraw this job announcement at any time prior to the awarding.

• The Human Resources Officer shall finalize a vacancy announcement and advertisement for the position, and send a copy thereof to the Executive Director and the requesting department.

V. Recruitment of Applicants

The Commission shall seek to procure applications from all interested, qualified persons.

Within five (5) working days after the Commission grants final approval for the job search, the Human Resources Officer shall advertise the vacancy with at least two newspapers with the highest readership, radio announcements and on the internet especially the INCHR and Executive Mansion website. As far as possible a vacancy advertisement shall be published in time to give interested persons a reasonable opportunity to respond to it. All positions are advertised for at least a minimum of two (2) weeks.

1. Formation of Search Committee

2. Procedure for Appointing Committee Members

A search committee shall comprise of three or five persons. If there are a very large number of applicants for a vacancy, or special circumstances exist, the Commission may increase the number of search committee members to five. The search committee members shall be selected as follows:

• The Commission shall appoint a person on the search committee for his/her expertise in the subject matter under consideration.

• The Commission shall ensure that persons so appointed on the search committee represent a diversity of stakeholders, namely a representative of the requesting department; a representative from

partner institutions and a representative from the Human Resource Office.

• The process begins with the director/supervisor of the employment position suggesting names for the search committee to the Executive Director.

• The Executive Director and Human Resources Officer discuss and finalize recommendations for search committee member appointments.

• The recommendations of the Executive Director and Human Resources Officer are to be forwarded to the BOC [via a memo].

• The Commission will then review the recommendations and appoint the chair [preferably the director/supervisor of the employment position] and members.

In case that an appointed search committee member cannot serve on a search committee, then the Human Resources Officer should be notified, and the Commission may replace that committee member.

3. APPLICATION PROCESS

The Human Resources Office shall make available application forms and clear instructions in furtherance of a smooth application process.

4. Application Deadline

All completed application materials must be received by the Human Resources Office, as applicable, by the deadline stated in the vacancy announcement and/or in the application instructions.

The deadline shall be uniformly applied to all applicants. Thus, no application materials received after the stated deadline will be considered unless the Commission extends the deadline (in which case all applications received by the new, extended deadline will be considered). A completed application package will consist of all the required documents listed in the solicitation as stated in the vacancy announcement or application instruction.

5. Receipt of Applications

The Human Resources Office shall promptly date-stamp all application materials received, so as to enable enforcement of the application deadline.

6. Communications with Applicants

The search committee through its chair shall promptly contact successful applicants to keep them abreast of their applications status. All members of

the search committee are required to maintain the committee’s work as confidential; as such they are precluded from passing on any unauthorized information to an applicant or others.

7. Search Committee Screening of Applicants

All timely and complete applications for a position advertised shall be screened by the search committee. The committee shall shortlist a maximum of five qualified applicants for each vacancy and recommends at least three applicants to the Commission (unless there are fewer than five qualified applicants, in which case all qualified applicants shall be submitted to the Commission).

The search committee's recommendations shall be ranked and shall be listed in alphabetical order by last name.

i. Preparations for Interview Committee’s Work

The Interview Committee shall comprise three or five persons to include the Oversight Commissioner or Director/supervisor of the relevant department/unit, a subject matter specialist, external partner and the Executive Director. The Interview Committee shall develop Standardized Interview Questions which it may refine by adding additional questions more specific to the relevant employment position. The Interview Committee shall reflect gender balance.

The Committee shall develop Guidelines for Interviewing Job Applicants. This document provides to the Interview Committee members guidance as to how to avoid natural follow-up questions or remarks made after a job applicant answers a standardized interview question - which are or may be considered discriminatory in nature (that is, based upon an applicant’s, sex, age, religion, regional origin, or disability).

ii. Testing

All technical positions in the Commission are subject to skill testing. Hence, interview committee will conduct necessary testing and evaluate the results. The testing results shall constitute part of the evaluation report.

iii. Secure Maintenance of Records

All applications received by the Commission shall, prior to, during and after the selection process, be maintained securely and confidentially by the Human Resources Officer in the Human Resources Office.

iv. When and how the Committee performs its Work

(1) Advance Examination of Applications

Once applications deadline expires, the Human Resources Officer shall make copies of the received applications available, in a secure or supervised setting, for inspection by individual search committee members.

Such viewing shall be under circumstances and guidelines established by the Commission, so that confidentiality and security of materials is appropriately maintained and the operations of the Human Resource Office are not rendered unduly inefficient.

(2) Initial Committee Meeting

(a) Committee Orientation

The initial search committee meeting shall be scheduled by the Human Resources Officer for a date not later than five (5) working days after the application deadline.

Untimely applications (those which were not received and completed by the application deadline) will be retained in the Human Resources Office. If, during its work, the search committee discovers that an application submitted to it is incomplete, then such application will be returned to the Human Resources Office and will receive no further consideration by the committee.

The Department of Administration will draft an evaluation instrument. The committee will, in consultation with the Human Resources Officer, refine or otherwise modify the instrument to the extent it deems necessary or appropriate, based upon the minimum qualifications for the position and subject to approval by the BOC.

(3) Additional Committee Meetings

(a) Evaluating Applicants

If more than ten (10) applications are received from persons who meet minimum qualifications, the HRO, in conjunction with the Search Committee, has the option of conducting a preliminary screening of these applicants to determine a “reasonable number” for interviews. This “reasonable number” cannot be less than five, and the Committee’s participation in the preliminary screening cannot be delegated to anyone else.

As part of the evaluation process, the search committee will satisfy itself that the persons invited for interview possess the relevant education. This will be accomplished by the committee, or members thereof, reviewing the transcripts included within the application materials submitted.

If work experience is a requirement listed in the vacancy advertisement, then as part of the evaluation process, the search committee shall also verify applicants’ work experience by telephoning employers. All work experience verification must be documented, by recording the dates and times of telephone calls, who called, the name of the relevant applicants, and the names of the persons who verified the information.

The work experience verification described in this paragraph will be conducted, at the committee’s discretion, with respect to: (1) all minimally qualified applicants; (2) all persons invited to an interview; (3) all persons who appear for interview; or, (4) applicants being recommended as finalists.

If an applicant refuses to permit his or her experience to be verified, then the applicant will not be given further consideration for employment.

The interview committee shall, during the evaluation process, use scoring instruments and methodologies.

The search committee should make its decisions as to which minimally qualified applicants should be invited for interview soon enough to enable the interviews to be conducted commencing on or before the thirtieth (30th) day after the application deadline.

The search committee shall submit to the Human Resources Officer two alphabetical listings: (1) the applicants to be invited to the Commission for an interview, and (2) the applicants not to be interviewed, stating the reason why each person is on the applicable list.

(b) Interviewing Applicant

Once the Search Committee concludes a list of persons who meet minimum qualification for the position, the interview committee shall proceed with interviewing the applicants.

The Human Resource Officer will then contact the approved applicants inviting them to be interviewed and to schedule the interviews and inform them of the date, time, and location of the interview.

The interview committee members shall conduct the interviews in a manner which is consistent with the Guidelines for Interviewing Job Applicants (included as part of the Committee Orientation Package).

(c) Using Standard Interview Questions

The questions (other than follow-up questions) posed during the interviews will be only those questions approved. Committee members should take an

active part in all phases of the interview process. Interview questions must be approved, in advance by Administration.

(d) Selecting Finalists

After the interviews are conducted, the interview committee will further evaluate the applicants. The committee will also check appropriate references of the finalists. The applicants who are chosen as finalists are to be informed of their status as finalists by the Human Resources Officer.

g. Offer of Employment

i. Making the Informal Offer of Employment

The Human Resources Officer / Executive Director shall make the informal employment offer to the selected finalist. The Human Resources Officer shall notify the relevant department and the Commission selected finalist’s response to the informal employment offer.

After an informal (and/or formal) offer of employment is accepted by a recommended candidate, all other finalists will be notified by the Human Resources Officer that the position has been filled.

If a selected finalist does not accept an informal (or formal) offer of employment, then the Commission may offer one of the other finalists the position or take other appropriate action.

ii. Determining Appropriate Rate of Compensation

The Commission through the Human Resources Officer and the Search Committee shall determine the annual salary for the selected employee based on the INCHR Salary scale/schedule which takes into cognizance position, education, experience mainly taking into consideration his/her specific importance to the institution, pay history, relevant trainings, etc. and determine the appropriate rate of compensation to be offered and paid to the selected finalist.

iii. Making the Formal Offer of Employment

The Executive Director shall prepare a letter of employment offer (and/or fixed-term employment contract) based on salary information provided to them by the Human Resources Office, for the Chairperson’s approval, as well as the selected finalist’s signature.

If the formal offer of employment is accepted through proper signature, then the Human Resources Office shall schedule a new employee orientation,

coordinate the completion of necessary paperwork, and create a new employee file.

APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS THROUGH ITS RESOLUTION #06172016 ADOPTED ON 17TH JUNE 2016 IN THE CITY OF MONROVIA – REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA.

STATEMENT of COMPLIANCE with THE PARIS PRINCIPLES of THE

[INDEPENDENT NATIONAL COMMISSION on HUMAN RIGHTS

(INCHR)]

December 18, 2016

1. Establishment:

The Independent National Commission on Human Rights (INCHR) was formally

established by an Act of the National Legislature of the Republic of Liberia on

September 9, 2005, as a national human rights institution responsible for the

protection and promotion of human rights in Liberia. Although not a constitutional

Commission, Chapter III of the Liberian Constitution captioned Fundamental Rights

is devoted to the protection of universal human rights of all Liberians and residents

of Liberia. Consistent with Article II (2) of the INCHR Act, by operation of law, the

INCHR has a mandate to establish and maintain regional and county offices in such

number as it may deem necessary within the Republic of Liberia and close and

terminate any of them, and thereafter reopen and reactivate them according to its

requirement. In fulfilment of this provision, the INCHR is headquartered in

Monrovia and has deployed Human Rights Monitors across Liberia. Below is the

full list of INCHR presence across Liberia:

County Location of Office Number of Staff

Montserrado

County

Monrovia

(Headquarter)

7 commissioners, 1 Executive

Director, 5 Department heads, 7

human rights monitors, 1 human

rights investigator, and several other

technical and support staff

Margibi County Kakata 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Bong County Gbarnga 2 County Human Rights Monitors

Lofa County Voinjama 2 County Human Rights Monitors

Bomi County Tubmanburg 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Grand Cape

County

Robertsport, Tienne 2 County Human Rights

Monitor/Education Officer

Gbarpolu County Bopolu 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Grand Bassa

County

Buchanan 1 County Human Rights Monitor

River Cess County Cestos City 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Sinoe County Greenville 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Grand Kru County Barclayville 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Maryland County Harper 1 County Human Rights Monitor

River Gee County Fish –Town 1 County Human Rights Monitor

Grand Gehed

County

Zwedru 2 County Human Rights Monitors

Nimba County Saniquellie 2 County Human Rights Monitors

2. Independence:

The INCHR is an autonomous state institution which enjoys enormous

independence: its Board of Commissioners and staffs are not under the control of

any branch of government, instead, their day to day work is defined by the powers

that are conferred on them by the Act. According to Article XIX(9) , “as a policy

to ensure accountability, the Commission shall submit detailed quarterly and

annual reports on its activities and programs to the Legislature, the Judiciary and

the Executive Branches of Government. The reports shall also be accessible to the

public and the international community.” In addition, the Commissioners and other

requisite staffs of the Commission have unhindered access to prison and other

facilities throughout the country without any prior notice or request from officials.

Although funded by the government the INCHR works completely independent

and void of interference of the government.

3. Composition, Appointment Process, Tenure:

3.1 Composition

The BOC of the INCHR is comprised of persons with diverse backgrounds including

sex (4 males, 2 females), professional pursuits, geographic origin or ethnicity. As

clearly stated in Article IX (6) of the INCHR Act, “the composition of the

commissioners thereby appointed shall reflect, the extent possible, the pluralist

nature of Liberian society in terms of sex, ethnicity, language, and religion and shall

also have the representation of nongovernmental organizations or professional

associations involved in the protection and promotion of human rights, or such

bodies as universities, the legislature, and other civil society group.” Regarding

nomination for membership on the Commission, consistent with Article IX (3) the

President of Liberia shall consider only such persons for the purpose of appointment

for the position of chairperson or commissioners who are on the list of persons

recommended for this purpose by an Independent Committee of Experts formed by

the Chief Justice of the Republic of Liberia in consultation with the civil society

organizations. Article/IX (3), is the guiding principle for the nomination of

Commissioners fn the INCHR.

According to the INCHR Act, Articles IX (1), XIII (1), the following positions are

listed:

• Chairperson

• Six Commissioners including a Vice Chairperson

• The Executive Director, and five Departments namely, The Department of

Administration and Budget, The Department of Planning, Internal Monitoring

and Evaluation, The Department of Complaints, Investigation and Monitoring,

The Department of Legislative Assistance, Treaty Matters and Law, and The

Department of Education, Training and Information

• To date, the following positions are filled by the following:

Name Sex Position

Chairperson (vacant at the moment)

Rev. Bartholomew B.

Colley

Male Vice and Acting Chairperson

Mr. Adolphus S. Wade Male Oversight Commissioner, Dept.

of Administration and Budget

Mr. Wilfred N. Gray-

Johnson

Male Oversight Commissioner, Dept. of

Planning, Internal Monitoring and

Evaluation

Atty. Oretha Snyder-

Davis

Female Oversight Commissioner, Dept. of

Complaints,

Investigation and Monitoring

Mrs. Tonieh A. Talery-

Wiles

Female Oversight Commissioner, Dept. of

Legislative Assistance, Treaty

Matters and Law

Mr. James Torh Male Oversight Commissioner, Dept. of

Education, Training and

Information

Mr. Herron Gbidi Male Executive Director

Mr. Abudul Hamid

Kiawen

Male Director, Dept. of Administration

and Budget

Mr. Orando Nyanquoi Male Director, Dept. of Education,

Training and Information

Mr. Nathaniel Solo Male Director, Department of Legislative

Assistance, Treaty Matters and Law

Miss. Christo Gorpudolo Female Coordinator Complaints Monitoring

and Investigation

Mr. Bah-Wah brownell Male Program Officer / Acting Director

Department for Planning, Internal

Monitoring and Evaluation

At present, due to budgetary constraints, two Departments namely the Departments

of Internal Monitoring and Evaluation; Complaints, and Investigation and

Monitoring do not have directors, but are staffed with technical officers who assist

the Commission to fulfil these roles in a significant manner. The Commission as of

November 2016 has a total of 89 staff including 6 Commissioners, 44 regular staff,

34 short term contract staff and a project management unit overseeing the national

palava hut project with 5 staff. Thus there are a total of 87 staffs on the government

payroll.

3.2 Selection and Appointment through a vetting process

The INCHR Act, Article (XX) adequately defines the selection and appointment

criteria which are meticulously adhered to, and forms the bases for selection and

appointment of commissioners. Apart from the Act, the Panel of Experts consults

human rights professionals especially those from the United Nations System and

other international organizations who have human rights focus for guidance to

ensure international best practices are referenced during the selection and

appointment. Regarding transparency, there is adequate publicity about vacant

positions and names of shortlisted candidates are published in several national

dailies for public scrutiny before such names are submitted to the President for

nomination. Although the Act does not have a Black Letter Law definition of

transparency, publicity, broad consultation, openness with respect to the

appointment and selection procedures of commissioners, in practice, the selection

and appointment is replete with transparency, publicity, broad consultation and

openness. Diverse stakeholders including civil society, the Legislature, professional

bodies, and the Judiciary play critical roles in the selection and appointment process.

In addition, philosophical or religious thoughts, and persuasions from diverse groups

also play a significant role in the vetting and confirmation processes of

commissioners and some commissioners are derived from those organizations. For

instance, the commissioners are selected based on an open and transparent vetting

system headed by a panel of experts which is primarily a configuration of civil

society representatives, professional bodies such as the Liberia National Bar

Association, representatives from academia (universities and colleges), Youths

represented by the Federation of Liberian Youths, and women organizations. The

Independent Committee of Experts (ICE) forward list of selected candidates who

meet the selection criteria to the President for nomination to the Liberian Senate (an

Upper House of Legislature) may confirm or deny a nominated candidate.

Representatives from Government departments are not represented on the INCHR

and do not form part of the Commission’s day-to-day work. Although, not explicitly

stated in the Act, representation from indigenous, persons with disabilities or

religious minority are emphasized in the vacancy announcements for

commissioners.

3.3 Guarantee of Tenure

Article XV (1-4) defines the tenure for INCHR commissioners, specifically, Article

XV (1), the tenure for the Chairperson is six years and that of the six other

Commissioners is five years. The Executive Director also has five year tenure. Per

the Act, Commissioners are full-time employees, hence, they are precluded to take

up any other employment, additionally, Article XV (4) is emphatic on this subject:

a commissioner shall not hold any position incompatible with the proper

performance of his/her official duties. Within ten (10) days following his or her

appointment and before taking office, he or she must resign from any position

incompatible within this section or with the office of Commission; otherwise the

nominated person is barred from accepting the appointment.

With respect to the remuneration for commissioners, Article XIX addresses Funding,

of the Commission. Article XIX (1) stipulates that “In order to enhance the

operational efficiency and independence of the Commission, the Government of

Liberia shall ensure its adequate resources to the Commission following

consultations with the Legislature, Director General of the Budget and the

Commission.

The chairperson and commissioners hold a secure tenure for six and five years

respectively. However, if a strong reason for replacement or dismissal is anticipated,

Article XIX (1-2) sets the basis for replacement or dismissal of a commissioner. To

date, no commissioner has been dismissed. The present commissioners were

appointed and started work in March 2016, while the Chairperson, retired at the end

of September 2016. There is no advisor body who serve along with the members of

the Commission, but the Commission maintains good working relationship with

other stakeholders such as the Interfaith Council of Liberia, the National Civil

Society Council, the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission, The Carter Center,

amongst other in furtherance of protecting and promoting human rights.

4. Organizational Infrastructure:

4.1 Infrastructure

The INCHR is comprised of the Board of Commissioners (BOC) (the chairperson,

vice chairperson, and five commissioners who have thematic oversights). The

Executive Director, as Head of the Secretariat is the Secretary to the BOC. The day

to day technical operations of the Commission are executed by directors who are

supervised by the Executive Director whilst the BOC focuses on policy formulation.

Below is the Commission’s realized organogram reflecting current filled positions

as well as anticipated positions. Filled positions are marked blue whilst those

envisaged but not yet filled are marked yellow: the commission receives funds from

Government to pay special allowances of its commissioners, secretariat’s technical

or support staff, goods and services and for the Commission’s facilities.

Although much is desired for the full establishment of the Commission, its Act is

written with keen emphasis on provisions that allow it to fully fulfil its mandate; this

includes the provisions for adequate financial resources for personnel and facilities

that ensures a strong national presence.

INCHR Organizational Chart:

4.2 Staffing

The INCHR is an autonomous independent state institution which enjoys broad

powers to hire staff based on its requirements; hence, staffs are hired solely on

selection criteria established by the Commission’s Standard Operating Procedures

set by the BOC in keeping with international best practices such as equal opportunity

for all, competition, and transparency. Apart from the availability of funds, the

Commission is not limited by any restriction imposed on it when it comes to

employment. There are presently two interns on secondment with Commission from

the Liberia Peacebuilding Office, and the Public Procurement Commission; the rest

of the staffs working for the Commission are either full employees or contractors

hired by the Commission. From Commissioners to Secretariat’s technical or support

staff, there is strong reflection of pluralism including backgrounds, gender, ethnicity

and religion.

4.3 Premises (accessibility)

The INCHR headquarters is located on the main boulevard in Congo Town,

Monrovia. The Commission is housed in a two- storey building well situated for

prompt services to the public. The building has enough offices for the BOC, the

Secretariat’s five departments as well as a sizeable conference room. The

Commission has deployed monitors in all the fifteen counties of Liberia and

envisages opening five regional offices and staffing same with coordinators to

coordinate 10 county offices also being established. The INCHR is people focused

organization, hence, members of the public who wish to utilize the services of the

Commission do not have to undergo any formality: all that is required is to make a

telephone call or appear in person to speak to officers of the Commission. The

building housing the Commission’s principal offices was not specifically designed

for the Commission: so there was no special consideration to cater for persons with

disability, however, our staffs have been trained to assist disabled persons who

intend to visit the Commission. In addition the Department of Complaints

Monitoring and Investigation is on the ground floor for easy access to persons with

disabilities.

4.4 Budget

The Commission’s budget is informed by the Revenue Expenditure ceiling set by

the Department of Budget, Ministry of Finance & Development Planning based on

the GoL Annual Expenditure Plan. Based on the advice and technical guidance from

the Department of Revenue aforementioned, the Commission’s Budget Committee

then consults all departments and advises them to structure their planned

expenditures in accordance with the set budget ceiling. The Board of

Commissioners then reviews the budget and submits same to the Ministry of Finance

and Development Planning which then reviews, makes adjustments and finally

submits it/budget to the Legislature for approval. The Government of Liberia

allocated from its Fiscal Budget a total of US$7,130,916.00 over the last five years

2010 – 2016, while it is projected that for the period 2016 – 2021 the Government

will contribute US$8,117,700.00 which constitutes at least 55.8% of the

US$14,838,740 million projected for the operations and programs of the

Commissioner for the next five years as detailed in the chapter on costing and

resource mobilization plan in the INCHR Strategic Plan. This estimate contribution

from the Government is based on actuals over the last five years – but depends,

however on actual revenue intake. The INCHR, like any other GoL institution is

subject to all budget formalities prescribed by the Public Financial Management Law

of Liberia.

After allocation, the Commission takes control over the management and

expenditure of its allocated budget consistent with Public Financial Management

Law, i.e. expenditure of budget lines are spent per the budget contents (lines for

wages are spent for wages only). To date, 100% of the Commission’s core budget

comes from the GoL, however, donors such as the UNDP and United Nations

Mission in Liberia, Human Rights Section regularly support the Commission

financially. UNDP with funding from the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund

(UNPBF) is supporting the Project Management Unit/PMU which is managing ‘the

Community-Based Truth Telling and Atonement Project (the Palava Hut Project).

This project is on the transitional justice initiative that was recommended by the

erstwhile Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) aimed at addressing minor

offenses that were committed during Liberia’s Civil War using traditional conflict

resolution mechanisms.

5. Working Method

The Commission has developed and adopted internal regulations including a staff

hand book with code of conduct, standard operating procedures for internal and

external communication, a personnel manual with terms of reference and jobs

descriptions for each position of the INHCR including future posts, financial policy

and manual as well and procurement policy and petty cash policy. The Commission

has also developed and applies procedures for investigating complaints, and has

developed its five year strategic plan. The Commission’s first three year strategic

plan expired in May, 2015 and a second strategic plan has been concluded and will

come into force effective August 1, 2016. Overall, the strategic plan defines the

Commission’s overarching objectives, emerging challenges in the protection and

promotion of human rights, constraints and yearly financial requirements.

5.1 Regular Meetings

The INCHR’s meetings are scheduled, called or general staff meeting. Scheduled

meetings are normally twice monthly for the BOC as provided for in Article XI (2),

while called meetings are held based on exigencies, and General staff meetings are

held to apprise secretariat staff and commissioners alike of emerging trends that the

Commission wishes to address. The BOC meetings are informed by a formal agenda

and decisions are reached based on a consensus. Additionally, decisions are

expressed in a resolution that is signed by at least four of the seven commissioners.

5.2 Working Groups

The Commission has established working groups on protection, harmful traditional

practices, and child labour and transitional justice. The table below explains their

mandates, composition, and working methods:

Name of

Working

Group

Mandates Composition Working

Method

Protection • To identify trends

of vulnerability and

provide plausible

scenarios to

mitigate the

identified

vulnerability

• To regularly liaise

with GoL ministries

and agencies

including INGOs to

highlight triggers of

vulnerability

Chair/ex-officio, Civil

Society Council of

Liberia, Oversight

Commissioner for

Monitoring and

Investigations, Executive

Director, Director of

Education and

Information

Meet once a

month

(last

Thursday) or

as required to

share

information

and take

corrective

actions

Harmful

Traditional

Practices

(HTPs)

• To strategize and

raise awareness that

will reduce the

frequency of HTPs

such as FGM, Trial

The Commission,

Ministry of Internal

Affairs, Ministry of

Information, Culture

Affairs and Tourism,

Ministry of Gender

Regular

meetings and

awareness

raising on

HTPs

reduction

by ordeal which are

commonplace in

rural Liberia

• Build congenial

relationship with

traditional leaders

to ensure that they

inculcate human

rights in their

traditional practices

Children & Social

Protection, Ministry of

Justice, Interfaith

Council of Liberia,

National Traditional

Council of Liberia, CSO,

Liberia Peace

Ambassador, The Carter

Center, Catholic Justice

and Peace Commission

Women and

Child

Rights

(Child

Labour)

• Identifies specific

issues of women

and children rights;

• Work with diverse

stakeholders

including local

authorities to raise

awareness on the

negative

consequences of

child labour

• Engage in

prevention

initiatives such as

influencing

legislations that

outlaw and punish

exploitation of

children

The Commission, the

Ministry of Labour,

Ministry of Education,

Liberia National Police,

the Ministry of Justice,

Ministry of Gender

Children & Social

Protection, MIA,

Traditional Council,

Women NGO Secretariat

of Liberia, and key

NGOs and INGOs

Regular

meetings to

highlight the

harmful

issues related

to women

and children

rights as well

as

consequences

of child

labour

Transitional

Justice

• Work with key

national institutions

and CSOs to

discusses

transitions justice

issues as articulated

in the Truth and

Reconciliation

Commission Report

The Commission, MIA,

PBO, Liberia Peace

Ambassador, CSOs

working on transitional

justice issues, key

ministries, agencies and

commission of

government

Hold

quarterly

meetings

(TRC) and

Reconciliation

Roadmap and

Agenda for

Transformation to

decipher concrete

and practical

actions for the

implementation of

thematic areas and

recommendations

• Discuss draft report

on the TRC

recommendations

for submission to

the President of

Liberia

implementing TRC

recommendations

6. General Competence and Responsibilities:

The Commission’s competence and responsibilities as enshrined in Article III o fthe

Act establishing the Commission captioned “Powers of the Commission:” The

Commission shall have general competence to protect and promote human rights in

the Republic of Liberia according to the provisions of its Act, the Constitution of

the Republic of Liberia, especially Chp. III and other relevant laws of Liberia. Its

competence and responsibilities are detailed in Article III (1-17). Amongst its salient

powers are:

• To take up any situation of violation of human rights, which it may deem

necessary, for necessary action according to its Act;

• To hear and consider complaints and petitions concerning human rights

violations brought before it by victims, their representatives, third parties, non-

governmental organizations, association of trade unions or any other

representative organizations;

• To submit to the Government, Senate and any other competent body, on an

advisory basis, either at the request of the authorities concerned or on its own

motion, opinions, recommendations, proposals and reports on any matters

concerning the protection and promotion of human rights;

• To examine the legislative and administrative provisions in force, as well as

bills and proposals and make such recommendations as it deems appropriate in

order to ensure that these provisions conform to the international human rights

standards or instruments. The Commission shall, as it deems appropriate,

recommend the adoption of new legislation, the amendment of legislation in

force or both, and the adoption or amendment of administrative measures;

• To draw the attention of the Government human rights violations in any part of

the country and make proposals to it for initiatives to put an end to such

situations and, where necessary, to express an opinion on the actions of

Government in response to such violations;

• To promote and ensure the harmonization of national legislation, regulations

and practices with the international human rights instruments to which the

Republic of Liberia is a State party, and their effective implementation;

• To encourage ratification of these instruments which the Republic of Liberia

has not yet ratified, or accession to those instruments, and to promote their

implementation by the Government;

• To cooperate with the United Nations and any agency in the United Nations

system or related to the United Nations System, the African Commission on

Human and Peoples’ Rights, other regional institutions and the national

institutions of other countries which are competent in the areas of the protection

and promotion of human rights;

• To assist in the formulation of programs for the teaching of, and research into,

human rights and to take part in their execution in schools, universities and

professional circles.

Consistent with its Article III (3a), the INCHR is authorized and empowered to act

on a complaint filed by a victim, on behalf of a victim or suo moto (based on the

Commission’s own initiative). A concrete example of how the Commission fulfils

this function: the Commission sometimes declines to participate on taskforces or

committees that are established by the Government to investigate a given human

rights situation, instead, it relies on its authority to investigate on its own initiative

as provided for by Article III (3a).

6.1 Mandate to Promote and Protect Human Rights

The INCHR Act empowers the Commission to be the premier human rights

institution in Liberia. With this mandate, the INCHR sees itself as the lead

protection, promotion, and advocacy body with both a national as well as an

international mandate. There are several legal provisions that vest the Commission

with this function including Articles I which succinctly reads “There is hereby

established the independent national human rights institution named and styled the

Independent National Commission on Human Rights as the independent and non-

political national human rights institution of the Republic of Liberia.” Its powers,

functions, method of operation, immunities/privileges, composition, and terms of

reference amongst others are defined by law/the Act.

In practice, the INCHR carries out this function by regularly ceasing itself to address

human rights issues in Liberia: this includes the Commission’s stance on its

independence, impartiality and integrity coupled with its thoroughness to investigate

and publish its findings if need be. Regarding the Commission’s authority to make

recommendations, there are several initiatives:

• The Commission’s recommendations to the Constitutional Review Committee

which is attached to this document;

• The Commission’s advisory position to the Liberian Parliament against the

infamous Proposition “24”, the Proposition which calls to declare Liberia a

Christian State;

• The Commission’s advisory position to the Parliament on the Amended

Domestic Violence Bill which seeks to decriminalize FGM, contrary to the

original Bill which criminalizes FGM;

• Advisory to the Government on the State of Emergency during the Ebola crisis

Regarding advocacy thus undertaken by the Commission to harmonize Liberia’s

laws and practices, the Commission in consultation with civil society organizations

is campaigning for the elimination of the death penalty in furtherance of

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Optional Protocol II.

Additionally, the Commission has openly supported the United Nations Security

Council Resolution that imposes a travel ban and asset freeze on several persons in

Liberia.

6.2 Advisory Functions

Article IV(3) of its Act confers on the Commission powers to submit to the

Government, Senate,and any other competent body, on an advisory basis, either at

the request of the authorities concerned or on its own motion, opinions,

recommendations, proposals, and reports on any matters concerning the protection

and promotion of human rights.

6.2.1 Functions Regarding National Legislation

Article IV(4) empowers the Commission to examine legislative and administrative

provisions in force, as well as bills and proposals, and make such recommendations

as it deems appropriate in order to ensure that these provisions conform to the

international human rights standards or instruments. The Commission shall, as it

deems appropriate, recommend the adoption of new legislation, the amendment of

legislation in force, or both, and the adoption or amendment of administrative

measures. In practice, the Commission, reviews legislations to ensure their

compliance with international standards consistent with Liberia’s obligations. This

implies that the Commission consults with the Legislature, raises awareness with

keen emphasis on the State’s obligations to uphold international human rights

standards. With respect to the Commission’s stance on recommendations and

administrative provisions, please see initiatives listed in 6.1 above.

6.2.2 Encouraging Ratification and Implementation of International

Standards

The INCHR regularly engages with the Legislature and the Executive to ensure that

Liberia goes beyond merely signing up to international human rights instruments but

to take necessary steps to domesticate those instruments in Liberia national laws. In

the Annual Report for 2015, the INCHR called for the domestication of a few

legislations including: Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the

Child (CRC), and AU Protocol on the Rights of Women, and for the printing into

handbills and publication of the Act enacted by the National Legislature on the use

of the White Cane to safe guide the rights of the Blind. INCHR also encouraged the

government to deposit with the headquarters of the World Intellectual Property

Organization (WIPO) the MARRAKESH Treaty ratified by the government of

Liberia in 2016. In furtherance of this, the Commission has compiled a full list of

international treaties that Liberia has signed or acceded to the Senate’s Committee

on International Relations for their consideration. The Commission’s Department of

Legislative Assistance, Treaty Matters and Law is in a constant dialogue with the

Legislature, the Law Reform Commission and the Ministry of Justice for their

necessary actions so that those laws can be domesticated.

6.3 Monitoring Function

Article III (4d) vests in the Commission, the powers to monitor the general situation

of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights of the citizens and residents

of the Republic of Liberia; while III (4e) empowers the Commission free unfettered

on-site inspections and investigations, if necessary without the prior consent of the

concerned authority, including powers to visit all civil, military and para-military

places of detention in the Republic of Liberia. On a day-to -day basis with keen

emphasis on the work of the judiciary, the prisons, law enforcement and economic

social and cultural rights including the right to education, health etc., the

Commission primarily fulfils its human rights monitoring role by field visits. Field

monitors gather the aggregate human rights situation in their assigned counties and

report same to the monitors’ coordinator who is situated in the Monrovia head office.

The Commission also gathers information from media sources and from other

human rights organizations that are working across Liberia. As far as possible, the

Commission vigorously monitors Government authorities compliance with its

advice and recommendations: its recommendations on the West Point Shooting

Incident (during the zenith of the Ebola pandemic in Liberia) and the Golden

Veroleum Concession Company (GVL) in Butaw Riot in Sinoe County, have been

thoroughly followed, thus ensuring the Government full compliance with the

Commission’s recommendations (victims of the West Point Shooting Incident

received compensation from the Government).

6.3.1 Investigation

Not Applicable: consistent with Article VI (2,3,4) The Commission has quasi-

judicial powers which it can exercise through a court as stated below:

The Commission shall have the power to require any person, subject to any privilege

which may be claimed by that person under any law for the time being in force, to

furnish information on such points or matters as, in the opinion of the Commission,

may be useful for, or relevant to, the subject matter of the inquiry or investigation

and any person so required shall be deemed to be legally bound to furnish such

information subject to the criminal law of Liberia; 3) the Commission or any officer

authorized by the Commission on its behalf may enter any building or place where

the Commission has reason to believe that any physical evidence or document

relating to the subject matter of the inquiry or investigation may be found, and may

seize any such physical evidence or document or take extracts or copies or

photographs thereof subject to the existing provisions of Criminal Procedure Law,

in so far as it may be applicable; 4) In case any person refuses to appear before the

Commission, in the context of inquiry or investigation, the Commission may apply

to any Circuit Court for a writ of arrest to compel the accused to appear before it . In

all public inquiries, the Commission invite a concerned person(s) through a formal

written communication which states the subject of the invitation, time and place for

the concerned person to appear before the Commission.

6.3.2 Reporting

Regarding its reporting obligations on the national human rights situation, Article

IV (16) obliges the Commission to prepare quarterly and annual reports on the

national human rights situation generally and on more specific matters such as armed

aggression against the Republic of Liberia, internal conflicts, crimes against

humanity, war crimes, torture and genocide and to submit same to the heads of the

three branches of Government. This requires the Commission to prepare and present

its quarterly and annual reports to the Speaker of Parliament, the Chief Justice of the

Supreme Court of Liberia and the President of Liberia who represent the Legislature,

the Judiciary and the Executive respectively. The Commission generates its reports

by keeping abreast of and taking interest in human rights developments that occur

in Liberia, thereby recording those developments as they occur. Copies of annual

and thematic reports are circulated to diverse stakeholders including civil society

organizations, international organizations and the diplomatic community. The

Commission also holds press conferences to directly address the public about the

key contents of each report. English is the official language of Liberia; hence, all

the Commission’s reports are published in English.

With respect to response to the Commission’s recommendations or findings, there

are legally binding requirements which oblige public authorities and individuals to

respond to the Commission’s recommendations. If an individual or public authority

refuses to respond to the Commission’s recommendation, the Commission may seek

recourse to its quasi-judicial powers to enforce compliance. The Commission’s

recommendations are logged in a matrix which is reviewed regularly with the

concerned institution of Government. Recommendations are also shared with civil

society organizations to inform and influence their advocacy.

6.4 Promotional Functions

6.4.1 By raising awareness on human rights norms and issues

The INCHR Act Article IV (11,13,14) vests in the Commission salient human

rights promotional functions including to assist in the formulation of programs for

the teaching of, and research into, human rights and to take part in their execution in

schools, universities and professional circles; to act as a source of human rights

information for the Government and the people of the Republic of Liberia; and to

assist in educating public opinion and promoting awareness and respect for human

rights and international humanitarian laws, treaties and protocols to which the

Republic of Liberia is a party. Although the Commission is a nascent institution

challenged with adequate budgetary allocation, however through its Department of

Education and Information, engagements with the public to raise awareness and

promote myriad of human rights instruments remain firm. Regular radio shows,

lectures at schools and other places of interest on key human rights issues are the

Commission’s primary mode of public outreach. The Commission does its official

business in English, however, in order to disseminate information to a wider

audience, the Commission tailors its messages for the specific audience, hence,

interpretations and use of Liberian creoles has been adapted. Apart from statutory

provision (Article 27b) of the Liberian Constitution which reserves Liberian

citizenship only to persons of Negro descent, Liberia is a very integrated country

with little or no significant incident of xenophobia or racism. The Commission has

regularly denounced Article 27b mention supra; declared same as inconsistent with

the spirit and intent of the CERD Convention. One of the propositions the

Commission has submitted to the Constitution Reform Committee for

amendment. In collaboration with the UNMIL Human Rights Section, the

Foundation for Human Rights and Democracy (FOHRD), The Carter Center and the

Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Commission is engaging traditional leaders to build

their capacities so that they better understand the harmful consequences of FGM,

trial by ordeal, early marriage and other harmful traditional practices that are

commonplace in rural Liberia.

6.4.2 Through programmes for teaching and research

One of the key functions of the INCHR/Commission as stipulated in Article IV (11)

captioned functions of the Commission is: to assist in the formulation of programs

for the teaching of, and research into, human rights and to take part in their execution

in schools, universities and professional circles. Our Department of Education and

Information is playing this critical role in a modest manner: its primary modes of

outreach lectures and seminars on basic rights and fundamental freedoms with keen

emphasis on economic, social and cultural rights such as the right to affordable and

quality education as well as health; the rights of the child are mainly promoted in

junior secondary schools. The Commission’s engagement with professional

organizations focuses on civil and political rights with keen emphasis on political

competition and consensus building. With reference to research, the Commission

has been able to conduct a full empirical research on several human rights issues,

but it has engaged in collating anecdotal evidence for instance on the proximate

causes of mob violence in rural Liberia, the high frequency of Sexual Gender-Based

offences, especially rape of minors.

6.4.3 By addressing public opinion

Article IV (14) of the Act empowers the Commission: to assist in educating public

opinion and promoting awareness and respect for human rights and international

humanitarian laws, treaties and protocols to which the Republic of Liberia is a party.

In achieving this provision of the Act the Commission avails itself to address on-

going public discussions. For instance, the Commission has released several press

statements to address public opinion on issues such as freedom of speech with keen

emphasis for the public to better understand the human rights prescriptions on the

enjoyment of this fundamental human right. The Commission encourages the media

to fully teach its members and the public as well the entire contents of the right to

free speech; how this right can be a pivotal source not only for mere free speech, but

also a pivotal source of an enlightened public that values tolerance and diverse

opinions.

7. Subpoena and Other Quasi-Judicial Powers

The Commission hears cases and independently makes determinations. On a more

regularly basis, the Commissions Department of Complaints, Investigations and

Monitoring receives complaints from members of the public, or based on its

initiatives takes up a complaint solely on the following requirements: whether the

complaints falls within the Commission’s competence or meets its admissibility

criteria which are listed in Article XVII of the Act. The Complaint handling process

and system is at the heart of the protection role of the Commission in dealing with a

wide range of human rights issues. The officer, human rights monitor or a

Commissioner receiving complainants is in many ways the face of the Commission.

Anyone claiming or alleging a violation of his or her fundamental right may bring a

complaint before the Commission for its timely intervention in finding redress.

Complaints may be received in person (walk-in) i.e., where the complainant walks

into any of the commission offices to tell their story, or by a letter, by email, or a

telephone call. After listening to the allegations made by the complainant, the person

receiving the complaint will make a preliminary assessment based on the following:

(a) whether or not the Commission has jurisdiction in the matter; (b) whether or not

the complaint raises a human rights violation based on the admissibility criteria. This

is a crucial stage in the investigation process and the person receiving the complaint

has a duty to apply due diligence in recording and ascertaining that the facts are

correct. Where the complaint raises a human rights violation and the person or

monitor receiving the complaint is satisfied that the Commission has jurisdiction

over it, the Monitor should record the complaint on a commission’s complaint form

and open a file for the complainant. The Monitor writes an initial assessment to his

supervisor stating why the complaint should be investigated. When a file is assigned

to a particular investigator or monitor, he/she must send out a notice called an

“Allegation Letter” signed by the chairperson or a commissioner delegated to the

respondent within 7 days of being allocated the file, to be reply to within 21 days. If

this fails, a reminder letter is sent allowing for a further 7 days for a response. The

Monitor requests the complainant to make available at the Commission two of

his/her witnesses to record their statements. Thereafter, witnesses for the Respondent

are contacted for purposes of recording their statements as well. At this stage, the

investigation begins by setting a time and venue, preferably at the Commission’s

offices ensuring that all parties and witnesses to the complaint are present.

Thereafter, the investigator concludes the investigation and documents his findings

in the form of a report and submits same to the supervising commissioner for

endorsement. The commissioner reviews the report and decides whether or not to

endorse same. If the findings are endorsed, the commissioner with oversight writes

a legal opinion for the attention of the Chair and the Board of Commissioners as to

whether or not to endorse the recommendations of the legal officer or recommend

further or different action. The Chairperson of the Commission will make the final

decision on all legal opinions.

On the other hand, complaints should only be deemed inadmissible based on the

admissibility criteria as provided in the Commission’s Complaints manual. At this

stage, it is the duty of the Commission to provide advice, legal or otherwise to the

Complainant explaining the Commission’s lack of jurisdiction in the matter and

make a referral to the relevant agency or institution or government with authority to

handle the matter.

.

8. Relationship with Relevant Human Rights Stakeholders and Other Bodies:

8.1 Relationships with Civil Society

The INCHR enjoys a congenial working relationship with civil society organizations

collectively and individually. Article V (2) of the Commission’s Act recognizes the

fundamental role played by the non-governmental organizations in expanding the

work of national institutions; hence, the Commission shall develop relations with the

non-governmental organizations devoted to protecting and promoting human rights,

to economic and social development, to combating ethnic discrimination and racism,

to protecting particularly vulnerable groups such as children, women, refugees,

physically and mentally disabled persons or to other specialized areas. The

Commission consults and works closely with the National Civil Society Council of

Liberia and other members of the Council in several undertakings including joint

fact-finding missions or investigations. The Commission is open and has worked

with diverse civil society organizations, but on a more regularly basis, the

Commission has been more engaged with NGOs especially those who are based in

the field. The Commission has at times utilized their field presences to fill the void

created by its absence in the field when there were little or no resources for the

Commission to deploy its own monitors in the field. Holding meetings and joint

workshops are the most frequent modes of interactions or collaborations that the

Commission enjoys with NGOs. It is also noteworthy to highlight the Commission’s

collaborative efforts with the Ministry of Justice Human Rights Unit in the

implementation of the National Human Rights Action Plan as well as how we

consult in addressing the UPR recommendations.

8.2 Relationship with Other Bodies

Although a nascent human rights institution, provisions of the INCHR Act are

replete with references that ensure that the Commission maintains strong working

relationship with diverse organizations nationally both in Government (Legislature,

Judiciary, and Executive) and those of civil society organizations. For instance, the

Commission’s power to propose amendments or reforms of laws, regulations or

administrative practices to the competent authorities , especially if the laws,

regulations or administrative practices have hindered or unreasonably complicated

the filing of a complaint by a complainant, puts the Commission in a position to

dialogue with the Parliament, the Judiciary and the Executive on regular basis. The

Commission’s Department of Legislative Assistance, Treaty Matters and Law works

in close collaboration with the Parliament (Senate Human Rights Committee, House

Human Rights Committee), the Ministry of Justice and the Law Reform

Commission. The Commission meets at least once with the National Civil Society

Council of Liberia, conducts joint facts - finding missions on needs basis with other

collaborating civil society organization; and undertakes capacity building initiatives

to enhance mutual benefit; consults the Ministry of Justice, Bureau of Corrections

and Rehabilitation to address prisons concerns on recurrent basis.

8.3 Cooperation with the United Nations and other Organizations

In Article IV (10), one of functions of the INCHR is to cooperate with United

Nations, in particular the Office of the High Commission for Human Rights

(OHCHR), UNDP and any agency related to the United Nations System, the African

Commission on Human and People’s Rights, other regional institution and the

national institutions of other countries which are competent in the areas of the

protection and promotion of human rights. The Commission strongly recognizes

itself as a national body which also has strong international commitments to fulfil.

As such, within its capabilities, the Commission engages with its international

partners to promote their mandates through collaboration and espousing the

principles of those organizations. The Commission attends regional and

international meetings in furtherance of the work of the African Union and UN to

address issues affecting the continent including the impact of refugees and stateless

persons on the continent; promoting international humanitarian law, raising

awareness to reduce the frequency of trafficking in persons, promoting the AU

objectives on improving the welfare of women and children; the UN Convention on

the Rights of the Child, Convention Against Torture, etc. The Commission has

worked regularly with UNHCR and Liberia Refugee Repatriation and Resettlement

Commission (LRRRC) in highlighting the plights of Ivorian refugees and the

resettlement of internally displaced persons in Liberia. With the Human Rights and

Protection Section of the United Nations Mission in Liberia, the Commission

immensely collaborated on the Protection Cluster during the Ebola crisis and at

present is jointly conducting capacity building training for the Ministry of Internal

Affairs to reduce the frequency of harmful traditional practices such as FGM, trial

by ordeal, early marriage, accusation of witchcraft that are commonplace in rural

Liberia. The Commission is collaborating with UNDP to address some of the TRC

recommendations aimed addressing some minor offences that were committed

during the Liberian Civil War and memorialization through the Palava Hut Project.

The Commission is working with the government, CSOs and related institutions on

addressing transitional justice issues resulting from the 14 years civil conflict in

Liberia.

Finally, in June 2016 the Commission visited the Secretariat of the Office of the

High Commission on Human Rights (OHCHR) in Geneva, Switzerland where the

INCHR delegation got further knowledge and understanding of the working of

OHCHR, treaty bodies and special procedures amongst others. In August 2016, the

INCHR visited Nairobi, Kenya, and re-established membership with the Network

for Africa National Human Rights Institutions (NANHRIs), and established working

relationship with the Kenyan National Commission on Human Rights. In September

2016 the INCHR also visited Sierra Leone and has forged partnership with the

Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone, while in October and November 2016,

the Commission attended the African Commission Annual Meeting Banjul, the

Gambia and the 2016 Human Rights and Business Forum held in Geneva,

Switzerland. With funding from the European Union, the INCHR will be supporting

the Government of Liberia to begin to put in place its National Action Plan (NAP)

for the implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and

Human Rights. The Commission has already stated discussions with and will shortly

conclude its engagement and partnership with The OHCHR Regional Office for the

West Africa Region (WARO) based in Dakar, Senegal, The Network of National

Human Rights Institutions for West Africa (NNHRIs-WA) based in Abuja, Nigeria,

and The UPR Info Africa Regional Office, based in Nairobi, Kenya.

‘Dark Moment’ of the West Point Quarantine

A Report by

The Independent National Commission on Human Rights (INCHR)

Submitted to: The Government and People of Liberia

October 28, 2014

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. 1. Background --------------------------------------------------------------- 4

2. 2.Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------- 6

3. 3.Methodology -------------------------------------------------------------- 8

4. 4.Findings -------------------------------------------------------------------- 8

5. 5.Conclusion ---------------------------------------------------------------- 12

6. 6.Recommendations ------------------------------------------------------- 13

Appendices ---------------------------------------------------------------- 17

Appendix A: Testimonies of Witnesses

Appendix B: Photos from the Scene of the Shooting

Appendix C: Photos Presented by the JFK Memorial Hospital

Appendix D: Communications

1. 1. BACKGROUND

In the month of March 2014, authorities at the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare reported the first case of the Ebola disease in Lofa County, Northern Liberia. The disease later began to spread to other parts of the country amidst initial public denial. As Monrovia and its surroundings had fallen prey to the disease, President Sirleaf declared the disease a National Emergency in June 2014. That was followed by the establishment of a National Taskforce on Ebola, co-chaired by the President.

As the prevalence of the infection of the disease intensified, several lives were lost, including those of many health workers. This resulted in the closure of key health facilities in several parts of the country, including the John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, ELWA Hospital and the St. Joseph Catholic Hospital in Monrovia. Consequently, the President, on August 6, 2014, declared a State of Emergency, equating the epidemic to “an unrest affecting the existence, security and well-being of the Republic amounting to a clear and present danger”. In the same vein, the President alluded to the possible institution by Government of “extraordinary measures, including, if need be, the suspensions of certain rights and privileges.[1]”

Despite the aforesaid measures and attempts to deploy more health workers and to open new Ebola treatment centers with the help of the international community, the disease continues its spread to all political subdivisions of the country. Reuters quoted WHO on October 22 as saying as of October 19, 2014, “Liberia has been worst hit, with 4,665 recorded cases and 2,705 deaths, followed by Sierra Leone with 3,706 cases and 1,259 deaths. Guinea, where the outbreak originated, has had 1,540 cases and 904 deaths.”

The Township of West Point

The Township of West Point is a peninsula jutting from the fork of the Atlantic Ocean and the Mesurado River and separated from Central Monrovia by the UN Drive. The township has a population of about 75,000 people. The population cuts across the various ethnic groups of Liberia and nationals of other West African countries. Residents comprise mainly low income people and petty traders. Most young people in West Point are unemployed and subsist generally on the fishing trade led by Ghanaians and the Kru ethnic group. Basic social services are virtually nonexistent. There is only one public school housed in a structure originally intended for a market. No public clinic exists in the Township.

Although the history of the community dates as far back as the early 1940s, West Point remains a major slum divided into seven working zones. Zone one, which contains “Zimbabwe” and “White Flowers”, is occupied by the most stigmatized and marginalized residents of West Point. “Zimbabwe” and “White Flowers” are among the most notorious ghettos in the Country.

[1] Statement on the declaration of the State of Emergency by President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, R.L, August 6, 2014

1. 2.INTRODUCTION

This report catalogues findings of the investigation and the hearing into the August 16 dismantling and looting of the West Point Ebola Transit Center and the August 20 West Point shooting incident.

The Government of Liberia (GOL) declared a State of Emergency on August 6, 2014 to counter the rapid spread of the Ebola virus disease. As the Government put measures in place to counter the spread of the disease, reports indicated the presence of the disease in the Township of West Point on the basis of which the Ministry of Health established an Ebola holding/transit center. On August 16, 2014, the Center was

ransacked by some residents of the Township on grounds that dead bodies and sick patients from elsewhere were being brought to the center and that residents of the center were not fed regularly and sufficiently. Patients at the center left it and re-entered the Community. The police assigned to man the center and the depot abandoned the community leading to the looting of the center. Materials at the center, including blood stained mattresses, food, medical supplies and power generators, were looted. The Nation was alarmed.

Hence, during the early morning hours of August 20th, the Government of Liberia quarantined, with immediate effect, West Point and Dolo Town in Montserrado and Margibi counties, respectively. The Joint Security Forces, comprising the Liberia National Police (LNP), the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL), The Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization (BIN), inter alias, were deployed in the two communities to enforce the quarantine and to provide backup for the Ministry of Health team.

Although the Commissioner of West Point had prior knowledge of the quarantine plan, the residents of the Township protested the quarantine as being abrupt because of the lack of notice, thus depraving them of the time needed to get the necessities to sustain their families for the duration of the quarantine. This protest, the general chaos attending the quarantine, and some official indiscretion detailed in this report culminated into the shootings that left one person dead, and another seriously wounded on August 20, 2014.

President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf set up a Committee headed by the Ministry of Defense, to investigate the shootings. The Committee reported to the President on September 10, 2014. After reviewing the report, the President asked the Independent National Commission on Human Rights to conduct an in-depth investigation of the incident, with emphasis on the views of the residents of the Township.

The Independent National Commission on Human Rights (INCHR) was already investigating, pursuant to its mandate, To inquire or investigate, suo motu or on a complaint presented to it by a victim or any person on his/her behalf, into a complaint of violation of human rights or abetment thereof or negligence in the prevention of such violation by the State, any of its functionaries, or public servants, or any other related person. Article III Sec. (3)(a) of the INCHR Act, Powers of The Commission.

The Commission held hearings from September 29 through October 21, 2014 interviewing about 40 persons, including the lone surviving shooting victim Titus Nuah (shot in the stomach), Sylvester Kromah (wounded by barbed wire while running away from the shootings),West Point Commissioner, Madam Miatta Flowers, several residents of the Township, the Chief Medical Officer and the General Administrator of the JFK Memorial Medical Center, Dean of the A. M. Dogliotti College of Medicine, the supervisor and the driver of Hon. Saah Joseph’s Ambulance (Responder 2), and former AFL officer, Lt. Col. Augustine J. Nagbe (aka Gen. Power), and Journalist Watson Johnson, a Senior TV Reporter of the Power TV and others.

The Commission wrote to the Minister of Defense, and to the Inspector General of the Liberia National Police, requesting access to their commanders and to any other relevant personnel of their entities present in West Point at the time of the shooting incident in order for the Commission to get their version of the story.

The Ministry of Defense responded to the letter by sending its lawyer with a verbal message seeking a clarification to our request. The lawyer was told that the Commission preferred a written response to its written request. Thereafter, the Minister wrote to the INCHR Chairperson nominating two lawyers to liaise with the Commission on the West Point shootings. The Commission considered the Minister’s letter as an intentional non-response and a clear indication of the MOD’s unwillingness to cooperate with the investigation without an excuse.

When the Police Director or his representative did not appear on the date of his invitation, an INCHR Commissioner made a follow up visit at which time the Chief of Staff/Senior Policy Advisor, Col. Edwin V. Hoff, informed the Commissioner that the communication, signed for by an office staff, Inspector Kemokai (Cell No. 0770800287) on September 28, 2014, could not be located. Col. Hoff acknowledged receipt of the letter but promised that his office would liaise with Deputy Director for Operations to designate somebody to appear for the investigation. However, the LNP did not attend the hearing and no excuse was offered.

1. 3. METHODOLOGY

1. INCHR investigators made on-the-spot visits and collected information.

2. INCHR extended invitations to eyewitnesses and media experts and their testimonies were recorded.

3. Authorities and stakeholders of the Township of West Point were invited and their statements were recorded.

4. INCHR conducted hearings by interviewing the witnesses.

5. Other materials relied on included still photos, video and newspaper clips, medical reports and opinion.

Hearing dates and venue were announced on several media outlets. The hearings ran from September 29 to October 21, 2014. The Board of Commissioners interviewed each witness individually.

1. 4. FINDINGS BY INCHR BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

The Board of Commissioners of the INCHR, having reviewed all the evidence/information provided by the nearly 40 persons interviewed, hereby finds as follows:

4.1 On The Looting of the Ebola Holding Center

4.1.1Witnesses’ testimonies have confirmed that the holding center was established in West Point without prior community awareness.

1 4.1.2 Based on the testimonies of witnesses, the Ebola Response Team of the Health Ministry was transporting dead bodies and suspected Ebola contacts from different communities to the West Point holding center; this action on the part of the Response Team prompted the public protest that degenerated into the dismantling of the Center and subsequent desertion of the Center by the police.

1. 4.1.3 he desertion of post by officers of the Liberia National Police who had been assigned at the Center, left the holding center vulnerable to looting by some residents.

1 4.1.4 The looting of the West Point Center exposed the community to potential health hazard.

4.1.5 Mr. Alfred Nagbe (aka Muller) was arrested, paraded with generator on his head and kept for several hours in handcuffs at the back of a pickup before being taken to the Zone 8 police cell. He denied looting or stealing the generator but rather had retrieved it from looters for safekeeping.

4.2 On The Shooting Incident – August 20, 2014

1 4.2.1 On the early morning hours of August 20, 2014, the Township of West Point was quarantined by the Government of Liberia, with the Joint Security forces stationed there to enforce the quarantine.

1. 4.2.2 The Commissioner of West Point was informed by the Government of Liberia of the quarantine three days before the quarantine.

1 4.2.3Residents of West Point had no prior knowledge that the Township would be quarantined .

4.2.4 The Commissioner was not in West Point at the time of the quarantine.

1.1 4.2.5 On the first day of the quarantine, the Commissioner of West Point attempted to evacuate her family from West Point despite the quarantine imposed on the community.

1. 4.2.6 From the testimonies of witnesses and the review of video and newspaper clips, some of the West Point residents were angry and determined to prevent the Township Commissioner and her family from leaving the quarantined community.

1 4.2.7 The protesters surrounded the premises of the Commissioner to prevent her from taking her family out of the Township.

1. 4.2.8 By her testimonies, which are confirmed by other witnesses, the Township Commissioner called for the intervention of the security forces to evacuate her and her family from the Township, away from the protesting residents.

1 4.2.9 The security succeeded in evacuating the Commissioner and her family at which time, the angry protesters began throwing stones at the security forces. Some police officers also threw stones at the protesters.

4.2.10 Additional soldiers came as backup and began firing warning shots in the air.

1. 4.2.11 Based on the testimonies of witnesses, shots were also fired in the crowd.

4.2.12 The 15-year-old Shaki Kamara was shot in the legs which shattered his right leg (tibia and fibula), resulting in profuse bleeding (newspapers and video clips attached).

1 4.2.13 According to video recording, first aid was administered to Shaki’s seriously wounded leg by MSF staff and an AFL soldier, as he laid on the ground at the scene of the shooting, crying and explaining that he had gone only to buy bread.

4.2.14 Another young man, 22-year-old Titus Nuah, who was shot in the stomach, laid bleeding.

Sylvester Kromah sustained serious bodily lacerations from barb wires while attempting to escape the scene of the shooting and the angry mob from West Point. He was also bleeding.

1 4.2.15. According to video recording, Col. D. F. Forleh, Chief of Operations of the Joint Security mission in West Point, “two warning shots were fired in the air. Nobody shot anybody. He got strangulated between wheelbarrows.”

4.2.16. According to the video, Deputy Police Director for Operations, Col. Abraham Kromah, said it was unnecessary for the crowd to throw stones at the police. He said “Be that as it may, the kid has to be taken to hospital.” He also said he had called an ambulance.

4. 2.17. Both the police and the army were carrying guns and some of them were flogging civilians with expandable batons even in their houses and in the market, according to the video.

4.2.18. Miatta Lamina (aka Baby Ma) was flogged over and over and kicked by a police officer assisted by a military personnel while trying to run away from them. She was accused by the same police of being a prostitute because of her hairstyle.

4.2.19. Col. Samuel Nimely (106), Chief of Intelligence of the Liberia National Police, was seen on the video carrying a long gun (which appears to be a Winchester) and a side arm parading the scene of the shooting (see video clip).

1 4.2.20. Hon. Saah Joseph’s Ambulance (Responder 2) was called by the Joint Security and it transported the three wounded persons to the JFK Memorial Hospital under security escort after a long argument. The ambulance left the shooting site at about 1:00pm.

1. 4.2.21. The three wounded persons were deposited in the hallway of the JFK Administration building after vigorous protest from the Administration indicating that the Hospital was closed except for the maternity center.

1. 4.2.22. The AFL soldiers and the journalist who had escorted the ambulance left the Hospital compound while the ambulance was being cleansed of blood by the supervisor and the driver of said ambulance.

4.2.23. The JFK Administration offered two of the wounded water and soda and administered drips to Shaki.

4.2.24. The JFK Administration called Dr. Bernice Dahn of the Ministry of Health requesting for ambulance because the one ambulance that the JFK Hospital had was inoperable. The JFK Administrator said that the wounded remained on JFK premises for only 45 minutes.

4.2.25. The three wounded young men were transported to the Redemption Hospital by the Ministry of Health ambulance, arriving there, according to Doctor Mohammed Sankor, at 8:10pm which timeframe was at variance with the time of departure from the J.F.K. Hospital compound, 45 minutes stay.

4.2.26 Upon arrival at the Redemption Hospital, the few employees on duty said that the Hospital was closed and had no supplies and therefore they were not accepting patients; but after some delay and protracted arguments between them and the ambulance crew, they admitted the patients.

4.2.27. According to Dr. Sankor, Shaki Kamara, upon arrival “Shaki was conscious but confused. He could not talk and was not alert. He had multiple injuries (Traumatic injuries) of the legs.”

1. 4.2.28. According to Dr. Mohammed Sankor, he treated Shaki Kamara by applying “pressure dressing to wounds of the legs including intravenous fluids of potassium chloride, tetanus antitoxin against tetanus and Analgesic (Diclofanac) intramuscularly.”

1 4.2.29. Also according to Dr. Sankor, Shaki Kamara died on August 20, 2014 at 9:30pm, stating the cause of death as “traumatic injuries of the legs secondary to violence.”

4.2.30. The other shooting victim, Titus Nuah, who was in the same room at the Redemption Hospital with Shaki Kamara, said the following: “Shaki was administered drips, he constantly requested water to drink but received none, he called out to the nurses but no one came, he rolled down from the bed to the floor and crawled to my bed telling me Timaya, I will die; I want to drink. He called plenty times crying and nobody came; he stopped

talking and sleep carried me. When I woke up round about 5:00am, Shaki was dead.”

4.2.31. According to Dr. V. Kanda Golakai (MD, ChM, FLCS, FWACS, ScD), Dean, A.M. Dogliotti College of Medicine, Professor & Consultant/Department of Surgery, JFK Medical Center, “Based on still photographs and video images of the injuries sustained by the patient in those presentations, I can say with certainty that the victim of those injuries could have been successfully treated by a competent person or team in Liberia and should not have died as a result of such injuries.”

4.2.32. Unidentified witnesses informed the INCHR that Shaki Kamara was aimed at and shot in the leg by a police officer.

Unidentified witnesses informed the INCHR that Titus Nuah was shot at by a military personnel.

4.2.33. These witnesses are ready to prove their allegations but only if their safety will be guaranteed.

1. 5. CONCLUSION

From the facts we have gathered from testimonies, videos, field visits, medical records, medical opinions, and the totality of the circumstances, we conclude as follows:

5.1. As to the ransacking and looting of the West Point Ebola Holding Center on August 16, 2014, INCHR has determined that the lack of information about the establishment of the Holding Center, and failure to sensitize the residents about the need for the Center contributed to the protest.

5.2 The abandonment of the Center and the West Point police depot by the police left the Center vulnerable to the subsequent looting of the Center.

5.3. The arrest and humiliation of Mr. Alfred Nagbe, head of the Community Watch Team of West Point, further exacerbated the tension in West Point.

5.4. As to the shooting incident of August 20, 2014, in West Point, INCHR says that the indiscretion/misjudgment or perhaps intentional violation of the quarantine order by the Township Commissioner Madam Miatta Haja Flowers, to evacuate her family assisted by the very security forces deployed to enforce the quarantine order, was a glaring display of

special treatment for the Commissioner and her family and discrimination against the residents of West Point who were quarantined under the President’s emergency power. These actions and circumstances led to the protest. The security forces were to enforce the quarantine order, not to allow entry into or exit from West Point. They disobeyed the order of the President by allowing the Commissioner to enter West Point and not only that, they allowed and assisted her quarantined family and herself to exit from West Point.

5.5. The violent reaction of the residents in trying to prevent the Commissioner and her family from leaving the community culminated in the throwing of stones and insults at the security forces.

6.6 In response, the Joint Security Forces called for a military backup. The military backup started shooting warning shots in the air from the Ecobank Waterside branch, as they moved towards the checkpoint at the LEC gate while the Commissioner and her family were loaded in a vehicle. INCHR says that the militant manner in which the backup team entered the scene of the confusion heightened the pandemonium and further agitated the protesting crowd.

5.7 Shots were fired in the air according to video recordings. INCHR however says that the bullets that shattered the leg of the late Shaki Kamara leading to his death, and the bullet(s) that Titus Nuah received in his stomach could not have been fired in the air. Instead, they were live bullets fired into the crowd, or directly at the victims.

5.8 According to the video recording and still photos, the shooting victims lost a lot of blood and did not receive prompt and adequate medical attention.

1. 6. RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 West Point is home to about 75,000 residents, most of them young people, who, due to their circumstances, have been deprived of formal education and proper upbringing. Some of them are traumatized street children and therefore, have turned to drugs and alcohol, and to support their habits, they engage in criminal activities, including robbery. As a result of these conditions, these citizens of Liberia have become stigmatized and marginalized. INCHR recommends that the Government finds ways and means to improve the living conditions of its citizens in West Point and eventually the other urban slum communities such as New Kru Town, Clara Town, Soniwhein, Slipway, Buzzy Quarters and

others. GOL must put in place a comprehensive development plan to raise these citizens from their present sub-standard living conditions by providing housing, health facilities, schools, adult literacy programs, vocational training centers, and public toilets.

6.2 The criminal elements in West Point and their “territories”, especially “Zimbabwe” and “White Flowers,” must be dismantled and not allowed by Government‘s non-action to terrorize the entire West Point community and beyond. Citizens as well as residents of West Point also are entitled to Government’s protection from harm.

6.3 INCHR recommends that the President, through the Minister of Internal Affairs, reassign Madam Flowers if the Government still finds confidence in her. But for her own safety and the welfare of the Township, she should be replaced.

6.4 The Township Commissioner knew that her township would be quarantined on August 20, 2014. Yet, she chose to sleep in Central Monrovia on August 19, 2014. Her return to the quarantined Township not to stay but to evacuate her family led to the resistance and subsequent flare of violence. INCHR recommends that the Commissioner issue a sincere public apology to the residents of West Point and the Liberian public for her misjudgment, and beg for forgiveness from the families of Shaki Kamara, who lost his life, Titus Nuah, who is still in hospital and Sylvester Kromah, who also sustained serious injuries by running into barb wires in his desperate efforts to get away from the scene – gun sounds and stone-throwing mob.

6.5 Because of the circumstances of the Township of West Point as mentioned in Recommendation #1, INCHR further recommends that counseling sessions be organized by Government and NGOs, human rights and Civil Society Organizations to help the youth of urban Liberia beginning in West Point to cope with their anger, brought on by frustration, poverty, ignorance and stigmatization, and while at it, offer them hope. INCHR says in this connection, the youth be made to understand that the way forward is not through violence because Liberians experimented with that process before and the lessons learned are not worth repeating. The road to positive change is through the rule of law.

6.6 While INCHR understands the circumstances that provoked the anger demonstrated by some of the residents, INCHR condemns the throwing of stones by civilians at the state security forces. INCHR equally condemns the deployment of military and the contingent’s response to the civilian action. While the civilians were throwing stones, the military

came on the scene with guns and assumed combat posture, which inflamed the volatile situation. For instance, the military backup came on the scene with lethal weapons.

6.7 INCHR condemns the deployment of soldiers and armed police to quell a civilian uprising such as happened in West Point. The use of non-lethal weapon – teargas – would have been sufficient to disband the stone throwing residents. In fact it did. The protestors stopped their stone throwing aggression when the police fired teargas, according to video recording. That was how the joint forces were able to advance into inner West Point. The INCHR recommends that military personnel be kept out of civilian disorderly conduct problems; that the military be deployed to encounter military insurgencies; that the Police, who ought to be peace officers and presumed to be trained to deal with such matters, be allowed to use their skills in order to save lives and not to shoot, kill or wound civilians.

6.8 According to video recording of press statement by Col. D. F. Forleh, AFL, “two shots were fired in the air and nobody got shot.” INCHR however says that the bullets that shattered Shaki Kamara’s legs were not fired in the air. This fact is undebatable for obvious reasons. Except it was a magic bullet (which it was not, right?). A bullet shot in the air cannot fall from above and shatter somebody’s legs, especially a person standing up as was Shaki Kamara’s position when he fell to the ground after the impact. Similarly in the case of Titus who was shot in the stomach, INCHR says that the shots that the military admitted to firing in the air were not the shots that hit Titus in his stomach, for the same obvious reason. In both cases INCHR says that those shots were fired directly into the crowd or directly at the victims in complete disregard for human life. This complete disregard for human life resulted into the death of Shaki Kamara – a violation of his right to life, and the victimization of his family, and the other shot that posed a serious threat to the life and wellbeing of Titus Nuah who is, as we speak, confined to a hospital bed. The INCHR recommends as follows:

6.9 As to the late Shaki Kamara, INCHR recommends that the President of Liberia, on behalf of the Government, extends a public apology to the family. The INCHR also strongly recommends monetary compensation to the family, amount to be determined by the Government in collaboration with the Interreligious Council.

6.10 INCHR recommends further that the Government of Liberia erects a health center in West Point in memory of the late Shaki Kamara to be called The Shaki Kamara Memorial Health Center.

6.11 As to Titus Nuah, INCHR recommends that he be flown to a renowned hospital in Accra, Ghana for further evaluation/treatment, accompanied by a family member and the physician who operated on him at the S.D.A. Cooper Hospital in Monrovia and that the Government of Liberia, through the President’s office, underwrites the cost. The INCHR further recommends that the Government of Liberia provides financial compensation for Titus to restart his life if he makes a full recovery, if not, that the Government provides his support for the rest of his life.

6.12 As to Sylvester Kromah who also sustained serious lacerations while attempting to get away from the life-threatening atmosphere that obtained at that moment (the shooting and the angry mob) ran into barbwires, Government should compensate him for the pain and suffering, amount to be determined by the President of Liberia.

6.13 As to Mr. Alfred Nagbe (aka Muller) who was falsely accused of stealing a generator, publically humiliated and punished without due process of law, INCHR recommends that LNP authority issue a public apology to Mr. Nagbe for a violation of his human right to be treated with dignity as a human being. INCHR further recommends that the President determines a certain amount of money to be paid to the victim for the violation of his human rights – right to be accorded due process before judgment is rendered against him and the right to be treated with dignity as stipulated by both national and international law.

6.14 INCHR recommends that all compensations made to the victims herein listed should be made public for the information of the people of Liberia and beyond.

6.15 As to the request for the protection and safety of the eyewitnesses, the INCHR lacks the required resources such as funds, expertise, and other logistical support to address these concerns. The INCHR therefore recommends that the Government of Liberia makes the appropriate intervention in the interest of justice.

6.16 When the shooters shall have been identified, the INCHR recommends that they be stripped of their immunities, if any, and tried or prosecuted in a court of law for their reckless disregard for Shaki Kamara’s right to life and Titus Nuah’s right to a safe environment and protection of his person by the Government.

6.17 The Liberian police and army have received trainings since Liberia’s return to civilian rule. But for that fact, the West Point incident would have been more horrendous. Notwithstanding their training, two persons were shot at; police and soldiers were flogging peaceful people, people in the market place, doing business. These are indicators that there is still a need for more training. INCHR recommends that government does not relent in educating and training the police and army personnel, especially those whose behavior as portrayed in videos on August 20, 2014 leaves much to be desired. END

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:

Testimonies of Witnesses

a) Looting of the Ebola Holding Center

Testimony of the Township Commissioner

The Commissioner of the Township of West Point, Madam Miatta H. Flowers, a

principal witness, told the INCHR Board of Commissioners that she was in the

community on Saturday, August 16, 2014 when the Ebola Holding Center set up in

the township by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MHSW) was vandalized

and looted by some protesting residents. She said that the residents were angry about

the establishment of the Center out of denial of the presence of the Ebola disease in

the community. The Commissioner averred that the residents were also angry with

her on allegations that she had masterminded the setting up of the Center in exchange

for financial gains. Ms. Flowers intimated that the police had once rescued her from

a group of people who had gone to her office and jeered at her.

Asked if she had prior knowledge of the establishment of the Center and whether she had informed the residents, she said that the Center was established by the Government of Liberia and that there was no ample time for her to have informed the community. According to her, the MHSW had established the Center through the recommendation of one Dr. Mosoka Fallah who works with the Action Contre La Faime, based on the information she (the Commissioner) had provided. “I personally saw some people crawling due to sickness. Dr. Fallah came in as a result of the information I gave, because people were getting sick, especially a Kissi family”, the Commissioner explained.

Testimonies of other Witnesses

Witness WPW: The witness is a resident of West Point, age 38.

The witness said that the Ebola Holding Center was stormed by an angry crowd on

Saturday, August 16, 2014. According to him, some of the perpetrators claimed that

their relatives held at the Center were not being accorded proper care, while others

contended that it was not appropriate to have the Center in a populated community

such as West Point as it would expose the residents to health risk. The witness stated

that officers of the Liberia National Police (LNP) assigned at Center had left their

post before the facility was vandalized and looted. He explained that there was no

food and medication at the Center. The witness said that when he approached the

Commissioner about the incident she said that the situation was beyond her control.

Witness WPD: The witness, age 27, lives in West Point

Witness WPD explicated that the Commissioner of the Township of West Point, Ms.

Miatta H. Flowers, and Augustine J. Nagbe (aka General Power) had gone to an

“Attaye” center and said that they wanted to have a meeting with them regarding the

protest that was unfolding in front of the N.V. Massaquoi public school which hosted

the Ebola Holding Center. He said that the Commissioner and “General Power” had

informed the audience at the “Attaye” center about roadblocks being mounted by

some residents who were protesting the establishment of the Holding Center in the

township. However, according to the witness, the Commissioner and “General

Powell” contradicted each other during the meeting when the former said that the N.

V. Massaquoi School building was not a Holding Center, while the latter said the

opposite. He explained that when the residents at the meeting decried the bringing

of dead bodies from outside of West Point to the Center, the Commissioner negated

the information, while “General Power” again disagreed with her. These

contradictory statements by the Township Commissioner and “General Power”, the

witness averred, sparked confusion among the audience and resulted in the abortion

of the discussion. At the same time, the witness alleged that the Ebola Response Unit

of the MHSW was bringing dead bodies and suspected Ebola contacts from different

areas to the holding Center, to the dislike of some residents of the township.

Witness WPM: The witness, age 25, resides in West Point.

The witness informed the Board of Commissioners that he was at the “Bob Marley

Video Club” at the time of the public protest that degenerated into the looting of the

Holding Center. He said that the root cause of the incident was that the residents of

West Point were opposed to the presence of the Center because sick people were

being brought there from different places, some of whom were dying, which created

the notion that the Ebola disease was spreading in the community. He said that much

more annoying was the failure of health authorities to mention the communities of

the people who were dying at the Center.

The witness disclosed that during the incident two boys had stolen a generator from

the Center but were intercepted by one “Muller” (Alfred B. Nagbe), who retrieved

the generator. The witness quoted “Muller” as having said that he had informed the

Commissioner of the township, Ms. Miatta H. Flowers, about the retrieval of the

generator. He said that prior to the looting a group of women approached the

Commissioner about the existence of the Center but were not given any redress.

The witness added that Representative Solomon George of Montserrado County

later took to the airwaves and accused “Muller” of stealing the generator from the

Center. He claimed to have also heard that the Minister of Justice, Christiana Tah,

had requested information about anyone who might have participated in the looting

of the facility. Witness WPM indicated that afterward some state security forces

went to West Point and did not only arrest but also forced “Muller” to carry on his

head the very generator he had retrieved from the looters. “Muller was cuffed and

tied to the generator,” he narrated.

Witness WPN: The witness is 52-year-old and lives in West Point.

The witness told the Board of Commissioners that Ebola patients and dead bodies

were being transported from elsewhere to the West Point Ebola Holding Center,

which sparked resistance from West Pointers. He alleged that in the first instance,

West Pointers were not informed about the establishment of the Center. Second,

West Point, with a population of approximately 85,000 people, was not an ideal

place for such a center. He asserted that when he personally approached the

Commissioner of the Township, Ms. Miatta H. Flowers, about the situation, she

denied having any knowledge of the establishment of the center. The witness

explained that in the wake of these developments, the Commissioner had left the

township, especially at a time when residents desperately needed explanations from

her as well as the need to provide the necessary leadership in the face of the national

emergency.

In relation to the looting of the center, witness WPN said that the police officers

assigned at the Center had left the facility on Saturday, August 16, which rendered

it vulnerable and resulted to its looting.

Relative to the much-publicized news about a stolen generator during the looting

incident, the witness recounted as follows:

“I retrieved a generator from some looters on Aug 16 and informed the

Commissioner that I had retrieved a stolen generator. She told me to hold on to it.

On Monday Aug 18, Representative Solomon George took the airwaves and accused

me of inciting violence in West Point. The interplaying of these events culminated

into my arrest around 11:00am by the Emergency Response Unit of the Liberia

National Police (LNP) led by one Peewee and Tamba, accusing me of stealing a

generator. I was handcuffed and forced to take the generator on my head and paraded

through the streets of West Point. I was also taken to various communities on display

that I was a generator rogue. They kept me until 2:00am. I was tortured and made to

sleep in a tiny room with water on the floor. Since I couldn’t sleep on such a floor, I

stood up the whole night. I was later taken to Camp Shuffling and kept there for

hours. I was out of West Point when the shooting took place on August 20.”

Witness WPM2: The witness is a resident of West Point.

The witness said that on August 16, he met a group of people at the office of the

Township Commissioner, Miatta H. Flowers, seeking explanations about the Ebola

Holding Center. The Commissioner, he recounted, had denied having any

knowledge of the Center. Describing himself as an opinion leader, the witness said

that the West Pointers had accused him of the receipt U$3,000 from the government

to facilitate the establishment of the Center. He recalled that a police officer (106)

had joined him to appeal to the residents for calm at the time. The witness

accentuated that Dr. Mosoka Fallah had later asked that he meet with him at the gate

of the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC) in the Power Plant vicinity of the

Township so as to collect three tarpaulins to seal the windows of the Holding Center.

But the witness narrated that the Center had already been vandalized before he got

on the scene with the tarpaulins.

He revealed that during the looting he had seen one Bloh and others with a stolen

generator. The witness told the Board of Commissioners that the Chairman of the

Community Watch Team, Mr. Alfred Nagbe, alias “Muller”, had retrieved one of

the stolen generators from some of the looters and informed him (the witness) about

it. He quoted “Muller” as having informed the Township Commissioner about the

retrieval of the generator.

The witness continued that on August 17, which was the day after the looting

incident, a team of community stakeholders, since the Commissioner was not in the

township, had issued a press statement condemning the vandalizing of the Holding

Center. He pointed out that he later got a call from the Director-General of the

General Services Agency (GSA), Madam Mary T. Broh, to proceed to the Agency

for a meeting on the looting incident. The witness disclosed that during another

meeting held at the GSA on August 18, the township, through the General Secretary

of its Elders Council, Mr. Sieh Kofa Mah, had apologized to the President and people

of Liberia for the unfortunate incident via the mobile phone of Information Minister

Lewis Brown. The witness stated that subsequently on August 19, the government

had informed the nation that West Point had been quarantined.

Witness WPH: He is 54-year-old and has lived in West Point for many years. He is

the spokesperson for one of the communities in the Township.

The witness explained that the Ebola Holding Center was vandalized because the

West Pointers had contended that it was not established with their consent and that

people whom were being brought to the Center were not from West Point.

Witness WPD2: The witness is 36 years and has lived in West Point since 2001.

Witness WPD2 said that the protesters who looted the Ebola Holding Center

comprised mainly women. He said that the protesters had argued that besides being

uninformed about the establishment of the Center, the community was congested to

host an Ebola Center. The protesters were also disenchanted about bringing non-

West Pointers to the Center. He said that the police officers responsible to man the

center were constrained to leave because of the protest.

Witness WPJJ: The witness is a photo journalist employed with one of the local

television stations. The witness is not a resident of West Point but has become of

interest because of his significant coverage of the West Point situation.

This witness recounted that on August 16, some of the residents of West Point had

begun a protest against the presence of an Ebola Holding Center in the township on

grounds that it was established without the knowledge of the inhabitants and that

sick people were being transported from different communities to the Center. He

stated that in a bid to soothe the tension, a police officer named Samuel Nimely (106)

and other police officers had spoken to the residents, assuring them that the situation

would not recur. The witness asserted that having addressing the residents, the police

had left the scene thereby rendering the Center vulnerable. He recalled that a rift

subsequently ensued between the residents and the Commissioner of the township

whom had been accused of masterminding the establishment of the Center. The

protesters, according to him, had eventually taken advantage of the departure of the

police to loot the Center.

Witness WPM3: The witness has lived in West Point for over ten years and is a

businesswoman.

The witness explained that on August 16, she had seen people on the streets running

towards the office of the Township Commissioner, Ms. Miatta H. Flowers,

protesting that they didn’t want the Ebola Holding Center in the township. She

alleged that the protesters had surrounded the office and wanted to get the

Commissioner out. The witness claimed that the Commissioner had consequently

requested the health authorities to remove the Center, which they promised do by

August 17. She explained that before long she saw a crowd dominated by women

run towards the Center and return with materials, including blood-stained mattresses.

Augustine J. Nagbe (aka General Power): The witness, 42, lives in Central

Monrovia but had previously lived in West Point for many years. He currently

represents the Ministry of Justice on the National Task Force on Ebola.

Appearing before the Board of Commissioners of the INCHR on Monday, October

6, 2014, Mr. Augustine J. Nagbe narrated that he and one Chunk Davies had gone

to West Point on Saturday, August 16, 2014 for the purpose of holding a meeting

with the residents on the issue of the Ebola epidemic. The witness intimated that

the meeting, which was being held at the office of the Commissioner of West

Point, Ms. Miatta H. Flowers, had ended in confusion as some of the attendees had

had disagreements with the Commissioner and therefore disapproved the holding

of the meeting at her officer. He said after the failed meeting an ambulance had

gone to West Point and in the wake of its arrival he got information that some

people were on the rampage looting the Ebola Holding Center. The witness

disclosed that his daughter had participated in the looting of the Center and was

under an indefinite quarantine by him.

“General Power” explained that following the looting incident he and some state

security forces had gone to West Point and arrested Mr. Alfred B. Nagbe, alias

“Muller”, for his alleged complicity in the looting of a generator from the Holding

Center. He quoted “Muller” as having said that he had retrieved the generator from

some of the looters of the Center. He stated that “Muller” was cuffed, put in a car

and driven off to the Borough of New Kru Town on the Bushrod Island, where the

arresting security forces had gone to collect dead bodies. Mr. Augustine J. Nagbe,

who claimed to have been in charge of the operation in West Point, told the

hearing that Alfred Nagbe was later taken to the Zone- 8 Police Station in the

ELWA area under the command of 1st Lt. Aloysius Quaye of the Armed Forces of

Liberia.

“I was the senior officer. I was in charge during the arrest,” the witness emphasized.

Questioned if he was a military personnel to have been put in charge of a joint

security operation comprising the military and the police, the witness pointed out

that in the case of a state of emergency the military is in control of security operations

and, as such, 1st Lt. Quaye of the Armed Forces of Liberia was in command of the

officers who had arrested Alfred Nagbe. The latter statement runs counter to his

earlier claim of overseeing the enforcement of the arrest order as a “senior officer”

among the others. According to him, Alfred Nagbe was released from detention on

the following day and taken to the General Services Agency (GSA) before being

turned over to the community. Regarding whether the arrestee was at any point

forced to carry the generator on his head, the witness said he could not remember.

b) Testimonies on the August 20, 2014, Shooting Incident

The Township Commissioner of West Point, Madam Miatta Flowers, testified that

she had been forewarned of the quarantine three days before its imposition on August

20, 2014. The Commissioner, however, said that she was in central Monrovia when

the community was quarantined and barricaded, but had to return on the same day

because of phone calls from the Ministers of Information and Internal Affairs,

Messrs. Lewis Brown and Morris M. Dukuly, to go along with thirty persons from

the community for a scheduled meeting at the General Services Agency (GSA). The

witness said that the state security forces assigned in the area for the enforcement of

the quarantine had facilitated her entry into the community because they had had

prior knowledge about the thirty persons she was going to contact for the meeting.

The Commissioner asserted that while on her way, a group of residents had attacked

her and some security personnel at the junction of the roads leading to the Old

General Market and the Power Plant area, forcing her to run to her shop where her

mother sells. “I ran in my shop and called the security informing them that I was

under attack. My mother was in the shop but my sisters were not there. Then I called

the police and the security, there was no response. So I sent my personal bodyguard,

Jimmy Kojo, to call the security. So the security, ‘General Power’ and others came

to the shop and rescued us. The security put us in the car,” the Commissioner

explained. When asked as to how she came in contact with her sisters, the

Commissioner said that she met her sisters at the gate of the Liberia Electricity

Corporation (LEC) close to the Waterside area and had asked two security personnel

of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization (BIN) and the Drugs Enforcement

Agency (DEA) as well as her private guard, Jimmy Kojo, to escort them. The

attackers, she alleged, had accused her of responsibility for the quarantine and the

establishment of the then vandalized Ebola Holding Center. Ms. Flowers disclosed

that she was constrained to call for the help of the security forces at the checkpoint

for protection. She however refused to or could not tell the name of the particular

officer she claimed to have called on the phone.

Asked if she had taken the officers whom she said were attacked along with her from

the checkpoint, the Commissioner indicated that she came in contact with them

“inside West Point”, though she had earlier stated that she stopped at her business

stall at the market. She averred that her private escort (Jimmy Kojo) was present

during the pandemonium. Ms. Miatta Flowers said she had first encountered Jimmy

in the Waterside vicinity, outside of the quarantined zone, while en route to West

Point. But she further mentioned that Jimmy Kojo resides in the “Power Plant” area

of West Point, which was obviously covered by the quarantine. The Commissioner

said that though she had managed to get some of the thirty persons requested by

Ministers Lewis Brown and Morris M. Dukuly, she could not attend the meeting at

the GSA. “They called me, but I said I could not attend because I was under attack,”

she declared.

Commissioner Flowers indicated that it had taken long before she heard of the

shootout and the shooting of Shaki Kamara and Titus Nuah. “I was under tension. I

don’t know anything about shooting. But I heard about the shooting later. I saw it on

the television when A.B. Kromah was talking about it; and some people called and

told me of the shooting when I was in the car,” she pointed out, again saying that she

could not remember the name (s) of any of the people who had called her. Her only

response to questions seeking the mention of any specific names was, “The

community called me.” Ms. Flowers said she knew the late Shaki Kamara, one of

the victims of the shooting incident.

In her general comments, the witness explained that the Commissioner of the

Township of West Point is usually falsely accused of being responsible for most of

the problems of the community. Ms. Flowers asserted that she was informed of the

Ebola Holding Center on the night before its establishment in the township. She

disclosed that one Doctor Fallah of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare had

suggested the need for the Center in the wake of suspected Ebola cases she had

reported from the community.

Questioned about her permanent residence, the Commissioner responded: “My fiancé lives in town (Central Monrovia). I have a family house in West Point where I live together with my mother and sisters. So I live between West Point and town. Sometimes I stay a week in town, but I come to work every day.”

Witness WPK, 23 years: The witness recalled that the Commissioner of the Township of West Point, Ms. Miatta H. Flowers, had gone to the township in the morning hours of Wednesday, August 20, 2014, surrounded by a group of gangsters armed with knives and other objects. The witness explained that the gangsters escorted Commissioner Flowers to her shop in the Old General Market to help get her family members out of the quarantined community. He intimated that some of the residents became angry over the Commissioner’s action and began to protest, which degenerated into confusion between the residents and the gangsters.

“The Commissioner came into the community with gangsters. She wanted to get her

family from the community. And people and the gangsters went into confusion. The

AFL (Armed Forces of Liberia) came in because of the tension between the

Commissioner’s group and the residents,” the witness said. He said that he did not

see guns with the officers of the Police Support Unit (PSU) who were with the

soldiers.

The witness, who had deep wounds on his two feet, said he got wounded while

jumping over barbed wires when the soldiers had started shooting. He disclosed that

Shaki Kamara, Titus Nuah and he were taken to the John F. Kennedy Hospital, where

they were not accorded any medical attention. He said the three of them were later

put in an ambulance and driven to the Redemption Hospital on the Bushrod Island,

where doctors also refused to treat them. “The doctors refused to treat us because

of fear of Ebola since we came from West Point. They put us among the Ebola

people,” the witness asserted. He said the refusal of doctors at the JFK and the

Redemption Hospitals to treat them had resulted in the death of Shaki Kamara in the

night of the same day. The witness explained that he was taken from the Redemption

Hospital by his uncle and carried to West Point where he was treated. He concluded

his testimony with the restatement of his conviction that the shooting incident would

not have happened if the Commissioner of the township, Miatta H. Flowers, had not

gone to evacuate her family members from the quarantined community.

Witness WPW: The witness is 38-year-old and a businessman.

The witness initially observed that the leadership of West Point has had problem

with information dissemination. He intimated that while he and others were at the

checkpoint around the compound of the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC), the

Commissioner of the Township, Ms. Miatta H. Flowers, arrived there and asked

them to provide her security so that she could talk to some of the residents who were

at the checkpoint about the quarantine. The witness said that upon being given the

opportunity to say her mind, the Commissioner had informed the audience that the

imposition of the quarantine was for the common good of the community because it

would help prevent the spread of the Ebola disease, particularly in the wake of the

looting of the Ebola Holding Center by some residents of the township. The witness

elucidated that the Commissioner concluded her message by cautioning the residents

to remain calm, irrespective of the obvious side-effects of the quarantine, which

included the hiking of prices of commodities and the shortage of food and water.

The witness narrated that when the Commissioner later expressed her desire to travel

further down the community to speak to other residents, he personally volunteered

to escort her. He asserted that after Ms. Flowers had succeeded in speaking with

some of the eminent persons in the community, she subsequently proceeded to her

business center with a plan to get her family members out of the quarantined

community.

“The Commissioner spoke to some eminent persons and later went to her business

place to relocate her family. I opposed to that. I told her that it was dangerous for

her to take her mother, sister’s children and sisters from the community during the

quarantine. The crowd objected to the relocation of her family. She called AFL and

police officers. About fifteen officers armed with guns and teargas came. The police

commander had a pistol. They beat people and collected the Commissioner and her

family. Coming to the checkpoint, they started shooting,” the witness

recounted. The witness disclosed that Commissioner Flowers had specifically called

an AFL Commander named Lt. Quaye to assist her and her family, although the

Commissioner had failed during her testimony to name the soldier whom she had

called on the phone for help. He further named “General Power” (Augustine Nagbe)

as one of the persons who protected and took Ms. Flowers away. “General Power”

is alleged to have pointed a pistol at residents in the process.

On whether he could remember or say anything about the victims after the

shooting had subsided, the witness said that the victims (Titus Nuah, Sylvester

Kromah and the late Shaki Kamara were put in Montserrado County Representative

Saa Joseph’s Ambulance and taken to the hospital. He alleged that security officers

severely flogged one Archie Ponpon while trying to help one of the victims.

Witness WPJ: The witness is a 28-year-old resident of West Point.

The witness explained that he was at a place called “White Flower” in West Point

when Jimmy Kojo, the personal bodyguard to the Commissioner of West Point,

came and asked for one “Long John” to help take the Commissioner’s family out of

the township. He said that “Long John” later arrived at the “White Flower” and stated

that the Commissioner had promised to compensate anybody who could volunteer

to assist in the process of getting her family out of the quarantined community. But

the witness claimed to have advised “Long John” about the potential danger of the

deal. He explained that minutes after “Long John” had left him, he saw “General

Power” (Augustine J. Nagbe) along with Commissioner Miatta H. Flowers and her

family members headed up the West Point New Road from the direction of the Old

General Market.

“One AFL personnel pushed me and General Power told him to leave me along.

Power took the Commissioner from the ‘gronna’ boys (gangsters) who were

guarding her. AFL vehicle came and we heard firing of guns. Aloysius Quaye was

on the AFL vehicle. I recognized him because we were all in the Clara Town area,”

the witness said. He alleged that Commissioner Flowers had recruited the “grona

boys” (gangsters) from a quarter of the community called “Zimbabwe” along the

beach. Quizzed if he knew the late Shaki Kamara, the witness responded in the

positive, saying that he and Kamara were both members of the same youth group in

the community. When asked about what in his view was the cause of the incident,

the witness said the problem erupted because the Commissioner had asked the

“Zimbabwe boys” to help her evacuate her family from West Point. “The main cause

of the problem is because the Commissioner tried to remove her family from the

township, which was a violation of the quarantine order and disrespect to the

President of Liberia,” the witness emphasized.

Witness WPD: The witness, age 27, resides in West Point.

The witness explained that while en route to the market on August 20, 2014, he saw the Township Commissioner, Ms. Miatta Flowers, in the company of a group of “gangsters” who wanted to help get her family out of the township. He said the Commissioner was opposed by an angry crowd. The first shooting, according to him, took place in the West Point estate around the residence of Mr. Frank Jericho Nagbe, the former coach of Liberia’s national football team, the Lone Star. The witness alleged that even after the August 20 shooting incident, the Commissioner still moved with the gangsters and threatened people she perceived as opposition to her.

Witness WPM: Twenty-five years of age, the witness lives in West Point.

“I was at the Attaye shop at the estate (West Point estate) and I saw the

Commissioner (the Commissioner of West Point) surrounded by “gronna boys”

(gangsters), including “Long John”, with sticks. Those same people had earlier

extorted money from businesspeople. She (the Commissioner) looked frightened.

She said she wanted to talk to some community people. But they turned around to

go to her business place. I saw some officers led by “General Power”. She said she

wanted protection for her people. The AFL and LNP were protecting them and even

entered the Attaye shop and started beating people. The first shot was fired in the

estate (West Point Estate).

When Titus came (Titus Nuah who sustained bullet wound in the stomach), I stopped

him not to join the crowd. But he said they would not allow the Commissioner to get

her family out of West Point. Archie Ponpon was beaten while helping Sylvester

Kromah (another victim). Shaki died because he was not treated on time.”

Witness WPM2: The witness is a resident of West Point.

The witness told the Board of Commissioners that he had received a call from Minister Lewis Brown of the Ministry of Information to mobilize people for a meeting to address issues emanating from the quarantining of West Point. He said that in the process of mobilizing the people, he met the Commissioner of West Point flanked by people holding sticks trying to protect her. The witness quoted the Commissioner as saying that she would contact a police officer, Robert Saah (107), to accompany her to the meeting. He explained that while en route to the meeting, he met Earnest Tweh, Dr. Mosoka Fallah and others at the gate of the Liberia Electricity Corporation (LEC) preparing for the same meeting. He said as they awaited the arrival of additional persons for the meeting, he saw the personal bodyguard of the Commissioner running towards them, indicating that he was going to inform the security forces because the Commissioner had been attacked. The witness recounted that before long he saw the Commissioner and her family being escorted by “Gen. Powell” and some security personnel, on the instruction of Lt. Aloysius Quaye (the Joint Taskforce Commander). The witness averred that the police, headed by A.B. Kromah, had begun firing tear gas, while the AFL soldiers began shooting as the Commissioner and her family members were being escorted to a jeep owned by “General Power”, which was parked at the intersection of the UN Drive and the road leading to West point. He recalled that one Roger Kofa had held the hand of the Commissioner’s mother and escorted her to the car that immediately took away. On the issue of the Commissioner’s residency, the witness said that the Commissioner lived on Center Street, opposite the Exclusive Supermarket, and only went to work in West Point.

Witness WPJ: The witness is a resident of West Point.

The witness testified that on August 20, the Commissioner of West Point had requested him to attend a meeting either at the Ministry of Internal Affairs or the Ministry of Information. He stated that as a tradition, he had called the Secretary and the Dean of the elders to accompany him. The witness indicated that not too long after they had gathered at the Commissioner’s market stall where her mother lived, people began to stone them. He alleged that some of the residents were accusing the Commissioner of trying to take her family away from West Point. He stated that while the broil was going on, a security vehicle arrived and parked at the “Stanley Drug Store” near a coal warehouse to collect the Commissioner. Quizzed whether or not he saw the vehicle that came to get the Commissioner, the witness said: “I was only told that a vehicle was

waiting to collect the Commissioner but I myself did not see it.” He said that he was not at the scene of the shooting but heard the sounds of guns. Asked if he had any knowledge of the Commissioner’s whereabouts when West Point was quarantined, the witness responded in the negative, but said that the Commissioner had told him that she was in West Point during the quarantine.

Witness WPK2: The witness, age 87, has lived in West Point for many years.

The witness explained that on August 20, the Commissioner of West Point, Ms. Miatta Flowers, had sent for opinion leaders to attend a meeting at the General Services Agency (GSA). He stated that the Commissioner was attacked by some residents of the township while they were at her office and had to escape with the assistance of security forces. He claimed that the Commissioner did not immediately go to the meeting because of the attack but had later joined him and other opinion leaders at the meeting.

Witness WPB: The witness, age 45, resides in West Point.

The witness explained that the Commissioner of West Point had invited him and others to a meeting on August 20. He said while en route to the Commissioner’s house, he saw an angry crowd carrying sticks and cutlasses in an attempt to attack the Commissioner. “The Commissioner was in the house with her mother; her family was crying for help due to the attacking crowd,” the man alleged. He said that he later saw the police coming, forcing him to flee the area due to fear.

However, the witness said he did not witness the shooting episode, but was surprised when the Commissioner went back to West Point the next day demonstrating “true leadership”. He claimed that it had taken two days before he got news that someone had died from the shooting incident. Asked about the Commissioner’s residence status, the witness said that the Commissioner lived in West Point, but would leave the community on weekends.

Witness WPF: The witness is 58 years and resides in West Point.

The witness informed the INCHR Board of Commissioners that on August 20, the Commissioner of the Township had been asked to carry some community stakeholders to a meeting at the General Services Agency (GSA). He asserted that while they were at the Commissioner’s house, people began to shoot and the security forces came and collected the

Commissioner and her mother. He said some of the security forces who had rescued the Commissioner were police officers and soldiers. The witness claimed that the Commissioner sometimes spent time in Central Monrovia where her fiancé lived.

Witness WPD2: Age 36, the witness has been in West Point since 2001.

The witness said he was a member of the team that was negotiating with state actors on the situations of the looting of the Ebola Holding Center on August 16 and the quarantine imposed on West Point on August 20.

“We were at the waterside preparing for a planned meeting. During that time, the Township Commissioner was still in West Point. Then the Aide-de-camp to the Commissioner, Jimmy Kojo, came and announced that the Commissioner had been attacked. We were at the waterside when the people began stoning. We were with the Elders Council when the shooting started. Later, security forces brought the Commissioner and put her in a vehicle near the Eco bank. I saw the Commissioner alone with no family members. At the time the Commissioner was brought to the Eco bank, there was no shooting,” the witness narrated. He said that the Commissioner had later joined them at the meeting at the General Services Agency (GSA).

Witness WPF: The witness is a resident of West Point and Businessman.

The witness narrated that on August 20 he saw Joint Security forces commanding everyone to remain in their houses. He disclosed that the road leading to West Point was closed by 4:00am with soldiers parading the streets and announcing the imposition of a curfew.

The witness pointed out that he had seen the Commissioner of West Point with some security officers going into the township. He recalled that after about an hour, he saw the Commissioner headed towards the Old General Market and before long people began chanting, saying that they would prevent the Commissioner from taking her family out of the township. He said some people in the crowd were throwing stones. The witness said that he then entered the house and started to watch the situation through ventilated blocks. He narrated that afterward he heard someone giving command for soldiers to shoot. “I did not recognize any security because I was indoors but I saw some security officers (102, 106, & 107) pass through the township,” the witness recounted.

Witness WPJJ: The witness is not a resident of West Point but has become of interest because of his significant coverage of the West Point situation.

The witness said that during the morning hours of August 20, he had requested permission from Col. A.B. Kromah of the Liberia National Police to go into West Point to cover the activity of the health team from the Health Ministry that was already on its way there. He said that Col. Kromah had granted him permission, but not without cautioning him of the potential danger of undertaking such a task. The witness explained that though he had accomplished his mission without event, he encountered a precarious situation characterized by sporadic shootings involving some protesters and state security forces upon his arrival at the gate of the Liberia Electricity Corporation while returning from central West Point. He said that he came across Shaki Kamara, already shot. The witness disclosed that Shaki had informed him that his mother had sent him to buy her some tea. He narrated that when he inquired from “102” of the Liberia National Police about the shooting incident, he (102) indicated that none of his men had been ordered to shoot. The witness stated that afterwards he had followed the security to go back into West Point, but found Shaki still lying on the ground upon return.

The witness averred that when he approached the head of the West Point Operations, Col. Davidson Forleh, on the shootout, he said that he was in West Point to help West Pointers and that his men had fired only two shots in the air, citing rule of engagement as the reason for the shooting. He disclosed that contrary to Col. Forleh’s statement, other AFL soldiers informed him (the witness) that they had fired once. The witness claimed to have seen police officers carrying sophisticated weapons but did not recall seeing any of them shoot. He indicated that Shaki, along with two other victims, was later taken to the JFK Hospital after lying on the ground for hours. The witness climaxed his testimony with the display of footage of the incident.

Witness WPK2: The witness, age 42, resides in West Point and is a Businesswoman. She has been in the township since 1980.

The witness explained that at about 5:00 am on Wednesday, August 20, she had come out of the house to light her coal pot to prepare her business food. But she said she was then told by some soldiers to go back into the house. The witness disclosed that people had attempted crossing the barricaded point but were prevented by the security forces. She intimated

that there were concerns as to why the community was not informed in advance to enable the residents prepare for the quarantine and the curfew.

The lady revealed that at the time of the shooting she had seen Shaki Kamara moving up and down. She asserted that Shaki was shot twice and that the security forces had prevented people who wanted to help him. The witness accentuated that the soldiers had later dragged Shaki towards the barbed wire to appear as though he had been wounded from the barbed wire. The lady, who claimed to have observed the action through the holes in the walls of her house, disclosed that the soldiers had attempted putting her out of the house when she began shouting that Shaki was not wounded by the barbed wire. She revealed that as the soldiers shot, they picked up the empty shells. The witness explained that though she did not know the person who had fired Shaki, yet, she could recognize him if brought before her. She stated that she knew the soldier who was the Joint Security Commander during the shooting.

Regarding the root cause of the shooting, the witness explained that the attempt by the Commissioner of West Point, Madam Miatta Flowers, to evacuate her family members from the quarantined community had triggered the public protest that resulted in the shooting. She alleged that the soldiers had started the shooting before the police came into the picture. The lady explained that the late Shaki had been predeceased by his parents and was therefore living with his grandmother.

Augustine J. Nagbe (aka General Power)’s Accounts of the Shooting Incident:

Augustine J. Nagbe informed the hearing that the Commissioner of West Point, Ms.

Miatta H. Flowers, was requested on the day of the imposition of the quarantine

(August 20, 2014) to carry along with her sixteen persons from the township to

attend a scheduled meeting at the GSA with the Minister of Information, Culture and

Tourism, Mr. Lewis Brown, and the Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr. Morris M.

Dukuly. The witness asserted that while preparation was underway to facilitate the

departure of the fifteen persons who were available for the meeting, they received

information that some residents wanted to harm the Township Commissioner. Mr.

Nagbe said that he therefore went to the rescue of the Commissioner who had by

then been surrounded by about 500 people stopping her from leaving the

community. He explained that because of the respect he commands in the township,

the crowd immediately broke up at his appearance, enabling him to free the

Commissioner from the attack. But Mr. Nagbe explicated that the residents still

continued their protest while he led the Commissioner to the checkpoint. This,

according to him, prompted the police to intervene by pushing back the protesters,

who then resorted to the throwing of stones at the police.

“When the police started pushing them back, then the people started stoning. I saw

over 2,000 people at the LEC gate. The police started using teargas but could not

contain the crowd. The military came in and first started shooting in the air but one

officer shot in the crowd. I called him and talked to him. He was drunk. The military

did what they did, but they should not have shot in the crowd,” Augustine Nagbe

explained. The witness said he did not recognize the soldier who shot in the crowd,

though he claimed to have spoken to him and picked up the empty shells from his

gun. “General Power” added that the soldiers did not receive any orders to shoot

because there was no “rule of engagement”. Although he pledged to help in

identifying the shooter in question, the witness however did not think that the gun

used by the soldier could have inflicted the wounds sustained by the late Shaki

Kamara. “AK-47 round cannot burst a human foot,” Mr. Nagbe said, implying that

the soldier he saw fire Shaki had used an AK-47 riffle. He named the Winchester,

G-3 and L-A-R as guns that could cause such wounds. The witness revealed that

even though some of the police officers were armed with Winchesters and other

guns, they did not shoot. He observed that Shaki Kamara died from profuse bleeding

because he had not been given any first aid medical treatment.

When quizzed if he was ever a General in the Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL), the

witness answered in the negative, but claimed to be working in the security

apparatus. He said that he had previously worked in the employ of the Ministry of

National Security (MNS) as a “Chief of Special Operations”. The number of the

identity card that he claimed to have been issued to him by the MNS read “0559”.

Mr. Nagbe asserted that he currently works with the Ministry of Justice as its

representative on the National Task Force on Ebola. “I worked with the Ministry of

National Security; but it closed down its operations and so they recommended me to

the Ministry of Justice,” the witness intimated.

The witness pointed out that as a result of the riot staged by the West Pointers and

the subsequent shooting incident, neither the Commissioner of the Township,

Madam Miatta H. Flowers, nor Ministers Lewis Brown and Morris M. Dukuly had

attended the planned meeting at the GSA. The witness accused the community

stakeholders whom were selected for the GSA meeting of having incited the

residents against the Commissioner. But contrary to Mr. Nagbe’s claim that the

meeting was not held, some of the community stakeholders told the INCHR that they

had participated in the meeting. The stakeholders also said Ministers Lewis Brown

and Morris M. Dukuly had attended the meeting from start to end, while the

Commissioner later joined them in the middle of the discussion. The Commissioner

also allegedly spoke to a crew of journalists at the close of the meeting pertinent to

the violent incident.

Asked if he knew where Commissioner Flowers lived, the witness said the

Commissioner lived in the market area in West Point. He however alleged that the

Commissioner had asked him to drive her to another place in central Monrovia after

she was rescued from the scene of the August 20, 2014 pandemonium. Mr. Nagbe

said he did not have any weapon with him during the West Point crisis, but

specifically accused Mr. Washington Blay (former player of the Liberia national

football team) of being one of the persons bent on tarnishing his reputation.

a) The Version of the John F. Kennedy (JFK) Hospital

A three-man delegation from the John F. Kennedy Hospital headed by the Chief Medical Officer, appeared before the Board of Commissioner of the INCHR to give their account of the situation of the three wounded victims of the August 20 West Point shooting incident. Accordingly, the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) recounted that on August 20, three patients were taken to the Administration Building of the JFK Hospital at about 2:00 pm. by a military informer and a journalist. The CMO intimated that when the military personnel had requested an audience and informed him of the presence of three wounded patients for treatment, he told him (the soldier) that the hospital closed and therefore could not accept any patients.

“I told him that the hospital was closed. I explained that the Trauma Section, Internal Medicine, the Surgical Department, and the Emergency Rooms were closed; there were no medical practitioners and no medications. These facilities had been closed by July. We indicated to them that only the Pediatric Ward, which could not handle the current emergency, was functional at the time,” the CMO said.

The witness narrated that on that note the two men had left, but not too long the journalist returned with another military officer (a Captain) and insisted that the hospital receive and treat the patients. The CMO testified that as they insisted on the impossibility of responding to the situation under the then prevailing circumstances, the soldier and the journalist forcefully deposited the patients in the corridors of the Administration Building of the hospital. He also accused the journalist of being “ruthless” and of having injured him on the leg. The witness said that he and his colleagues began to wonder why the two men had to carry the patients to the Administration Building, when they had earlier taken patients to the appropriate sections of the hospital. He pointed out that they had asked the

men as to why the three patients were not taken to either the S.D.A. Cooper Clinic or the Redemption Hospital.

The witness continued that after the soldier and the journalist had left, he and other Administrators had instructed everybody on duty to put on their Personal Protective Equipment to respond to the emergency. “We put them in wheel chairs and the JFK emergency staff came and helped. We administered some sugar and soda taken from the General Administrator’s fridge. We also established an IV line and administered drips. Since there were no doctors, it was difficult to assess what types of wounds they had,” the CMO told the hearing.

The witness further explained that the having been contacted and informed of the situation, the Health Minister, Dr. Gwenigale, ordered the Chief Medical Doctor, Dr. Bernice Dahn, to handle the case. He said Health Ministry had provided an ambulance that took the three wounded patients to the Redemption Hospital.

Asked why the JFK Hospital could not provide an ambulance, the Chief Medical Officer disclosed that the hospital’s lone ambulance had been down, and was still inoperative as of October 3, the date of the testimony. According to the witness, the three patients were alert and talking up to the time of their transfer to the Redemption Hospital. He recalled that it had taken an interval of 45 minutes between the time of their arrival at the JFK and their transfer to the Redemption Hospital.

Testimony of an Ambulance Driver

Mr. Gordon Kamara is the driver of Rep Saa Joseph’s Ambulance code-named “Responder 2” and Deputy Supervisor of the Ambulance Team.

In his testimony, Mr. Gordon Kamara explained that he and another workmate had received a call to pick up some patients in West Point. The witness said that on reaching to the Waterside area while en route to West Point, they observed that the place had been abandoned, except for the soldiers who had been deployed near the sub-branch of the ECO-Bank located at the junction of the road leading to West Point and the UN Drive. Mr. Kamara narrated that when the soldiers told him and his workmate that the patients in question were wounded persons, he had refused to put them on the ambulance because it was their line of duty to collect only sick people. The witness said that the soldiers then insisted that the ambulance would not be allowed to leave unless the wounded persons, who then lied on the ground bleeding, were put on board and taken to a hospital for

treatment. He stated that as a result of the adamant stance of the soldiers, they subsequently put the victims in the ambulance but insisted that the soldiers provided an escort for them. Mr. Kamara disclosed that after about 45 minutes of argument occasioned by the soldiers’ refusal to escort them, the victims were finally driven off and taken to the JFK Hospital under the escort of a white Nissan Patrol jeep occupied by some soldiers and a journalist. He recalled that a Military Police Commander named Col. Saa was on the scene and that Shaki Kamara was one of the wounded.

The witness however recounted that upon arrival at the JFK Hospital, the security guards at the entrance of the hospital had refused to allow them in, prompting the soldiers who were on the escort jeep to open the gate. He said more frustratingly, the nurses had informed them that the hospital was not admitting patients. He indicated that when it became obvious that even negotiation with some administrators could not reverse the decision not to admit the patients, they could not but put them down in the corridors of the Administration Building of the hospital. The witness averred that at that junction the soldiers had left while he washed the ambulance of blood.

“The soldiers left me there. It was raining. Then the people at the JFK said that we should take the patients back or else we would not leave. I said the soldiers were responsible for the patients because they had just asked us to carry them to the hospital. So we also left later on,” the witness stated. He alleged that the nurses and the soldiers had earlier argued for about thirty minutes when they arrived at the hospital.

Mr. Gordon Kamara further told the Board of Commissioners that some of the hospitals in Monrovia had already begun rejecting patients before the West Point shooting incident. He mentioned the ELWA, Benson and Catholic Hospitals as being among the health institutions that had since begun the rejection of patients. “The Catholic Hospital rejected patients from me three times,” he concluded. The witness was accompanied by the driver of Representative Saah Joseph’s Ambulance code-named “First Responder-1”.

APPENDIX B:

Photos from the Scene of the Shooting

APPENDIX C:

Photos Presented by the

John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital

APPENDIX D:

COMMUNICATIONS

Paynesville April 16 Violence Report

k Moment’ of the West Point Quarantiport

byhe Independent National Commission on Human Rights

(INCHR)

Submitted to: The Government and People of Liberia

October 28, 2014