Assessing liberia’s anti corruption environment by DemocracyWatch

Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment

Liberia Democracy Watch

GOVERNANCE MONITORING REPORT-II FINAL PROJECT REPORT 2010 Grant No. TA-09-026

“Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment” FINAL PROJECT REPORT Grant No. TA-09-026

With Support from TrustAfrica-Humanity United:

2 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Acknowledgements

LDW extends gratitude to its many volunteers for the tireless investment of time and energy securing the success of the project. Gratitude is also extended to those who cooperated with the project by the responses they provided. Exceptional gratitude is extended to the staff and patrons of TrustAfricaHumanity United who so graciously supported the project. To government officials who have embraced the findings from both segments of the project we are grateful and look forward to greater partnerships in the materialization of the recommendations contained in both reports. Finally to the commitment of the LDW staff for the continuing commitment and sacrifice.

3 Assessing Liberiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Anti-Corruption Environmentâ&#x20AC;?

Governance Monitoring Report-II

1. Executive Summary: 2. Background: 3. Goal &Scope Evaluation Parameter: • Trust Indexes Evaluation Scope: • The Executive • The Legislature • The Judiciary • The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission(LACC) • The General Auditing Commission (GAC) 4. Methodology of Study: a. Methods of Data Collection: 1. Case studies; 2. Desk Review; 3. Survey 5. Findings:

6. 7. 8. 9.

GRAPHICAL DEPICTION AND NARRATIVE! Work Session Outcome: Project Successes and Constraints: Recommendations: Conclusion:

Appendixes

4 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

PREFACE: Built on the preface of Liberia’s reconstruction and national recovery drive, “corruption” is and remains by far, the current leadership’s single greatest challenge which, if any could undermine the success of succeeding generations of leaders if not controlled in time. Branded “Public Enemy #1,” by current President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, much has been invested to quell the ravages of corruption on the life of the state and its people. Predicted by Liberia’s international partners as a contributing factor to the country’s dwindling economic prospects over the years, carved out in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement1 the constitution of an Anti-graft institution to primarily administer and manage, in concert with other agencies of government, the fight against corruption. Since the establishment of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC), and the subsequent appointment of Commissioners of the Commission, headed by former Minister of Justice Cllr. Frances Johnson Morris much progress has been made. The thrust of the Commission’s energies have been directed towards strengthening public knowledge of evolving incidences and ensuing pre-litigation debates that obtained through various forms of public discussions. These are aimed at providing further clarity to situations of corruption and the follow ups by government and its apparatuses. Programs designed to effectively address the corruption endemic, especially in the public domain remain the prevailing challenge. These efforts of government have been assisted by CSOs including INGOs in a litany of innovative programs aimed at amplifying the erosive impact of corruption on national growth and development. This project, under taken with support from TrustAfrica-Humanity United, is a final half of LDW’s 2010-2011 Governance Monitoring project, in which an examination of the anti-corruption environment takes center-stage. The effort in this direction is to gauge public perspectives on government efforts and draw a parallel between actual government’s actions with a view to helping policy makers identify and utilize the critical contributions of “public perception” on policy formulation, management and administration. Accordingly, LDW wishes that this report will make great reading not only as catalogue of actions undertaken over the life of this project but also as a vital resource to policymakers and campaigners seeking to affect successful developmental initiatives and looking to leverage the links between effective policy management and impact of public perceptive in that connection.

George Wah Williams Executive Director

2003 ground breaking agreement signed in Accra, Ghana by Liberia’s belligerent factions to end years of war.

5 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

List of Acronyms

9. 8. 2. 1. 3. 7. 13. 4. 11. 10. 5. 6. 12.

ACRONYMS

MEANING

CSA CSO GAC GC GRC INGO JPC LACC LEITI LNP MNS MOJ UNDP

Civil Service Agency Civil Society Organization General Auditing Commission Governance Commission Governance Reform Commission International Non-Governmental Organization Justice and Peace Commission Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission Liberia Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative Liberia National Police Ministry of National Security Ministry of Justice United Nations Development Program

1. Executive Summary: 6 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Amidst growing condemnation of the escalating impact and influence of corruption on commencement and perpetuation of war in Liberia, international mediators meeting with Liberian belligerents mandated, through the 2003 CPA, the establishment of an anti-graft framework that will primarily seek to deliver a set of actions to reduce the surge of the practice, especially in public service and to provide a platform upon which investigation and prosecution including education is carried out nationally to avert the occurrence of the act. Current President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, then Head of the Governance Reform Commission (GRC) spearheaded the establishment regime and was completed by Dr. Amos Sawyer, current head of the now Governance Commission(GC).2 In its quest to get the fight going, the government of Liberia in 2008 August, established and appointed a Board of Commissioners of the LACC headed by former Justice and Commerce Minister Cllr. Frances Johnson Morris and Chairperson. This phase of the project culminating in this report looks at Liberia’s anti-corruption environment from the critical perspective of the public whose views are influenced by what obtains in the public domain as recorded in the local dailies, electronic and other media. The project provides a framework within which LDW assesses public appreciation or otherwise of actual government efforts in the anticorruption fight and matches that against actual actions taken by government in that direction. The aim accordingly is to provide a benchmark against which policymakers can measure their level of performance using public opinion, to measure policy effectiveness and moving forward incorporate public perception as viable measure and success of programmatic outreach at all levels of government. The project covered activities for a period of six (6) calendar months and included several activities including a survey training workshop to equip volunteers with the requisite data gathering tools which were required to effectively conduct a survey of public opinion. The project utilized the services of some volunteers to gather the data from the field. The process of data collection was for a period of four (4) months and covered Nimba, Bong, Grand Bassa and Montserrado Counties. The project targeted five(5) critical institutions of government vital to the anti-corruption fight for scrutiny: The Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary including the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission and the General Auditing Commission (GAC) were assessed using as a basis for ranking public perception: “Very trusted,” “Trusted” “Not trusted” “Not Very Trusted” and “Not Sure.” With data gathered and processed, LDW collated the findings and drew up its results from the exercise. The findings were subsequently withheld and a validation workshop was held to corroborate the findings from a more structured and informed collectivity of anti-corruption stakeholders active in the campaign. At the findings workshop, LDW ensured the presence and participation of all entities shortlisted for scrutiny by the public. Using a very basic set of questionnaire, LDW inquired from the public a ranking from their perspective, how various institutions ranked in terms of their commitment to fight corruption and the “public’s trust” in their commitment

There are still arguments questioning the rationale behind the change of name to the governance commission when considering the enormity of the continuing governance reform process; With virtually no assessment available to the public in regards to studies examining the efficiency and effectiveness of those structures created as a result of the GRC’s recommendations from which lessons were learnt and modifications made to effect corrective actions by those institutions.

7 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

The following report catalogues in detail how the project process unfolded and reflects what the findings represent. LDW trusts that readers, especially policy administrators will utilize the learning provided by this report and incorporate applicable aspects of the findings (Public opinion benchmark) in future programming. Corruption Erodes Faith in Government Because Of the Mismanagement And Misapplication Of Public Resources ---Ellen Johnson Sirleaf3

1. Background: As the government of Liberia and its international partners embarked on the tortuous task of reconstruction, recovery and development in the post-conflict Liberia, the economic blue print developed to guide the process is the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) branded more widely as the “lift Liberia” program. Key amongst the goals of the PRS is concomitant national development in all sectors and regions. Accordingly a set of developmental initiatives captured in the full program of the PRS was undertaken. In 2008 LDW, with support from TrustAfrica-Humanity United embarked on a PRS sensitization and awareness enhancement campaign after an assessment which informed that project of huge gaps in public knowledge and ownership of the PRS process. LDW gathered through its findings the enormously dismal levels of coordination between and amongst state institutions, especially the various branches of government. On one hand, the Legislature projected the process as a program of the Executive branch, for which they had nothing to do with. On the other hand it seemed more internationally driven than the local with various INGOs working closely with government taking the lead in some places. Rural communities knew very little about the program and could logically not participate effectively. Realizing these gaps, LDW reached out regionally throughout the country with sensitization and awareness of the PRS and communities contribution to the success of the process. In its follow up project, again with support from TrustAfrica-Humanity United, LDW scaled up its activities to organizing regional dialogues bringing together various stakeholders including religious and political leaders, students, INGOs and 3

Curled from the LACC Website, www.lacc.gov.lr

8 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

CSOs including Legislators to lift issues around the unfolding PRS process, highlighting the pitfalls for collective and concerted redress. Lessons learnt from that exercise emphasized the need for effective monitoring of all aspects of the unfolding process to ensure and guarantee effectiveness and success at the close of the process. The need for continuous monitoring, from a second or third party, became imperative, when in 2009 unsubstantiated records of massive success was reported by the lead Ministry of the program, Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs claiming some 86% success rating of the progress achieved. Groups such as LDW, PRS Tracking Network4 raised concerns about the pronounced success and distorted picture presented to greater collectivity of Liberians and its international partners who tremendously invested in the recovery process. The government almost immediately carved out a new approach to establish deliverables for a set of ninety days period, so as to ease the process of monitoring from the standpoint of Cabinet, and the Presidency. LDW’s follow on actions with support to the PRS process had come across another angle from which to contribute to the monitoring process. Hence in its 2010 project support document to TrustAfricaHumanity United, LDW emphasized the need for scrupulous monitoring reporting of aspects Governance and Rule of Law component of the PRS, which fell within the programmatic scope of LDW’s mission. Accordingly, and in support of the overall PRS process, LDW designed and implemented its Governance Monitoring Project which comprised two major components: Monitoring and Evaluating and aspect of the Civil Service Reform Process led by the Civil Service Agency (CSA) and a review of the effectiveness of Liberia’s anti-corruption regime since the establishment of the Liberia AntiCorruption Commission (LACC) and the General Auditing Commission (GAC). The first of two phases of the project climaxed with a report welcomed by the Director-General of the CSA, Dr. C. William Allen, who congratulated LDW for the remarkable information provided through its findings and pledged his agency’s commitment to working with LDW in furtherance of aspects of the reform process with which LDW has expertise and was open to partnering5 where applicable. The first phase of the project was aimed at “Assessing the State of Customer Services in Liberia’s Public Sector6.” Targeting five costumer focused government ministries (Labor, Commerce & Industry, Finance, Foreign Affairs and Transport) the project reviewed their customer service operations of the selected agencies to assess the level of customer focus, characterizing business activities at those entities. The results showed that there was a lot to be desired and that the CSA needed to put in place a customer service incentive program at various government ministries and agencies. LDW recommended that as an impetus, this responsibility initially rest in the Human Resource department of this agencies and that findings be used to package incentives and benefits to deserving employees. The second and final half of this critical governance monitoring project under the PRS Governance and Rule of Law Pillar targeted the Anti-Corruption environment of Liberia since 2005 including the establishment of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) and that of the General Auditing 4

www.csowatch.org.lr/prs-tracking-network-holds-feedback-meetings-on-key-research-findings&catid=36:articles

See appendix 3. http://www.liberiademocracywatch.org/images/stories/reports/governance-monitoring-report-ldw.pdf

9 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Commission (GAC). This phase will contrast the level of contribution the two institutions have made since their reconstitutions and establishment as well as contributions from the three critical branches of government; The Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary. The project targeted the five institutions listed based singularly on their individual and coordinated authority to investigate, prosecute and set the public examples for the non-recurrence or reduction of corruption in public service. As guidance of the public trust, the leaders in the three branches including the two autonomous public institutions bear the brunt of the responsibility in terms of preventive actions and deterrent enforcements. To that end, LDW embarked on a series of two rounds of “Trust surveys” to gather public perception about the level of commitment of the institutions given the records reported in the public domain and the observation and common knowledge of the public. The aim of the surveys was to obtain from a lay man standpoint what their appreciation of national actions, within the framework of the listed institutions’ contribution to the fight against corruption and how that has impacted overall appreciation for the national fight against corruption. LDW will later at close of the project conduct a review of findings workshop to validate/corroborate from an informed point of view, the information gathered from the survey. The results will then serve as a basis for an effective campaign to enhance the anti-graft program and boost the prospects for improvement. 2. Goal and Scope: The goals of this final stage of the project are, amongst other things, to provide a platform upon which effective public policy administration and management recognizes the implications of public opinion or perception on policy management and administration; It seeks to provide an effective stage upon which ordinary community residents can contribute to the policy management environment; The evaluation process presents a innovative approach to harnessing public opinion in the effectiveness or deficiency of public policy education. With this learning, LDW believes invariably policy mangers including non-state actors are factored into the policy formulation process to ensure useful periodic feedbacks are gathered to further inform the effectiveness of any policy program. To this end, LDW developed a set of “Trust” indicators which ranked the level of public trust in the commitment of the selected institutions towards the anti-graft fight. The index was selected based on its simplicity and ease of usage. Volunteers were trained in interviewing skills and how to effectively utilize the survey instrument7. LDW index comprised: •

•

Very Trusted: representing the highest level of public trust of the commitment of the selected institution. In numerical representation, this would fall between numbers 8-10 with 10 being the highest. Trusted: represents the next highest category of trust falling just below the “Very Trusted” category. Numerically this would fall between numbers 5-7 with 5 being the lowest rank on the trust index. Not Very Trusted: This category represents a midpoint on the trust index, reflecting a somewhat moderate, reserved or questionable level of trust. This ranking would numerically tabulate between numbers 2-4 which essentially represents again a marginal level of trust.

A sample of the instrument is attached in the appendix section of this report.

10 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

•

Not Trusted: Represents that trust category that is considered too low to generate any positive impression, perception or positioning for an entity. This category ranks numerically between 01 with one being that component of vagueness that is certain.

These ranking were use to evaluate the level of commitment of the selected institutions, again from the lay man’s viewpoint, finding out what they felt in terms of the commitment of the Legislature, Executive, Judiciary, LACC and the GAC’s commitment to the fight against corruption. We now look at the role each institution’s contribute toward the fight and how their standing serve as an important reference in the fight against corruption: •

The National Legislature: As the first branch of government under Liberia’s 1986 republican constitution, the legislature is made up of direct representatives of the people and charged with the primary responsibility of providing the oversight especially of the Executive branch of government. It is by recommendation of other branches of government that the Legislature enact laws affecting the life of the state and its people. Accordingly, the Legislature sets the stage for anti-corruption struggle by ensuring the laws are enacted and institutions are established to manage laws affecting the life of the state. In this instance, The Legislative oversight over other agencies of government including autonomous public institutions, ensuring that appropriate laws are enacted in support of the effective functioning of established institutions and that budgetary appropriation are made to boost the overall capacities and the attainment of established goals of established entities.

•

The Executive branch is directly in charge of the daily management and administration of the state. It has direct responsibility for guaranteeing public probity and the institution of processes and procedures that militate in favor of anti-graft. They have primary responsibility to provide the “political will” essentially required to guarantee prosecution of public officials. It is this branch’s responsibility to support efforts of other institutions under it direct watch that must give impetus to the war on corruption. Where especially the leadership of the executive branch is seen wanting in this regard, it would have adverse implications for the success of the anticorruption process.

•

The Judiciary: regarding as the most effective hurdle for corruption officials, the judiciary stands as the keepers of the law against corruption and provides the forum where individuals indicted are arraigned before a court of law to exonerate him or herself from charges brought against them. The State (Executive) would normally appoint legal counsels in instances where litigants lack the resources to hire legal representation of their own. How the judiciary such cases speaks of the level of public confidence in it.

•

The Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC): Establish to primarily spearhead Liberia’s anti-corruption fight. It has a mandate to investigate, recommend for prosecution, public officials found liable for corruption. Its mandate includes providing public education on the dangers and implications of corruption o the nation. The LACC does not prosecute on its own but must make use of the Ministry of Justice.

11 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

•

The General Auditing Commission (GAC): responsible for the periodic conduct of public institutions ensuring that corrective financial management practices are enforced and that systems and control are instituted to safeguard public resources and minimize waste. To this end the GAC has a mandate to undertake audits of public institutions at will and provide it’s in findings to the office of the President for action.

Schemata of Liberia Anti-Corruption Cycle The anti-corruption process in Liberia unfolds in generally two ways: The first scheme below draws on the primary cycle of the overall process. It begins with the conduct of the public audit by the GAC and the discovery of fiscal discrepancies deemed grievous enough to warrant further investigation and prosecution. The GAC then forwards its findings to the Office of the President (head of the Executive branch) who subsequently with advice of the Ministry of Justice, further investigation is commissioned and carried out by the LACC where it would investigate for more substance and recommend prosecution or acquittal for persons shortlisted in the audits for investigation. It must be clarified that under the Executive are the Ministry of Justice, bearing the Attorney General of Liberia, and under the MOJ is the Liberian National Police, the Ministry of National Security and a variety of other security agencies with mandates to investigate. The LACC recommends prosecution through the Ministry of Justice, under the Executive which then proceeds to prosecute through the Judiciary.

JUDICIARY

EXECUTIVE

GAC

LACC

MOJ

LNP MNS & other Investigative Public Agencies

a. Figure 1: The scheme above shows the process can take on various approaches depending on the evolution of the case. In the event that a case emerges from within a branch of Executive or another branch, the routing of the prosecution will flow from the Executive directly to the Judiciary or from the Executive to the LACC back to the Executive( Ministry of Justice ) which then prosecutes through the courts, the Judiciary branch. The GAC and the LACC are both autonomous agencies regarded as Independent institutions of the Executive, though they are appointed by the President and vetted through the Senate.

Public Perception Assessment: Liberia Anti-Corruption Campaign 12 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

This report represents the second phase of the overall assessment process initiated by and through this project. With the first component focused mainly on structure, administration and management of anticorruption program, LDW believe it a worthy complement to incorporate public perception in this evaluation considering the public’s growing interest in governance and decision making couple with the fundamental essential of ensuring that public policy management is guided by measures that take into account the impressions of the public. Effective policy management requires that the public is adequately informed and bears the right impressions of given policy regimes, needless to say that where the public impressions on a policy or set of policies fall below the radar of efficient administration and management, implicit inferences point to several developments: poor policy management and administration; negative policy impact; low policy education program etc. 5. Objective of the Survey: The overall intent of this segment of this anti-corruption assessment is to provide an indication of the public’s audit of the ensuing national campaign with prospects of mirroring the effectiveness or otherwise, of the government led campaign. 6. Methodology of Survey: The survey employed the commitment of 32 volunteers who in sets of 16 member teams, were deployed in five of Liberia’s critical counties: Montserrado, Margibi, Bong, Nimba and Grand Bassa Counties. The survey targeted, pre-determined number of professionals including academics, technocrats, media practitioners, street peddlers, religious leaders, students and a number of government’s domestic partners. Volunteers were equipped with predetermined survey questionnaires (intended to guide the process of interviewing) and tailored to provide a context of the questions, in most cases where interviewee was confused. Targeting 240 respondents per county, a total of 1200 respondents were interviewed over the process. Volunteers were rotated over after two months in teams of (4, 4, 4, 3 and 3) depending on the size of the County and distance from the Country’s Capitol. Montserrado County though the greatest in size and population was by far the easiest to scan, hence three member teams were used to cover the area. The respondents were asked to rank their perspectives on a select number of governance institutions and their level of anti-corruption effectiveness within the framework of the overall anti-corruption program. Respondents were asked to state their thoughts on whether they felt the Executive, Legislature, the Judiciary, the GAC and the LACC were effectively contributing to the national anti corruption program individually. Respondents were required to rank the institutions about whether

13 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

they felt these institutions were “Very trusted,” “Trusted”, “Not Very Trusted,” “Not Trusted,” and “Not Sure.” As a means to gathering an appreciation of the basis behind the perspectives provided by respondents, LDW empowered interviewees with “soft inquiries” to solicit a sense of the basis for their perspectives. Accordingly respondents were asked to provide examples of instances which supported their assertions. Cllr. Morris and other panelists during the validation workshop.

7. Project Findings: To complement the findings of the research, LDW preliminarily examined the expressed actions of government since taking over in 2005 to the present period. The intent of the examination is to strengthen public perception of earnest actions against corruption. The findings of the study have therefore been catalogued into two divisions: A look at direct government actions, compared to public perception of government actions and commitment to the fight against corruption. a. Direct Government Actions:

DIRECT COURSE OF GOVERNMENT STATUS ACTION

COMMENT

GOL passed new procurement laws whose effects are felt through the bidding process

Operational

Subjectively administered. Very little significance in the process of public procurement and management processes.

GOL is implementing the first ever Public Financial Management Act

Operational

Require more tighter systems and controls with greater levels of supervision.

GOL has joined he Extractive Industries Transparency

Operational

Initiative (EITI), becoming the first African country to be

Limited to the extent of what is provided by GOL and various entities.

14 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

validated as EITI; GOL established and empowered an Anti-Corruption

Operational

Commission with full powers to fight corruption anywhere in Government, including at the highest levels;

Limited by immeasurable resource and capacity constraints, including the lack of political will. Require financial autonomy and a greater period of tenure in addition to expanding its authority to prosecute.

GOL has restructured and funded the General Auditing Commission, making it accountable to the Legislature as it is done in the United States and other progressive countries

Operational

Require greater financial independence and extension of tenure period.

GOL has given the GAC sweeping powers to audit any official and/or agency of government, even at the highest levels, at anytime, without necessarily seeking approval from the President or anyone else

Operational

Require political will from the three branches of government

GOL has required appointed officials to declare their assets to the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission

Operational

NO political will for enforcement

GOL has ensured total freedom for the media to investigate and expose corruption everywhere in the country; She has required every agency of Government to fully cooperate with the works of the GAC and AntiCorruption Commission

Operational

No political will for enforcement; harassment of the media persist.

8. Survey Results: •

National Legislature: As the first branch of government, the national legislature was included in this assessment primarily regarding its role (current and potential) in the anti-corruption fight. Additionally, the level of media attention drawn to that branch of the governance structure over time. Figure-1: Respondents’ Perceptions on the National Legislature

National Legislature 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

15 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

National Legislature

Governance Monitoring Report-II

The results show that the level of public trust is very low. The figures show that more than 75% of respondents engaged bear a low trust rating for the national legislature in contrast to a trust rating of 10%. 13 % of respondents remained unsure of whether or not they could rate the National Legislature in the anti-corruption fight. A dominant number of respondents point to the numerous incidence of reports recorded in the local dailies and electronic media regarding the Legislature. Amongst some of the reasons for the rating, respondents relied on: bribery case surrounding the deposition of former Speaker Edwin Snowe8; the Dillon revelation9; budget passage scandal;10 amongst many other instances spread over time and listed in the media and public knowledge. •

The Executive: As the branch primarily responsible for the development, management and administration of policies and programs tailored to address the endemic anti-corruption situation in the country, the Executive has been a major focus for providing the necessary support to the process, in regards to initial and buttressing of final decision-making especially through Presidential action.

Figure 2: Respondents’ Perceptions on the Executive

The Executive 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

The Executive

http://www.afrika.no/Detailed/13539.html http://www.theinquirer.com.lr/story.php?record_id=3214&sub=14 10 http://allafrica.com/stories/200608290066.html 9

16 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

The results of the survey reveal a similar trend in respondents’ perspectives for the Legislature. Survey figures reveal that 81% of respondents distrust the Executive in its fight and commitment against corruption as against 17% trust level. This is remarkably a “no confidence” ranking presents a very worrying situation, in comparison to the Legislature. Respondents point to the numerous reports of corruption cases in which the Executive flagrantly exercised it “right to inaction.” Respondents point to the “ Email Scandal11”, Laurence Bropleh Corruption Scandal12, Harry Greaves’ LPRC, Carbon Credit Case13. Respondents averred that in many of the instances they remembered, a close relative14 of the President or her confidant was connected and therefore left the President without the courage to act. Respondents point the President’s repeated pledge of confidence in personalities implicated in most investigations sanctioned thereby undermining the prospects of judicial redress. The level of respondents remaining not sure of their Trust rating of the Executive is correspondingly very low. •

The Judiciary: This is the branch responsible for interpreting the law in furtherance of ensuring the prosecution of alleges corruption cases. In coordination with the Liberia AntiCorruption Commission, the Ministry of Justice, the Judiciary system both at the High Court and Lower court levels provide the legal mechanism of “due process.” Perceptions from respondents provide a critical gauge of how generally confident or not people are of the system. Figure 3: Respondents’ Perceptions on the Judiciary

The Judiciay 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

The Judiciay

http://allafrica.com/stories/200909180915.html http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/Butty-Liberia-Acquittal-React-Tah-10december10-111654209.html 13 http://www.probeinternational.org/carbon-credit-watch/carbon-credit-fraud-makes-its-way-liberia 14 Former Internal Affairs Minister Ambolai Johnson and former LPRC MD, Harry Greaves 12

17 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

The results of the survey unveiled respondents’ rating of the Judiciary at all levels and their contribution to the anti-corruption fight. Like the Executive, 81% of the respondents bear a high distrust level for this branch of government. 16 % of respondents express their trust and confidence in the judiciary system with 3% registering their lack of judgment. Respondents co-related the number of corruption cases involving judicial personnel, those relating to failed proceedings involving non-judicial personnel in high government positions and the ever prohibitively increasing cost of justice. Respondents maintain that corruption cases are handled in ways that provide various legal windows for requital of influential government officials or those connected to them. Respondents believe that Liberia’s judiciary belongs to the “highest bidder” and that ordinary people cannot rely on the system for judicious redress. •

Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission: This specialized arm of the Executive was established in August 2008 to directly investigate, recommend for prosecution all acts of corruption in all sectors of government including the private sector and to institute measures aimed at eradicating the practice and its impact.

Figure 4: Respondents’ perceptions on the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission:

Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Liberia AntiCorruption Commission

Data from the survey shows that respondents hold a high trust rating of the LACC. 64% or respondents do trust the role of the LACC in the Anti-Corruption fight. While and contrasting figure of 24% do to trust that LACC’s institutional participation in the anti-graft drive. 12% respondents declare that they are unsure and could not rate the performance of the LACC. 18 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Meanwhile, while respondents with a high trust rating the LACC say believe that they have and are doing what they can what little they have to fight corruption, but that the executive have not given as much resources and leverage to enable the LACC to enlarge its impact15. Respondents believe that unlike other institutions in the survey, there are hardly instances of corruption16 reported in the media (electronic or print) that emanates from within the LACC. However, its effectiveness, respondents maintain can be traces to both endogenous and exogenous factors. Some of which are enumerated in the full project report. •

The General Auditing Commission: Established out of the need for strengthening public financial accountability and transparency in government including the conduct of routine annual audits and it the institution of measures of systems and control along acceptable international financial auditing standards.

http://www.inprofiledaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3074:corruption-cases-collect-dustlacc-alarms&catid=1:headlines&Itemid=56 16 2000 Schacter and Shah: “The use of public office for private gains”

19 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Figure 5: Respondents’ Perceptions about the General Auditing Commission:

General Auditing Commission 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

General Auditing Commission

The survey report lifts the perceptions of respondents have for the GAC as higher than any of the institutions listed in this report. Respondents perceived the GAC to be that institution with the greatest level of commitment in the fight against corruption. This is manifested by the more than 85% trust rating of the GAC. 5 % of the respondents either do not trust that GAC or were unsure of their how to rate the entity. Respondents point to the level of professionalism employed by the GAC in the discharge of its responsibility, though recognizing a few administrative shortfalls. Respondents maintain in the survey that GAC has stood as the singular institution that has glaringly and consistently highlighted the extent of the corruption virus in public service.

Figure 6: Graphical Summation of Respondents Perceptions: 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Very Trusted

COMMISSION

LIBEERIA ANTICORRUPTION COMMISSION GENERAL AUDTING

JUDICIARY

EXECUTIVE

LEGISLATURE

Trusted Not Very Trusted Not Trusted Not Sure

SUMMATION OF RESPONDENTS' PERCEPTION

20 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

The illustration above summarizes respondents’ perceptions about the five institutions selected under this assessment and provides a good comparison between them using the parameters of the measure for this report. Accordingly, the Executive which includes all institutions under the second branch of government are perceived by respondents to be far less trusted than any other under this assessment, in the fight against corruption. The GAC, in contrast attracts the greatest trust rating followed by the LACC. These perception performances by the critical institutions should drive renew demands to reform and improve commitment and political will in the anti-graft campaign. 9. Review of Findings and Validation Workshop: Held on Wednesday, April 13, 2011, LDW in collaboration with its many local partners, and with support from Trust Africa- Humanity United, administered a one-day validation and review of findings workshop to evaluate the findings of the study. Held under the theme:"Public Perception on Anti- Corruption Efforts in Liberia: A Survey of Governmental Performance,” The program brought together distinguished legal luminaries and to grace the occasion, several high profile personalities were invited to serve as keynote speaker and panelists respectively. Cllr. Negbalee Warner, former head of Secretariat of the Liberia Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (LEITI), and now Senior Advisor at the Carter Center for the Freedom of Information Project in Liberia, Cllr, James N. Verdier, Rule of Law Officer at the UNDP, and Cllr. Frances Johnson Morris, Chairperson of the Liberia Anti-corruption Commission. Workshop Objectives: The workshop was designed with the following objectives in mind: • Draw the attention of policy managers to the importance of public perception as a measure of effective policy management; • Accentuate the vial nature of public participation in policy formulation, management and administration; • To assess the relative successes and failures of the anti-corruption process; • To strengthen the prospects of public outreach for effective management of public policies. 21 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

10. Panelists Presentations: Speaking under the sub-theme: “The Implications of Public Perception on Policy Management,” Cllr. James Nyenpan Verdier, Rule of Law Officer of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in Monrovia informed the audience that perceptions were not facts and must be viewed as such. He however stated that based on what was available to people through the local media, reports and other sources people were bound to establish the frame of mind that is manifested through public opinion. He stressed the recent United States Department of State Human Rights report. The University of Liberia Law Professor and former National Director of the Justice and Peace Commission (JPC), averred that the authoritative contents of the report and speaking as a Lawyer and not as a UNDP Rule of Law expert, he stated that Government institutions responsible for the fight against corruption had not executed the fight effectively thereby resulting in a non-effective campaign against graft. The legal luminary pointed to landmark corruption cases such as that of Harry Greaves, Edwin Snowe, Gyude Bryant, Lawrence Bropleh and numerous other cases were tackled unsuccessfully. He stated that government prosecutorial arm was in immeasurable ways deliberately inept leading to the overwhelming losses in the face of convicting evidences. Cllr. Verdier in conclusion called on take stakeholders to take due cognizance of public perception and ensure that improvements are made to enhance public perception on national events through enriched public educational programs so as to improve the chances of success. He stated that corruption was not new and had contributed to the demise of several leaders dating back to the 1870. Moreover he recalled that successive governments have taken sometime demeaning actions to address corruption in Liberia17. Cllr. Verdier18 called on Government agencies to cultivate the practice of incorporating in policy design the critical aspect of policy education for greater public information and understanding. For her part, the Chairperson of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission, Cllr. Frances Johnson Morris, hailed Liberia Democracy Watch and its partners for the workshop. She recognized that such efforts was critical to the fight on corruption and congratulated the donors who supported the project. Cllr. Morris, a former Minister of Justice lamented the prevalence of corruption and its impact on the society. She scolded the politicians and CSO leaders who are bent on using the situation to launch tremendous criticism on the government. She listed the autonomy granted the LACC and the GAC in the discharge of the responsibilities as a major step in the fight against corruption including the institution of the LEITI19 process, the passage of the FOI Law, the open budgetary process initiated, The LACC Chairperson however lamented that despite the actions taken by government, corruption was still on the rise. She conceded the that there were severe challenges in prosecuting corrupt officials due in large measure to the resource and Human resource capacity gaps being experienced at the LACC and specifically in Government’s prosecution arm, the Ministry of Justice. She listed as some of the challenges the unwillingness of people to report corruption, and the level of corrupt jury program as part of the hurdles to be overcome. Cllr. Morris called for the granting of prosecutorial powers to the LACC as a means to enhancing and speeding up the prosecution of indicted persons. She lamented that the LACC capacity has been undermined by successive budget cuts by the Legislature and the numerous hurdles in accessing appropriations in time has greatly limited that body to impact the anti-

1989 Liberia Economic Stabilization Project Report, led by the USAID Operational Experts(OPEX) Elder sibling of the Cllr. Jerome J. Verdier Sr. of the defunct Truth and Reconciliation Commission 19 Liberia Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative 18

22 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

corruption landscape in Liberia. According to Cllr. Morris, the LACC was using bulk of its allocations to community outreach across the country. She extended gratitude to LDW for the support through the organization and administration of the workshop and the sharing of the findings with policy makers. She looked forward to continuingly working with CSOs in Liberia to eradicate corruption in all its forms. After the presentations by panelists, a period of questions and responses was carried out after which participants were asked to provide their assessment of the shortlisted institutions using the same assessment framework as the “Trust Index” used in the survey. Participants in general agreed with the findings and provided additional reasons including: • Increasing number of corruption cases implicating the institutions of the Executive, Legislature (including the Senate and House); Cases of bribery to be confirmed for Presidential nominees20 and those for the passage of concession agreements21 etc.

After the session, LDW through its Program Officer, launched the findings and climaxed the work review and validation session. 11. Constraints and Challenges: Amongst the constraints experienced during the execution of the project include: • • •

Public distrust at the unset of the project was a major constraint thereby undermining the initial public engagement in the survey; The unfolding national electoral process immeasurably have diluted away from the level of public involvement and interest envisage; As a consequence of the electoral year, a critical part of the post-project advocacy will now take greater place during the campaigns then prior to the campaign process. The findings will help assist politicians in lifting in their manuscripts or platforms how they intend to address the corruption fight. 12. Recommendations:

From the study, LDW is positioned to realize that despite the many actions taken by government of Liberia and its many partners, so much remain to be done. The study shows that many limitations experienced by various institutions and the challenges hindering the success of the fight imposed by various factors lacing the anti-corruption landscape. Findings show that while the government has enacted and created the LACC, the GAC and other institutions and fiscal policies to control and eradicate corruption in the public sector, immensely adverse actions by government have tended to undermine all efforts to eradicate the inimical ill. The 20

Rumors averred that Cllr. Gongloe’s rejection was arguably based on his refusal to pay bribe to the Senate. http://frontpageafricaonline.blogspot.com/2011/05/probing-elelnilto.html ; http://frontpageafricaonline.blogspot.com/2011/05/cold-water-saga.html ; http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15599 21

23 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

chart on page 12 of this report illustrates in graphical ways the success of the ongoing anti-corruption program led by the government of Liberia and what has and has not succeeded. The most recent carbon credit scandal22 was a more and ample case in point where the government action went contrary to its expressed commitment to fight corruption. Increasingly as the campaign to combat corruption continues, a lot is being hoped for, in terms of greater commitment and institutional strengthening policies: Accordingly and in consideration of the immense learning unearth as a consequence of the research, LDW herewith list the following recommendations as critical measures aimed at enhancing government’s prospects of success in the campaign against corruption.

•

• • • •

•

• • • •

Approach the fight on corruption from either end of the spectrum: Supply and Demand side of the corruption axle by hiking the costs of corruption for offerers and recipients of bribe, while making the possibility of demanding bribe a virtual impossibility23; Government’s commitment to the fight cannot be subjective in favor of entrenched politicians and officials but must be nurtured to address every possible given situation; The financial autonomy of the LACC must be instituted to reduce any possibility of undue influences on the prosecution of corrupt officials; The appointment and subsequent commissioning of Commissioners of the LACC must be carried out in a transparent basis ensuring broader public participation, including CSOs. Under a effective fiscal reform program, Government should seek to digitalize its processes where possible , doing away with direct cash payment but to introduce computerize systems that make use of money orders and other non-cash receipts to reduce the level of cash transactions over time; Increasing public information on processes and procedures to increase public knowledge and reduce manipulations due to a lack of knowledge and that makes the public vulnerable to corrupt public servants; Synchronize and simplify public processes and procedures making them public friendly and that encourages the public support; The review or nullification of any contract, agreement found to have been fraudulently obtained especially through the process of bribery and related unscrupulous activities24. Utilize the strength of public opinion surveys as a means to capturing public concerns and incorporating same into a formidable solution; Corruption is realizably prevalent in unstable political environments, where public officials believe corruption to be a way of self protection in the event of a untimely dismissal;

LDW believes that these recommendations amongst several other critical contributive factors interplaying might work to help to quell the surge of corruption in Liberia. It is worth noting that 22

http://elawspotlight.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/liberia-seeks-prosecution-for-bribery-in-carbon-deal/ 2004 Shah, Anti-corruption Policies and Programs. 24 www.frontpageafricaonline.com; GAC books National Oil Company of Liberia for offering 118,00 in bribe to national Legislature for the passage of several oil agreements: Broadway Consolidated, PLC and Oranto Oil, Now Cheron. 23

24 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

reports filtering in the media and those made by special Presidential investigative committee have unfortunately implicated the President and her relatives in the increasing menace. Much has to be done and shield the Presidency from reproach and to institute an anti-corruption regime that is institutionalized and not serving to attract international partners merely. #####

25 Assessing Liberiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Anti-Corruption Environmentâ&#x20AC;?

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Liberia Democracy Watch Anti-Corruption Assessment Validation Workshop First United Methodist Church Board Room, First United Methodist Church Compound Ashmun Street, Monrovia Wednesday, April 13, 2011 Work Session Agenda 08:30 AM

Registration of Participants

08:45 AM

Welcome and Introduction

09:00-09:30 AM

Formal Statements of Welcome Mr. Nathaniel T. Kwabo, LDW Chairman of Board Mr. Kanio Gbai Gbala, CSO Specialist, (a.i.), TrustAfrica

Cllr. Frances Johnson Morris Chairperson, Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC)

09:15- 10:10 AM

Presentations

Keynote Address Cllr. Negbalee Warner Senior Advisor Carter Center FOI Project in Liberia

Cllr. Frances Johnson Morris Chairperson, Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) Cllr. James Nyepan Verdier, Jr. Rule of Law Officer United Nations Development Program (UNDP)

10:00- 10:30 AM

Q&A

Q& A

10:30 – 11:00 AM

Participants’ Work Session, Mr. James Thompson, Lead Facilitator

11:00 – 11:45 AM

Participants’ Presentation & Validation

11:45 – 12:00 Noon

Launch of Survey Findings,

12:00 – 12: 15 PM

26 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Announcement, Close of Program and Lunch

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Workshop Participants Listings No.

Name

Organization

Cell No.

Imam Habib Sheriff

IRCL

06556206

A. Saydee Momboe

LINNk

06909225

Robert T. Saasaiwor

N. Essul Allen

Selvester W. Gbidi

UMU/LRP HRPF

06554526 077095551

CEDE

06433007

Bockarie Sannoh

LAWCLA

06591959

Joseph Lahay

DFI

06917686

Adaqma D Jawondo

UMWAEO

06553525

Nimely B Dweh

The News

06586433

10.

E. Macauley Sombai

Front Page Africa

077217428

11.

Nathaniel Walker

INSIGHT

06129615

12.

Mcdonald Joss

LUDT

06512849

Hega W Johnson

AGENDA

06624022

14.

Philip N Kollie

15.

Moses Garseaway

Jarbo M Turray

Lawre4nce Konuwah

18.

Augustus A Kemokai

FLY

06749479

19.

Youfu Kamara

SKY FM

06665107

John Bonah

CGIT-Liberia

06144371

22,

Darius Waymah

WANEP- LIBERIA ELBC-LBS FOHRD UPELDESP

06579860 062666008 04763948 06582428

NHRCL

27 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

28 Assessing Liberiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Anti-Corruption Environmentâ&#x20AC;?

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Liberia Democracy Watch (LDW) In Collaboration with Its Many Local Partners Holds a Validation and Review of Findings Workshop Under the theme: “Public Perception on Anti-corruption Efforts in Liberia: A Survey of Governmental Performance” Venue: First United Methodist Church Hall, Ashmun Street, Monrovia Date: April 13, 2011 With Support from TRUSTAFRICA - HUMANITY UNITED

29 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

Sample Survey Questionnaire In furtherance of determining the Anti-Corruption “Trust” Index, respondents were required to rank each selected governance structures using the Trust scale. 1. How do you rank the following institutions and their commitment to anti-corruption fight? INSTITUTIONS VERY TRUSTED

TRUSTED

NOT TRUSTED NOT SURE

NOT VERY TRUSTED

LEGISLATURE EXECUTIVE JUDICIARY LACC GAC

2. What incident do you recall that support you assertions? Incidence -I Incidence-II Incidence-II

30 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II

CAPTURED PHOTOGRAPHS

Cover Page

LDW’s Umaru Vainga in mobilization gear during the data gathering process.

Page 1:

Photograph of President and Sirleaf and a business man seen handing over a “White Envelope” which subsequently brought about public reproach to the Presidency.

Page 8:

President Sirleaf seen in embracing discussions with Rep. Edwin Melvin Snowe, who had accused the Presidency of bribing his colleagues to dethrone him from the Speakership.

Page 14:

LACC Chairperson Cllr. Morris and other panelists during the findings review and validation workshop.

Page 19:

A cross section of participants during one the workshop

Page 21:

UNDP’s Rule of Law Officer, Cllr. James Nyenpan Verdier speaking at the program.

31 Assessing Liberia’s Anti-Corruption Environment”

Governance Monitoring Report-II