Women, chiefs, activists protest over Land Rights Act as Weah is accused of giving power to whites through land ownership
Emma Emeozor [email protected]
The peaceful transition of power from ex-President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf to President George Weah marked another epoch in the history of Liberia, a country traumatised by two civil wars.
The significance of the election of Weah could be considered from two standpoints: He is the first democratically-elected indigenous president since the country was founded 170 years ago. Second, Sirleaf was a harbinger who had the responsibility of stabilising the country after the 1999 to 2003 civil war.
As a ‘forerunner,’ she displayed rare courage and leadership acumen in the discharge of her responsibilities, mindful of the pitfalls that culminated in the civil war and the feud that trailed the regime of Charles Taylor. Though her party lost, she willingly acknowledged Weah’s victory and ensured his inauguration held unhindered. The event raised the hope of the international community that peace and stability had indeed returned to Liberia.
Conscious of the sad past of his country, Weah pledged to work to sustain peace and promote unity among the people, while addressing their socio-economic problems. One of the hot-button issues he inherited from Sirleaf was the land ownership question. Land was at the centre of the civil war that claimed about 270,000 lives and displaced about 80 per cent of the population.
Fifteen years after the last civil war, land ownership remains a potential source of crisis in Liberia.
Last week, signs emerged indicating that except Weah treads softly in handling the Land Rights Act (LRA) put in place by the Sirleaf administration, land could be an albatross for the success of his government. He has said the proposed LRA should be reviewed before it is passed into law. He wants “foreign land ownership” included to give legal protection to non-Liberians wishing to own land. European, American and Asian investors have been canvassing for such rights over the years. The president’s move though well-intentioned has opened the floodgates of protests by groups who also feel their interest was not incorporated in the bill. Late last month, the ex-football star had his first dose of street protests when 100 women reportedly marched on the presidential palace “to kick off a campaign to amend the Land Rights Act (LRA) passed by the House of Representatives in August, last year.”
Also, chiefs across the country reportedly petitioned lawmakers, declaring their position on the bill. The petition was submitted just as an amalgamation of activists organised a sit-in protest in Monrovia, the capital city. The women who marched on the presidential palace had the full support of the chiefs and activists.
But why the protests over a bill that has been passed by the House of Representatives and is only waiting for the Senate’s nod after which it would go to the president for his assent to become law?
Senior researcher at the Sustainable Development Institute, Ali Kaba, explained the sit-in protest when he told
Reuters in Monrovia: “We are trying to reach out directly to the president. We are aiming to present our petitions together as activities, traditional leaders and women groups to the Senate.”
Head of Rights and Rice Foundation, James Yarsiah, aptly expressed the mood of the people when he told Reuters that “the community only wants a fair share of their land and fair share on its investments.” On why the public protests now, he said: “We saw the president’s directive as an opportunity to push for LRA,” referring to Weah’s call for a review of the bill.
How the LRA came about: In an effort to put an end to the incessant conflicts over land ownership, the Sirleaf administration introduced the LRA to guarantee the rights of individuals to land, the right of family land and the protection of community land.
Under LRA, four categories of land ownership were approved: (a) private land, (b) public land, (c) government land and (d) customary land. The debate on LRA started in 2014 culminating in the drafting of the Land Rights Bill, which the House of Representatives reportedly approved in August 2017.
The Senate was not able to debate and approve the bill like the Lower House did before the 2017 general election. At the time, there was an outcry for a speedy process of the bill by the National Assembly to enable Sirleaf give presidential assent to it before stepping down. But so many interest groups, including legislators wanted to scrutinize every clause of the bill.
Weah was a senator at the time and had no opportunity to make his observations officially. As president, he now wants to ‘fine-tune’ it. Apparently, that is his message. It is for this reason he chose to address an issue considered sensitive enough to ignite unrest across the country shortly after he assumed office.
Liberian media quoted the president as saying that he was going to propose “a constitutional amendment that would allow foreigners, including whites, to own land and obtain Liberian citizenship.” Put differently, he wants a clause in the law to protect foreign ownership of land.
In his address to legislators on Monday, January 29, 2017, the president gave reasons for his decision when he said
“restrictions on citizenship and property ownership have posed serious impediment to Liberia’s development and progress.” He did not wait to be reminded of the reason such restrictions were made. The threats and conditions that inspired the founding fathers of the country to impose that restriction do not exist at the moment, he told the legislators.
“In these circumstances, it is my view that keeping such a clause in our constitution is unnecessary, racist and inappropriate for the place that Liberia occupies today in the comity of nations,” he said.
“It also contradicts the definition of ‘Liberia,’ which derived from Latin, meaning ‘liberty.’ I believe that we should have nothing to fear from people of any race to become citizens of Liberia.” Of course, in his inaugural speech, he did hint that he would do everything possible to attract foreign investors to boost the development and growth of the country. Foreign land ownership is crucial to this agenda.
But the president may have undermined an important aspect of the discord over the LRA and that is how the people, particularly the rural communities, feel over foreign land ownership, which is his focus. Some Liberians are strongly opposed to the president’s move because they fear it will encourage land grabbing by white investors, a development that could lead to the deprivation of the already impoverished indigenous Liberians of their land or homes.
Therefore, the president and the protesters are on parallel course in their demand for a review of the bill.
The chiefs, women and activists staging protests are asking for the reinstatement of “clauses to ensure that customary land cannot be privatized without community consent. The Civil Society Organizations Working Group on Land Rights has argued that “concessions for logging, mining and agriculture cover more than 40 per cent of the country.”
Reports said “the Land Rights bill as originally proposed wants concession companies and other corporate institutions to directly negotiate with the community on the terms and conditions of the land usage.
“It also provides that community or customary land cannot be sold but could be leased for up to 99 years. This provision is intended to ensure generational ownership of the land with corresponding economic benefit that can reduce or end rural poverty.
“Except for transfer of residential area as provided in section (1) of this Article, Customary Land shall not be sold or otherwise alienated to a private person until after a period of ninety-nine years (99) following the effective date of this Act,” reads Article 49 Section 3 of the bill.
According to Alex Yomah, who is accusing the president of giving power to Whites through land ownership, “Customary Land under the proposed legislation means the land owned by a community and used or managed in accordance with customary practices and norms, which include but not limited to wetlands, communal forestland and fallow land.”
He noted that “the law also provides that the proof of ownership of any customary land shall consist of any competent evidence including oral testimony showing a verifiable longstanding relationship or ties that the community claiming ownership of the particular Customary land has had to the land, but under no circumstances shall the ownership of a particular piece of customary land be denied merely because of a failure to produce documentary evidence of title.”
Beside the issue of foreign land ownership being canvassed by the president, there is also the nagging rift between bonafide land owners and squatters. For example, there were people who fled the country following the civil wars but returned only to meet people already occupying their land.
The squatters claim they are occupying abandoned land and, therefore, cannot quit. They insist the land now belongs to them, apparently, because they have been maintaining it, they have investments on it such as residential buildings or firms and above all they have no other place to occupy. Some squatters may have occupied the land they now claim for over 20 years before the real owner(s) emerged from their place of refuge.
Some analysts have argued that humanitarian concerns cannot override the rule of law. They believe squatters should allow the true owners to reclaim their land without condition such as demand for compensation.
“While we recognize the humanitarian concerns of our Liberian brothers and sisters, it cannot replace the rule of law that guarantees and protects private properties. And squatters cannot insist on dispossessing owners who have legitimate deed(s) to their land under the law,” they argued.
While noting that “Liberians in the interior used their own traditional systems based on community or collective ownership of unique land and land without deed is owned by government, thus denying ownership rights to squatters unless conferred by government,” they drew attention to the country’s Public Land Laws of 1956 and 1973 which “provide the legal framework governing public land,” pointing out that the “provisions in the law acknowledge the Liberian government as the sole authority of public land despite communal claims.”
Interestingly, they admit that the country’s land policy “needs reform as has been drafted by the Land Commission,” but quickly added that the bill “is still to be passed into law.”
According to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), “most of Liberia’s four million people live on land held under customary tenure, which is largely administered by chiefs but is not secured or recognized by legal title.”
As the drama over the LRA unfolds, what becomes of it when it is eventually passed into law would depend on the ability of Weah to convince those who believe he is more concerned about the interest of Whites. Also, he would have to allay the fears of community leaders, the women and activists over concessions.