I wanted to flag some interesting stories from Guinea, Liberia, and Cote d'Ivoire (which along with Sierra Leone, form the Mano River Union).
First, things in Guinea seem to be settling down with the appointment of an opposition Prime Minister and President Camara's agreement to voluntary exile in Burkina Faso. It seems the acting President of Guinea, General Konate successfully worked with Blaise Campaore (the regional mediator) and other regional leaders to convince the wounded Camara to step down. This is a relief for many in the region given fears that Camara's return would spark civil war in Guinea and of course threaten stability in the neighboring countries. The new Prime Minister, Jean-Marie Dore, is an old hand in Guinean politics. This is interesting analysis from BBC on the events unfolding in Guinea.
This brings me my next story. Charles Taylor, after months of providing testimony in his own defense, is undergoing cross examination at his trial in The Hague. The crazy "I'm innocent" stories keep coming but this one was, shall we say, entertaining. Taylor claims he had no part in sending Liberian fighters to Cote d'Ivoire in 2003. I think I need to start reading about the trial more often again because it's a good refresher in Mano River Union history.
This brings me to my final story, this time from Cote d'Ivoire, the last country to join the Union. Most people of course are worried about the elections though I think many forgot about that while they watched the quarter finals of the Africa Cup of Nations yesterday (Algeria beat Cote d'Ivoire). Anyway, back in 2006, the multinational oil company Trafigura brought 500 tons of chemical waste to Abidjan "processing" and disposal. I'm sure you've read about other places where governments and corporations are "working" with developing country governments to "process" and "store" dangerous waste. Anyway, the waste wasn't properly handled at all. In fact, it was simply dumped in the laguna in Abidjan (there are some nice photos here). As you might expect, many people got sick, some died. A lawsuit was filed and damages were awarded. On Friday, an Ivoirian court decided that a local activist, Claude Gohourou, should distribute the 45 $million to the 30,000 victims. Now no one is sure that the people who suffered from the dumping of this stuff will see a payment.
Showing posts with label Sierra Leone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sierra Leone. Show all posts
Monday, January 25, 2010
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Charles Taylor's testimony: "Me? I had nothing to do with Sierra Leone!"
If you haven't been following former Liberian President Charles Taylor's defense testimony, you're missing out on some really good (by that I mean anywhere from outright false to merely outlandish) stories. Over the last couple of weeks, Charles Taylor has been testifying in his own defense in the Hague, where he is being tried by the Special Court for Sierra Leone on 11 counts of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other violations of international humanitarian law.
To start off, the Special Court normally sits in Freetown, in Sierra Leone but has moved to the Hague for Taylor's trial because of concerns over security and of the impact having the trial in Sierra Leone itself could have on peace in the wider region. This is important because it's obviously a bit harder to keep both Sierra Leoneans and Liberians properly informed about far-flung proceedings than it would have been if the trial had occurred in Freetown. It also says a lot about how fragile peace is in both countries if the Liberian authorities in particular were worried that having Taylor in Sierra Leone might lead to increased security threats from his remaining supporters in Liberia.
But to get back to the trial, I've been reading the news stories coming out of the Hague. Allafrica.com has great country by country RSS feeds so I set one up for Liberia. Much of the reporting has come from an Open Society Institute-funded NGO that sent a Sierra Leonean attorney to monitor the proceedings.
With that (undoubtedly insufficient) introduction, I'll move to the Taylor's accounts of events.
One report explained that Taylor claims to anyone who looks will find no evidence that any of his (largely frozen) bank accounts hold any illicit funds or funds obtained from the illegal sale of diamonds. Another tells us that Taylor was too busy with events in Liberia in the early 1990s to have anything to do with events in Sierra Leone.
To be more specific:
The same article reports that Taylor claims he had too much going on throughout the 1990s to provide ongoing support to the RUF. Of course, Taylor also says that his 1997 "election" to the Liberian presidency was free and fair (despite the fact that monitors said the election had been marred by "widespread pre-poll intidimidation" of the "if you don't vote for me, I will resume war and you and your family will die" variety).
The third week of Taylor's testimony starts next week and if the reports coming out the last two weeks are any indication, it's worth keeping an eye on because you'll learn a lot about how the Liberian conflict supposedly did or didn't happen and how much Taylor had to do with it. I think the coverage has been pretty good at outlining both the prosecution's case and Taylor's responses. The only thing I haven't yet found is good coverage of reactions to the proceedings but if reactions to to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report are any indication,that would provide interesting insight into how populations view these types of efforts.
To start off, the Special Court normally sits in Freetown, in Sierra Leone but has moved to the Hague for Taylor's trial because of concerns over security and of the impact having the trial in Sierra Leone itself could have on peace in the wider region. This is important because it's obviously a bit harder to keep both Sierra Leoneans and Liberians properly informed about far-flung proceedings than it would have been if the trial had occurred in Freetown. It also says a lot about how fragile peace is in both countries if the Liberian authorities in particular were worried that having Taylor in Sierra Leone might lead to increased security threats from his remaining supporters in Liberia.
But to get back to the trial, I've been reading the news stories coming out of the Hague. Allafrica.com has great country by country RSS feeds so I set one up for Liberia. Much of the reporting has come from an Open Society Institute-funded NGO that sent a Sierra Leonean attorney to monitor the proceedings.
With that (undoubtedly insufficient) introduction, I'll move to the Taylor's accounts of events.
One report explained that Taylor claims to anyone who looks will find no evidence that any of his (largely frozen) bank accounts hold any illicit funds or funds obtained from the illegal sale of diamonds. Another tells us that Taylor was too busy with events in Liberia in the early 1990s to have anything to do with events in Sierra Leone.
To be more specific:
To echo a point one of my colleagues made on this I wonder if I could see his appointment calendar, his phone log, and the travel schedule of his close associates because I'm pretty sure it would be embarrassing for Mr. Taylor.Mr. Taylor said that when rebels attacked Sierra Leone in March 1991, he was busy holding discussions with West African leaders in Senegal geared towards the cessation of hostilities in Liberia and therefore could not have been planning an attack on Sierra Leone.
"At the time of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) invasion of Sierra Leone, I was busy with peace meetings but the prosecution has me busy planning and supporting the RUF in Sierra Leone," Taylor told the judges.
The same article reports that Taylor claims he had too much going on throughout the 1990s to provide ongoing support to the RUF. Of course, Taylor also says that his 1997 "election" to the Liberian presidency was free and fair (despite the fact that monitors said the election had been marred by "widespread pre-poll intidimidation" of the "if you don't vote for me, I will resume war and you and your family will die" variety).
The third week of Taylor's testimony starts next week and if the reports coming out the last two weeks are any indication, it's worth keeping an eye on because you'll learn a lot about how the Liberian conflict supposedly did or didn't happen and how much Taylor had to do with it. I think the coverage has been pretty good at outlining both the prosecution's case and Taylor's responses. The only thing I haven't yet found is good coverage of reactions to the proceedings but if reactions to to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report are any indication,that would provide interesting insight into how populations view these types of efforts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
