Taylor says he stepped down to prevent US from killing all Liberians

Today Charles Taylor took the stand. I've been sitting in my kitchen watching the trial stream live for the past few hours. Taylor has been energetic, and arguably most angry when talking about Moses Blah and other witnesses who he says have lied. He has vehemently denied every charge against him. Here are some highlights and thoughts:

• Taylor says he stepped down in 2003 because he was afraid the US would kill all Liberians in an attempt to get rid of him. (He appeared to start crying before discussing the shelling of Greystone. He says the US provided the ammunition for this attack.)
• Taylor says he was not trying to escape to Cameroon when he was caught. Rather he was traveling to visit the president of Chad. (One might ask why, then, he was traveling in disguise.)
• Griffiths: Was you revolution [the NPFL invasion] informed by any ideology? Taylor: I have tried not to become ideologically attached to any dogma. But it was informed by a desire for democracy and rule of law.
• He admitted to providing arms to the RUF at the end of 1991 and beginning of 1992 to defend the border against an ULIMO invasion. But after that he says he never armed the RUF.
• Taylor's responses to questions seemed to set the stage for certain witnesses to be called, including former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo and his former National Security adviser John T. Richardson. (How the latter would get to The Hague given the travel ban he is under is not clear.)
• Taylor said he met with Obasanjo once or twice every three months while in Nigeria. He said Obasanjo constantly said he was under lots of pressure to hand Taylor over to the Court. Taylor says Obasnajo knew Taylor was traveling to Chad, and doesn't understand why Obasanjo would say he tried to escape.
• Griffiths: Even though you are 61, if you were alone in a room with Obasanjo what would you do? Taylor: I would want to find out from him why in the hell did you do this? Two former presidents involved in a tussle. Because I am damn angry about what Obasanjo did to me.
• Taylor says the charges against him are, "what you lawyers call incredulous...Whether I live 100 years it is impossible what I have heard here, where humans can come, and in an organized fashion lie and lie. I am not guilty of any of this."
• Taylor: People have me eating human beings. How can people be so low to even think of me in such a way? Charles Taylor is supposed to be out there like some little common street thug involving himself in the acquiescence of rape and murder.
• "I am still the national chief of Liberia," Taylor said, referring not to secret societies but to the head chief of all tribal chiefs. I'm not sure whether many Liberians would agree with this.

The defense case: Day 1

Today Charles Taylor's lead lawyer, Courtenay Griffiths, outlined the defense's case. Though the prosecution disagreed.

In an unusual move, prosecutor Stephen Rapp interjected during Griffiths’ opening statement. Rapp objected because the defense was commenting on the prosecution’s case rather than setting out the evidence his team will present. At the time, Griffiths was describing the breakdown of the prosecution’s linkage and crime-based witnesses. The judges overruled the objection. Griffiths called the interjection “rude.”

That is from the Trial of Charles Taylor blog summary of today's proceedings. Tomorrow I'll be up at 2AM to watch Taylor on live video begin his testimony. But for today I'm relying on the Taylor trial blog summary. Here are some highlights:

• Griffiths said Taylor was trying to broker peace in Sierra Leone, and that the West is using Taylor as a scapegoat. The trial's political nature is demonstrated by the fact that the Court did not indict former Sierra Leonean President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah.
• Griffiths "infused his opening statement with a quote from Jamaican reggae singer Bob Marley and held up a sign to the public gallery that stated 'Charles Taylor is innocent' before the judges entered the courtroom[.]"
• Griffiths argued prosecution's evidence that supposedly links Taylor to crimes committed is weak.
• Griffiths said as president Taylor was so consumed with fending off attacks on Liberia he couldn't have been able to micromanage the war in Sierra Leone.

5 things you don't know about the Charles Taylor trial

Tomorrow Charles Taylor’s trial will resume. The defense team will give an overview of their case. On Tuesday Taylorwill begin testifying in his own defense.

Most people assume Taylor is guilty and that the Special Court for Sierra Leone has proved that. Taylor is responsible for horrific deeds and I think he deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. But below I offer five things you might not know about Taylor’s trial that don’t portray the Special Court as a paragon of justice, and the prosecution’s case as flawless.

1) Taylor is being charged with crimes committed in Sierra Leone, not Liberia.

Taylor has never stepped foot in Sierra Leone, but is being charged under joint criminal enterprise, a form of liability that places blame on an individual who participated in the design of a plan that involved perpetrating a crime.

2) Most Sierra Leoneans and Liberians are not closely following the trial.

Despite the Special Court’s strong commitment to outreach, apathy toward the trial permeatesWest Africa.Why? For security reasons, the trial is being held in The Hague.This physical distance may be dampening enthusiasm. Also, for many in Sierra Leone andLiberia, the big fish are the rebels who raped the neighbor, or the soldiers who looted the village. These individuals remain free, living side by side with their victims. Taylor’s indirect responsibility for these local crimes may seem less obvious.

3) Taylor has attended almost everyday of his trial.

Taylor legitimizes the Special Court by attending his trial and following Court procedures.When I observed the trial in January 2008, Taylor showed up to Court in a business suit with gold Africa-shaped cufflinks. He took notes as witnesses testified. When he excused himself to use the restroom, he gave a slight bow to the judges.

4) The necessity of several prosecution witnesses was questionable.

Taylor does not deny that many of the crimes he is charged with supporting took place. Rather he denies his responsibility for these crimes. Yet perhaps in an attempt to pull the heartstrings of judges, the prosecution called many crime base witnesses. These witnesses recounted terrifying stories of rape and murder. This testimony humanized distant events, but their legal necessity often was debatable.

5) The defense used cross-examinations to highlight witness compensation.

Defense lawyers used their cross-examination of almost all of the prosecution’s 91 witnesses to highlight compensation witnesses received for testifying. This compensation sometimes took the form of per diems while staying in The Hague, reimbursement for hospital bills, or rent. Defense alleged that one witness had his rent paid for a year by the prosecution, and again by the Court’s Witness and Victim Support unit. The implication is that witnesses’ statements are less reliable if they received significant compensation to testify. It remains to be seen how much weight Special Courtjudges will give to this issue.

A small dog and a $16,000 overdraft

I'm spending the summer in Chicago with my boyfriend, who lives here. I'm not starting grad school until the fall. This means I have lots of empty days to run and read and eat and go toNorthwestern's Library of African Studies. Which is what I did on Friday.

The library, which is open to the public, has at least 100 books on Liberia. I spent most of the day reading Mark Huband's The Liberian Civil War (and negotiating, unsuccessfully, for borrowing privileges). The book sells for $50 on Amazon and the Chicago Public Library system does not own it. Argh.

As Charles Taylor's defense team will begin presenting their case tomorrow, I will post here some quick facts you might not know about Taylor that I learned from Huband. (By the way, I haven't finished the book yet, but it is so good. Readable and super well-researched. )

• By the end of the 1970s, when in the US, Taylor had 3 credit cards and a $16,000 overdraft.
• Taylor was in Liberia when Tolbert was murdered, on a trip financed by Tolbert. Tolbert wanted his critics abroad to come to Liberia and see all the good things the government was doing.
• Taylor's position under Doe as head of the General Services Agency was more powerful than you might think. A recent law had prohibited ministries from purchasing most of their own supplies. They had to go through GSA. Purchasing goods from companies provided the most potentially lucrative financial kickbacks.
• When Taylor became head of GSA he "adopted the trappings of power...His critics described him as travelling in the back of chauffeur-driven government cars clutching a small dog, with up to 12 armed bodyguards[.]"

Taylor's point of view

The Charles Taylor Trial website has a great new format. It will have daily, weekly, and monthly trial summaries. And the site links to the trial's live video feed.

Tracey Gurd has just posted some thoughts on why it's important to hear Taylor's point of view:

Not only will it add to our understanding of the role he allegedly played in the Sierra Leonean war and to our historical understanding of the conflict, but it will provide the victimized community with one more reminder that their suffering has not been forgotten.

Statistics from TRC statements

Thanks to John for pointing me to a report Benetech did for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission called "Descriptive Statistics from Statements to the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission."

Here are some highlights. (At points I copy language straight from the text.) As the report notes, though, these are statistics from those who gave statements, not country-wide statistics. If you have time, scroll through the report. Some of the graphs are really useful for understanding dynamics of the war.

• The TRC collected and processed more than 17,000 statements. [G]iven the relative size of Liberia, particularly in comparison to truth commissions in other countries, 17,000 statements is a sizable number for the TRC staff to collect. For example, the TRC in South Africa collected approximately 21,000 statements in a country nearly fourteen times the size of Liberia.
• [V]iolations reported to the TRC spiked in 1990 with a total of 48,750 violations. The second most violations (28,657 violations) were reported in 2003, and the third most in 1994 (24,299 violations).
• Page 9 of the report shows variation in level of reported violations by county from 1979 to 2003. These are the same charts that appeared in the TRC report, but they are higher resolution so you can see the dates.
• [L]ess than 20% of all victims know the perpetrator who committed the violation against them personally.

Using the TRC for political advantage, not reconciliation

An anonymous Liberian left a powerful comment on my blog yesterday. Here is the comment in its entirety:

President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf did apologize at the TRC hearing. According to the TRC she did not go"far enough". I don't know what they referd to as far enough. [Could you elaborate on this? Do you have a copy of exactly what she said? -Shelby]

I am astonished and surprised by the hypocricy and sycophancy expressed by the people that are calling on the President to resign.

People have forgotten that 98% of the Liberian people supported Taylor because we all wanted dictator samuel Doe to be deposed. President Doe was repressive, tribalistic and dictatorial.

When people realized that Taylor's men were barbaric and engaged in extra-judicial killings and untold altrocities they turned against him. It was in late July and early September of 1990 that many Liberians stopped their moral support to Mr. Taylor. It was around the same time that president became very critical of Mr. Taylor. I know of many of my compatiots who were very upset because they thought Mr. Taylor was delaying his capture of Monrovia. If the average Liberian had the financial resources they would supported Mr.Taylor because his revolution was very popular in the early days and people just got caught up in the euphoria.

All Liberians were victimized by the Civil Crisis. The War Lords committed altracious and despicable acts of cruelty. Liberians in the wildest imagination did not expect this level of violence to have taken place. If they would have known, nobody in their right mind have supported Mr. Taylor's revolution.

It pains me that people will use the work of the commission to ban thier political rivals and score political points. The TRC was established to facilitate Peace and reconciliation among the people of Liberia. The acts pertuated by the warring factions were heinous and cruel. Liberians should work together for sincere peace and genuine reconciliation.

Let my people stop the pandering,political grandstanding, hypocricy and sycophancy.

"If you hold them responsible, it will not bring back my leg."

Thanks to Fred P.M van der Kraaij for pointing out this article Robert Blair has on The Huffington Post about how Liberians are reacting to the TRC report. (I admit I do love the reference to my blog.)

Blair argues that we are not sufficiently listening to the voices of Liberians. So Blair asked five Liberians for their reactions to the TRC report. Here's my favorite excerpt:

Twenty-six-year-old David Gibson's right leg was blown off in a firefight between rival factions in Monrovia. Like Passawe, he is a victim of war, but he is doubly stigmatized: as an amputee, he is often assumed to have fought in the conflict, though he has never held a gun; as a beggar and slum-dweller, he is subject to endless harassment. (During our conversation, a private security guard from a nearby supermarket hurried over and yelled, "Hey, hey, leave that white man alone!" Gibson shrugged: "That is exactly what I'm talking about.") Despite the indignities of his daily routine, he holds no grudge against the rebels or the country's current political leaders. "If you hold them responsible, it will not bring back my leg. It will not bring back my friends who died in the war. It will not bring back my life."

Suggestion that TRC commissioners afraid to appear in public since report release

Kate Thomas has a Voice of America article out today on how Liberians are responding to the TRC report. She quotes my rockstar friend Jonathan Saah:

Jonathan Saah, a graduate who works in a bank in downtown Monrovia, says he voted for President Johnson Sirleaf knowing about her support for Charles Taylor. He says every Liberian played some part in the war.

"At the time of the NPFL, it was like Charles Taylor inspired confidence because people welcomed it," he said. "People supported the rebels. Everybody was a contributing factor to the Liberian civil war."

The article also says this:

Public support for President Johnson Sirleaf remains strong. The U.S.-based Liberia Human Rights Campaign says some members of the truth commission have been reluctant to appear in public since the report was released.

Rapp may leave Taylor trial

Lead prosecutor in the Charles Taylor trial, Stephen Rapp, may become US Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues. Rapp says if Congress confirms him for this position, "I will leave the position [as lead prosecutor] ... after ensuring a smooth transition to my successor and the availability of personnel and resources to complete the trial of Charles Taylor and the other work of the special court."

I don't know much about Rapp, but my gut reaction is to see him as another foreigner who used Africa as a career stepping stone. It seems to me extraordinarily unprofessional and injurious to prosecution efforts to abandon the trial just as the defense will start to present its case.

Kristof and Liberia

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof is taking questions from readers. Here's an excerpt from his response to a question about why so much news on Africa is about bad stuff:

Incidentally, on my “Win a Trip” journey this spring, my firm intention was to end the trip with a reassuring column from Liberia, which is doing relatively well. That’s why I chose to end the trip in Liberia. Yet in the end, I came across rates of sexual violence, a legacy of war, that appalled me and demanded to be written about. So though my final column included some notes of the progress in Liberia, it was more depressing than I had originally planned. Journalism and planning don’t always go together; you have to bow to the story.

Did Sirleaf ever apologize?

There's some confusion about whether Sirleaf apologized to Liberians during her TRC testimony in February.

A BBC article today on opposition calls for Sirleaf to resign says she did:

When she appeared before the commission in February, Mrs Johnson-Sirleaf apologised to the commission for supporting Mr Taylor - who later became president himself, before fleeing the country.

She said she had been "fooled" into supporting him, adding: "I feel it in my conscience. I feel it every day."

Glenna Gordon had a post on this confusion several months ago. Glenna pointed to an AP article titled "Liberia's president apologizes to nation." Bizarrely, though, this is the best evidence the article has to show that she apologized:

“If there is anything that I need to apologize for to this nation, it is to apologize for being fooled by Mr. Taylor in giving any kind of support to him,” said the 70-year-old president as she sat before the flag of Liberia. “I feel it in my conscience, I feel it everyday.”

Also, if she had apologized and expressed remorse, the TRC would not have placed on the list of Liberians who should be barred from holding public office. (Just as Joshua Blahyi, aka General Butt Naked, apologized and thus is not on the list of those recommended for prosecution or those who should be barred from holding public office.) I think her spot on the list shows she did not apologize.

I can't find a transcript of her testimony to the TRC (can anyone point me to it?), but I'm pretty sure she's never apologized.

Taylor trial update

The Special Court for Sierra Leone held a status conference today in advance of the start of the defense case next week. Here's what happened:

• Taylor originally was set to start testifying on Monday, July 13. Now his lawyers will give an opening statement on Monday, July 13 and Taylor will start testifying on Tuesday, July 14.
• The prosecution complained that the 256 witnesses the defense has on their witness list is too many. Defense pointed out that prosecution lawyers had more than 300 witnesses on their witness list, but only called 91 of them to testify. Defense similarly plans to call only some of their witnesses. The judges said that if it appears the number of witnesses being called is excessive, they will order a reduction in the number of witnesses.
• Prosecution argued that several possible defense witnesses seem more like expert witnesses than witnesses of fact. (Apparently defense can't call any expert witnesses?) Defense said they are witnesses of fact. The judges said if they sound like expert witnesses when they testify, their testimony will be prohibited.

Thoughts on the TRC report

Here are some highlights from and thoughts on the TRC report that haven't made the news. All page references refer to pages of the PDF.

• The report is 384 pages long. But it really isn't that long. The findings don't start showing up until you get past page 200. And everything past page 305 is mostly administrative details. (A few exceptions: The list of those recommended for prosecution starts on page 346, and an annex on economic crimes starts on page 349.)
• The TRC collected 17,416 statements in Liberia (page 164). This is about half of one percent of all Liberians in Liberia (my calculations). While slightly more than half of statements came from men, for the most part the TRC did an admirable job in collecting an equal number of statements from men and women.
• For all the talk about reaching out to Liberians in the US, the TRC only took 227 statements in the US (page 164).
• Page 224 has fascinating graphs that show how each county was affected throughout the war. (I.e. Grand Kru county was not impacted much by the war until after 2000.) Unfortunately the charts are in low resolution, so even when you zoom in it's impossible to see the dates. But you can still get the gist of things.
• I think the chart below is interesting (page 229). I've pasted the data for the top six violators.

Reported Violations by Perpetrator, All Violations

Perpetrator	Violations	Percent of Violations
NPFL	63843	39
LURD	18797	12
Liberian Peace Council	16708	10
Militia	12762	8
ULIMO	11564	7
MODEL	11349	7

• I haven't finished reading the report, but thus far here's my favorit quote:

So endemic and permissive is corruption as a culturally accepted practice in Liberia that if one doesn’t steal public resources and monies when in government, he is considered stupid. While corrupt officials who steal and bask in affluence to extend their influence in society are well respected and honored annually by social and religious institutions as “honorable” and “good citizens” and “personalities of the year” because of their “benevolence and valuable contribution to society”. (Page 19)

What do Pat Robertson and the CEO or ArcelorMittal Liberia have in common?

My optimism about ArcelorMittal's operations in Liberia just fell a few notches.

This Virginian-Pilot article notes that Joe Mathews, CEO of ArcelorMittal Liberia, partnered with the televangelist Pat Robertson on a gold mining venture in 1999. I've posted on my blog why this venture was a bad idea.

Here's an excerpt from the Virginian-Pilot article:

Then a 1999 phone call from evangelist and Virginia Beach businessman Pat Robertson lured [Mathews] to Liberia.

“I thought, 'Umm, why would he be calling me?’” Mathews recalled. “It turns out that through some mutual contacts he wanted to talk to me about a business idea. He’s a very interesting character. I spent almost three hours talking to him, and he has the ability to make you feel like you’re the exact person he needs.”

The conversation with Robertson evolved from starting a dot -com business to a venture in Liberia – gold exploration. Freedom Gold Ltd. was then a Robertson-owned company based at the headquarters of his Christian Broadcasting Network in Virginia Beach.

Mathews...would go on to serve as the gold mining company’s vice president of finance and administration[.]