Vital Dimension of Ex-Soldiers’ Impeachment Petition

“If silence and taboo over certain critical national imperatives take the place of the Constitutional rights of Liberians to freely speak out, assemble peacefully and petition their leaders, then what options are left for the people to aspire for democratic practices and the peaceful resolution of grievances?”

THE UPROAR GREETING the petition of a group of ex-Armed Forces of Liberia soldiers to the House of Representatives for the impeachment of President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf is unfortunate. The uproar is unfortunate not because the reasons provided by the ex-soldiers are incontestable; it is unfortunate because most of the criticisms are product of mere sentimentalism that sidesteps the legitimate issue of Constitutional and democratic rights of the petitioners. As if the objectors of the petitioners' action were bent on prejudicing the matter which is obviously an element of due process, they have gone far ahead speaking and writing for the Respondent, and rubbishing the claims and vital issues of the pending litigation.

SADLY, SOME OF the objectors are members of the civil society, including a section of the local media, who should serve as impartial observers and analysts of this very crucial and delicate proceeding. Many not only embark upon a demonization campaign against the petitioners, they have also begun to create the impression that the action to petition the House lacks all basis and should be quashed without seeing the light of day. And the pre-judgmental argument is that the ex-soldiers don't understand that the AFL, contrary to what they claim, is being restructured and not dissolved pursuant to the Comprehensive Accra Peace Agreement. But even assuming that the impeachment proceeding were a product of headless group of people as others are making the public to know, whose responsibility it is to determine the degree of irrelevance? Is it fanatical elements or the House in whom the petitioners have reposed adjudicatory confidence? Why don't everyone see the petition, flawed or not, as a right of the petitioners that is determinable only by the House? Surely, some of our compatriots, had it been in the court of law, would surely have been held for contempt on prejudicial charge in the matter.

THERE IS STILL another factor or dimension of the ex-soldiers' impeachment petition that is knowingly or unknowingly swallowed by the verbosity and zealousness of the objectors. And the factor or dimension is seen where some objectors to the impeachment petition argue that the petitioners should not, after all, thread the ground of seeking the impeachment of the President, no matter the gravity of their concerns. The objectors pine--and even shiver--that dialogue, however endless, suffices over calls for presidential impeachment. If these ex-soldiers who could not defend the country in times of war have nothing to offer, some objectors argue, they should remain silent. But beyond the complexity of controlling the silence of every citizen is the other school of thought, which is this: If silence and taboo over certain critical national imperatives take the place of the Constitutional rights of Liberians to freely speak out, assemble peacefully and petition their leaders, then what options are left for the people to aspire for democratic practices and the peaceful resolution of grievances?

WHILE WE ACKNOWLEDGE the imploration that citizens should focus more on national recovery and peace and to eschew acts that edge on hate and bitterness, it is important that we all don't lose sight of the basic metabolism that keeps the body polity lively and healthy. The right to petition our national leaders, and even seek the impeachment of elective leaders, including the president, is a vital neutron of democracy sanctioned by all Liberians through the Constitution, without which the body polity is vulnerable to collision. For example, does it not help our democratic culture and peace to have thousands of apparently frustrated ex-soldiers of the erstwhile notorious AFL shed their trait of violence and come to the House of Representatives seeking the civil impeachment rather than opening gunfire towards the State House? In other words, it is not better for citizens to pursue their grievances through Constitutional processes than via unconstitutional means?

LEFT WITH FANATICS and zealots, the best trait all citizens must demonstrate for stability, peace and development is silence, complacency and indifference over the deeds and misdeeds of the political regime. And it is understandable that, from their perspective, calling for the President's impeachment is the most treasonable act. It would not be a surprise that, over the next couple of days or weeks, the Liberian public will play host to fierce greetings of condemnation to the ex-soldiers' petition calling on the House of Representatives to impeach President Sirleaf. But before the wailing and rage consume the conscience of the nation and dampen the merits and demerits of the matter, we must also not forget that all these emotional and sentimental wailings and condemnations have the potential to clog path of democracy and peace and create alibis for brutal engagement in the resolution of grievances.

ABSOLUTELY, THERE IS no better way to sustain the peace, build an effective democratic culture and subvert pretexts for violent political conflicts than for citizens to unreservedly aspire for their civil liberties and exercise their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, particularly via due process as the ex-AFL soldiers are doing. It would therefore be more patriotic and peace-loving had zealots and devotees of the President kept their venoms under control and allow the House fairly and expeditiously process and adjudge the petitioners' petition.