... I'd decline appointment of mayors- appointing powers

Certainly, some current-events pundits will vehemently reject the conjecture that Ellen is inclined--now and in the future--to turn her back on this particular temptation of power: the appointment of city mayors. And those who think this way are right to some extent because, after all, it was the President who launched the “trial balloon” months ago with the appointment of the city mayor of Zwedru City . It is that action of Ellen that provoked a Constitutional debate over whether or not it falls within the powers of a Liberian president to appoint municipal heads in the country; a debate which two leading political parties converted into a constitution review session at the Supreme Court. And, no doubt, it is Ellen who is the healthy beneficiary of the edict that has come at the end of the Constitutional debate. It is she who is anointed with lavish powers to appoint, appoint and appoint without season. Clearly, on the basis of scintilla of accounts characterizing the mayor-appointment debate, it is very easy for anyone reading current events from the periphery to conclude that Ellen, the victor and beneficiary of Supreme Court edict, will accept anything less maximizing the powers which she demonstrably sought and got.

But there are guiding principles, which are conscience-haunting and morally challenging. By the power of the logic of these guiding principles, there is possibility that Ellen can make a u-turn; that she can boldly reject her anointment by the Supreme Court with mayors-appointment powers. And she can decline the conferment of powers without bruises on her persons and her career and without harm to history. It is rather declination and u-turn can help the President, the history of the country and democracy.

What are the conscience-haunting guiding principles? Firstly, the President is a longtime progressive, a fierce freedom fighter and a shrewd reformer. She is a renowned vanguard of democratic transformation since the 1970s. She agitated against the specter of tyranny spinning from William Tolbert to Charles Taylor. She was persecuted because of her advocacy for political pluralism, social equality and economic justice. The motto of Ellen's campaign has--or had--been “power to the people.” Doesn't the Supreme Court edict inject into vein of the freedom fighter a dosage that is diametrically antithetical to her lifelong advocacy? Doesn't Ellen feel appalled that the people, whom she strongly defends as a democrat, are being denied the right to franchise and democratic inclusion and participation?

The next guiding principle is Ellen's spoken words. Words reflect ones reputation. And reputation is one's total embodiment, a treasured property of every man and woman. All of the hypnotizing things Ellen told her supporters and the general Liberians in the nearly 30 years of advocacy were crystallized and solemnized in her inaugural oration two years ago. She spoke her guts out. She couldn't be merely rhetorical.

“Today, I urge all of us to commit ourselves to a new era of democracy in Liberia ,” the then President-elect said amid tumultuous applauses. “While assuring the security of our nation and people, we will work tirelessly to ensure that the writ of democracy is expanded, and not constricted, in our land.” In what way does the power to appoint city mayors, traditionally meant for election, expand democracy? Does it not “constrict” democracy in our land?

But she did not stop there. She also said: “We pledge anew our commitment to transparency, open government, and participatory democracy for our citizens…The Executive Mansion and Monrovia will no longer be the only centers of power and sources of development policy making. The people and their interests, as defined by them, will be at the very heart of our dispensation of decentralization and the devolution of power.”

Again, these words--these pledges—which were soberly uttered at inauguration are clearly grossly contradicted by the Supreme Court's empowerment of Ellen to appoint city mayors. Even assuming that Ellen is amused by the edict, it makes one further wonder how she intended--or intends--to devolve and decentralize power to the people. It makes one to wonder how she would actualize her “commitment to transparency, open government, and participatory democracy for our citizens.” One wonders how the election of city mayors, and not their appointment, contravenes her pledge to promote popular participation.

Surely, if I were Ellen, I would regard the Supreme Court decision as a great temptation, the suicidal trapping and intoxicacy of power. I would see the right to appoint city mayors, even if it had undisputed roots in the Constitution, as a parody of my long years of struggle and advocacy. I would resist any such temptation that puts my earnest promises and commitment on collision course with public expectation. I would not afford to see any force or any person to paint of me the impression of political demagogue, unable to keep my words to my people.

More so, since Ellen knows that the Judiciary, including the Supreme Court, is still taking its reform dosages and is yet to fully recover from its fever of political susceptibility and structural decadence, if I were her, I would not be amused by its edict on mayor appointments. Even--God forbade--if I had mistakenly sought the edict, I would quickly withdraw and seek means to mainstream mayor elections into the country's democratization process. I would keep my words, my promises, to devolve power to the people of Liberia who have long been denied civic participation and greater democracy. I would not forget that the pledge of participatory democracy and devolution of power principally comes only with periodic elections, including mayoral elections, and not by appointments.

Indeed, if I were Ellen, I would remember that promise is sacred, and the failure to keep it can be costly, particularly for political leaders. Words make every man. It is by man's words that his moral standing largely judged. I would make Liberians trust me for my words--my promises.