BETRAYAL OF JUSTICE -Gongloe Condemns Senate’s Proposal on War Crimes Court

MONROVIA – Cllr. Tiawan Saye Gongloe has once again entered the Liberian intellectual realm, with a scathing critique of the Liberian Senate’s proposal for a purely domestic War Crimes Court. He termed the proposal a betrayal of justice and legislative bad faith, contradicting the Joint Resolution #JR-001/2024, which mandated the establishment of a hybrid court with international participation. Gongloe’s statement comes as a response to the Senate’s proposal, which he believes undermines Liberia’s international commitments and would lead to another compromised institution, strong on paper but weak in principle. As the Analyst reports, the renowned lawyer has emphasized that a hybrid court, with both Liberian and foreign judges, prosecutors, and investigators, is the only way to guarantee impartiality, credibility, and adherence to global standards.

Cllr. Tiawan Saye Gongloe, a renowned human rights defender and professor of law at the University of Liberia, has issued a strong statement criticizing the Liberian Senate’s proposal for a purely domestic War Crimes Court.

He argues that the move is a betrayal of justice and legislative bad faith, contradicting the Joint Resolution #JR-001/2024, which mandated the establishment of a hybrid court with international participation.

Gongloe emphasizes that Liberia’s civil wars were caused by bad governance, corruption, and contempt for human rights, and that excluding international participation would be unpatriotic and contrary to international law.

He cites examples of successful hybrid courts in Sierra Leone, Senegal, and the Central African Republic, which ensured impartiality and competence.

The proposed War and Economic Crimes Court should be rooted in international humanitarian law, with both Liberian and foreign judges, prosecutors, and investigators, to guarantee impartiality and credibility, he said.

“Anything less would produce a compromised institution, strong on paper but weak in principle,” he said.

Gongloe also argued that the Senate’s unilateral bill is procedurally illegal and morally indefensible, undermining Liberia’s international reputation and risking the pursuit of accountability. He advocates for a hybrid court, internationally anchored and nationally embraced, to fulfill Liberia’s promise of “Never Again”.

The former president of the Liberian bar indicated that the Senate proposal directly contradicts Joint Resolution #JR-001/2024, which the Senate and the House of Representatives jointly enacted on April 8, 2024.

That Resolution expressly mandated the Executive Branch, not the Senate, to “develop a legal framework and submit same to the Legislature for enactment into law for the establishment of an Extraordinary Criminal Court for Liberia” and an Anti-Corruption Court.

He continued: “Yet while the War and Economic Crimes Court (WECC) Secretariat, created by Executive Order under that very Resolution, is drafting those bills in consultation with national and international experts, two senators have preempted and undermined the process by submitting their own bill. This act is in clear violation of the Legislature’s own directive and reveals bad faith on the part of its sponsors.”

Contradicting Their Own Resolution

Joint Resolution #JR-001/2024 was deliberate and unambiguous, he emphasized. “It called for the establishment of an “Extraordinary Criminal Court for Liberia to be known as the UN-backed Special War Crimes Court for Liberia (SWACCOL)”, emphasizing international and domestic participation and cooperation with the United Nations, the European Union, and the United States Government.

According to him, it also directed the President to appoint a Special Envoy or Officer-in-Charge certified by the International Criminal Court or another international tribunal, to coordinate the process, mobilize resources, and ensure compliance with international law.

Nowhere did the Resolution authorize the Senate to unilaterally craft a domestic bill or to reduce the envisioned hybrid tribunal into an ordinary national court. The new Senate proposal therefore defies the Legislature’s own record and undermines the transitional justice process rooted in the Accra Peace Agreement and reaffirmed by the Joint Resolution.

Cllr Gonglo continue with the assertions:

Isolationism in the Name of Sovereignty

The Senate’s claim that a purely Liberian court would preserve “sovereignty” is misplaced and hypocritical. It confuses sovereignty with isolationism and nationalism with self-deception.

Liberia’s civil wars were not caused by foreign interference—they were caused by bad governance, corruption, abuse of power, and contempt for human rights. Over three hundred thousand Liberians lost their lives because successive governments chose the path of impunity over justice.

To now use “sovereignty” as an excuse to exclude international participation from Liberia’s war crimes process is unpatriotic, unnationalistic, and contrary to international law. Liberia is a signatory to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977, which impose binding obligations on all states to prosecute or extradite those responsible for war crimes and grave breaches of international humanitarian law.

To walk away from that responsibility now would not only dishonor Liberia’s dead—it would violate its international commitments and betray the very principles of justice that form the foundation of civilized nations.

Hybrid Courts: The Proven Path

Experience across Africa shows that credible justice for mass atrocities requires a hybrid court, not a domestic one.

In Sierra Leone, the Special Court’s combination of local and international judges ensured impartiality and competence—and successfully convicted Charles Taylor, Liberia’s former president and others with great responsibility war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Sierra Leonean civil conflict.

In Senegal, the Extraordinary African Chambers combined Senegalese and international jurists to try Hissène Habréfor crimes against humanity.

In the Central African Republic, the Special Criminal Court continues to function effectively under a mixed panel of national and international judges.

These hybrid courts gained credibility and financial backing because they were anchored in international humanitarian law and not trapped in local politics.

Moreover, organizations such as the Open Society Justice Initiative and CIVITAS Maxima, working through the Global Justice and Research Project (GJRP), have already supported successful war crimes prosecutions in the United States and Europe involving Liberian perpetrators. If justice for Liberia can happen in Philadelphia, London, and Paris, why not in Monrovia—under the right conditions?

Justice Anchored in Law, Peace Anchored in Justice

The proposed War and Economic Crimes Court is a transitional justice mechanism, not an ordinary constitutional court. It must be rooted in international humanitarian law, and composed of both Liberian and foreign judges, prosecutors, and investigators, with a majority of international personnel to guarantee impartiality, credibility, and adherence to global standards.

Anything less will produce another compromised institution—strong on paper, weak in principle.

Justice must comfort victims, reassure the accused, and restore the moral authority of the state. Only a credible hybrid court can achieve this.

Conclusion: Legislative Bad Faith and National Consequence

The Senate’s unilateral bill is not only procedurally illegal under Joint Resolution #JR-001/2024; it is morally indefensible. It substitutes political convenience for justice, undermines Liberia’s international reputation, and risks turning the pursuit of accountability into another exercise in deception.

Liberia cannot claim peace while shielding impunity. The Accra Peace Agreement, the TRC Act, the Rome Statute, and the Geneva Conventions all point to one truth: justice delayed is peace denied.

By rejecting international partnership in favor of domestic control, the Senate’s bill does not strengthen sovereignty—it weakens it. True sovereignty is exercised through justice, not isolation.

Liberia must not walk away from its international humanitarian responsibilities. To do so would be to abandon not only our commitments to the world but also our covenant with the dead.

Only a hybrid War and Economic Crimes Court, internationally anchored and nationally embraced, can fulfill Liberia’s promise of “Never Again.”