MONROVIA – The Liberian House of Representatives’ Specialized Committee is conducting a probe into the Implementation Agreement (IA) between Liberia and Guinea, revealing potential gaps in intergovernmental communication and raising concerns about the agreement’s efficacy. The committee’s investigation highlights the challenges of navigating complex bilateral agreements, particularly when key government ministries, like Foreign Affairs, claim lack of knowledge about the agreement’s status, sparking questions about coordination and oversight. The Analyst reports.
The House of Representatives has announced constituting a special committee to investigate the status of the Implementation Agreement (IA) between the Republic of Liberia and the Republic of Guinea today conducted a public hearing with officials from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA).
According to a press release, the House Committee hearing is focused on obtaining a comprehensive update on the Implementation Agreement signed on October 21, 2019, and ratified by the Liberian Legislature in May 2021.
The agreement outlines the framework for cross-border use of rail and port infrastructure, a key component of bilateral economic cooperation between the two sisterly countries.
Foreign Affairs Declares No Knowledge of Implementation Status
Representing the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Hon. Gabriel H. Salee, Deputy Minister for Administration, informed the Committee that MoFA has no information regarding the current status of the agreement.
“We have no idea about the status of this agreement. We didn’t participate at any level and cannot provide information at this time,” Deputy Minister Salee stated.
This disclosure drew strong concern from lawmakers.
As Representative Ivar Jones queried how the Ministry could claim no knowledge despite being the custodian of treaties and the body through which the ratified agreement was transmitted.
He further questioned whether the Parliament of Guinea had also ratified the agreement, noting that without domestication in both countries, a bilateral agreement cannot be binding.
He asked: “Did we share copies of our ratified agreement with our Guinean counterparts? If it is not passed there, it cannot be binding, regardless of our ratification here.”
Deputy Minister for Economic Affairs at the Ministry of Justice, Cllr. Charles D.F. Karmo, provided a detailed background on the agreement, noting that it centers on the evacuation of Guinean mining products through Liberia, consistent with long-standing regional mining cooperation.
He explained that arrangements of similar nature date back to 1973, 1983, and October 25, 2013, making the current agreement a successor instrument.
“It is essentially a logistics operation. Liberia has excess rail capacity and is obligated under the agreement to allow the movement of Guinean products,” Cllr. Karmo said.
He further disclosed a 2021 communication reflects a consensus between both governments, which remains valid; should Guinea choose not to transport its products through Liberia, it will officially inform the Government of Liberia; companies such as SMFG and Ivanhoe will not bring their own security into Liberia, and the agreement functions similarly to a transshipment arrangement.
He further claimed that Ivanhoe is the logistical arm of SMFG, which has confirmed licenses issued by the Government of Guinea to carry out mining operations, and assured the Committee that adequate safeguards exist, including Liberia’s right to terminate the agreement if the other party fails to meet its obligations.
Lawmakers Question Consensus and Coordination With Guinea
Several Representatives raised further concerns.
Representative Blue Benson stressed that no significant progress can be realized without explicit consent from the Guinean government, while Representative Michael Thomas asked whether Liberia was invited to the ceremony marking the dedication of an 850-meter rail segment in Guinea.
MoFA responded that it had no knowledge of such invitation. He further raised concerns about the adequacy of background checks on Ivanhoe, cautioning against potential noncompliance.
Rep. Gleekia referenced Article 3.3 of the agreement, which requires mutual awareness and engagement between both governments. He questioned whether Liberia had formally engaged its Guinean counterparts.
Rep. Jeremiah Sokan emphasized the need for Head-of-State affirmation in major bilateral protocols and warned against entering critical economic agreements without systematic consent.
“It is problematic to undertake an agreement of this magnitude without ensuring our sisterly country is fully aligned. Are we acting out of urgency?” he asked.
Following extensive deliberations, the Committee adjourned the hearing to next week Tuesday to continue its inquiry and gather additional information.
The House Specialized Committee Chaired by Hon. Foday E. Fahnbulleh reaffirms its commitment to ensuring transparency, legality, and mutual respect in all agreements entered between Liberia and its international partners.