Ivanhoe Rail Legality Questioned -Amid Govt’s ‘Guinea Fumble’

MONROVIA – A public hearing on Tuesday descended into a tense exchange as key government officials failed to provide evidence of Guinea’s formal approval for the Ivanhoe Liberia Limited rail access deal, intensifying legislative scrutiny of the controversial Concession and Access Agreement (CAA). The core of the issue, highlighted by lawmakers, is the proposed Concession and Access Agreement (CAA) with Ivanhoe Liberia. Its ratification appears to be moving ahead without documented formal endorsement from the Government of Guinea, a critical requirement set out in the 2019 Liberia–Guinea Implementation Agreement.

Lawmakers on the House of Representatives Joint Committee on Investment, Judiciary, and Transport pressed senior officials on whether the proposed deal, which would allow the transport of Guinean ore through Liberian infrastructure, complies with the strict dual-oversight requirements of the 2019 Liberia–Guinea Implementation Agreement.

The government representatives, including Justice Minister Cllr. N. Oswald Tweh, Deputy Minister of Finance, Anthony Myers, the Minister of Transport, Sirleaf Tyler and the Chairman of the National Investment Commission (NIC), Jeff Blibo disappointed the lawmakers at the hearing when they offered “varied, delayed, or vaguely referred to ongoing discussions” instead of a firm confirmation, sparking a heated debate.

The core of the controversy lies in the 2019 Implementation Agreement, which mandates a stringent, joint approval process to prevent either country from unilaterally moving forward with cross-border mining infrastructure use.

Lawmakers, chaired by Representative Foday Edward Fahnbulleh, insisted that the ratification of the Ivanhoe CAA must be contingent on proof of Guinea’s endorsement. They pointed out several critical gaps including that top government officials at the hearing could not present documentation that Guinea had formally “vetted” the project or that the company’s Request for Eligibility was completed, there was no evidence that Guinea declared the Ivanhoe project an “Approved Infrastructure Project” as required by Article Five of the Implementation Agreement, and the Committee noted the absence of a public record showing that the legal bodies mandated to review such requests—the Monitoring Committee or the Inter Ministerial Committee, had formally reviewed or approved the proposed CAA.

The inability of the officials to give straightforward answers amplified existing concerns that the Liberian Executive may be attempting to rush the agreement through the Legislature without fully activating the mandated joint oversight mechanisms with the Republic of Guinea.

“The Implementation Agreement of 2019 established strict procedures that were designed to prevent either country from acting alone,” one lawmaker reminded the panel.

The representatives from the Justice Ministry, Finance Ministry, NIC, and Transport Ministry acknowledged that certain technical processes were ongoing but were unable to present the required documentary evidence of completed cross-border procedures.

The Joint Committee has announced that it may recall the entities for further questioning as it awaits documentary proof that the two governments have jointly sanctioned Ivanhoe’s request to utilize Liberian rail and port infrastructure for Guinean ore.

The open hearing drew significant public attention amidst the growing national debate over the legality and long-term implications of the Ivanhoe Liberia CAA for the nation’s key infrastructure assets.