Monrovia, Liberia – Liberian are still in the dark after it was reported that the Government of Liberia and Ivanhoe Liberia Ltd. (previously HPX) had signed a $1.8 billion Concession and Access Agreement. A concerning aspect is that the United States Embassy was the one to initially notify Liberians of this historic agreement through a press release not the Liberian government.
Four prominent advocacy groups, the Partnership for Equitable Resource Governance (PERG), the Liberia Civil Rights Network (LCRN), the Center for Public Accountability (CPA), and the Coalition for Transparent Development (CTD), issued a strongly statement on Monday expressing the concern that such an important agreement was signed on a Sunday night behind closed doors without public consultation or legislative oversight.
“It is extremely troubling to us as a coalition of concerned civil society actors dedicated to openness, responsibility, and the public’s right to know that such a significant agreement the biggest in Liberia’s recent history was signed late on a Sunday, July 6th, without any prior consultation or prompt official statement from the government. The entire agreement has not yet been published, there has been no news conference, no public briefing, and no attempt to clarify what exactly is covered by this $1.8 billion price.”
Concerns have been raised about whether the deal was a result of more extensive, secret geopolitical discussions and whether Liberians are being exploited as negotiating chips in backroom diplomacy. “Why was the agreement signed on a Sunday night, just before President Boakai’s trip to the United States? Is there any connection between this signing and the planned meetings in Washington? Was this deal part of a broader geopolitical negotiation? Why is the United States Embassy the only institution that has released a public statement on the agreement? Why has the Government of Liberia remained conspicuously silent?”
Inquiring as to what precisely makes up the much-discussed $1.8 billion amount, they questioned the deal’s worth. The Ivanhoe news statement does not specify how the remaining amount is determined, although it does reference two staged payments of $10 million and $15 million, respectively. The organizations are inquiring as to whether the sum represents actual capital expenditures, anticipated earnings from the sale of Guinean ore, or just hypothetical infrastructure expenses.
“What exactly constitutes the $1.8 billion figure? Is it a future projection? A combination of capital expenditure, assumed mineral value, or infrastructure development?”
The deal’s provisions for train infrastructure also drew criticism from the civil society coalition. They said that according to reports, the deal allows Ivanhoe to use Liberia’s rail route to carry up to 30 million metric tons per annum (mtpa) of Guinean iron ore, which is a significant increase over the 5 mtpa that Guinea had asked in a formal communication in 2019.
They argued that no published analysis of rail capacity has been found to support this enormous allocation. They cautioned that local mining interests may be suppressed if all remaining capacity is given to a foreign company. “Is the granting of 30 mtpa rail capacity to move Guinean iron ore consistent with the 2019 request from Guinea? The October 2019 letter from Guinea indicated a 5 mtpa capacity to be moved through Liberia?”
The groups claimed that a monopoly on the rail line might result in future domestic projects and small Liberian mining enterprises being structurally prohibited from using the country’s infrastructure. They questioned if Liberia’s long-term strategic needs were considered before committing such a large capacity.
“Is there a rail capacity study underway to ascertain the single track rail’s maximum possible capacity? Giving enormous capacity without understanding if it actually exists might lead to confusion. Does the granting of such capacity allow for small Liberian ore miners and other third parties? Small mines in Liberia will not be able to operate if the entire rail’s reaming capacity is allocated to a business that wants to carry Guinea iron ore.”
The complete lack of public input is another significant area of criticism. According to the groups, there is no proof that public or economic impact evaluations have been conducted or disseminated. They argue that this highlights a risky return to a kind of government where elite deliberations and secrecy marginalize the populace.
Additionally, they are seeking clarification on whether President Boakai personally signed the agreement prior to to his trip to the United States, and if so, under what legal and procedural conditions. They emphasized that the consequences are too significant for Liberians to be kept in the dark.
The civil society coalition is calling on President Boakai to release the agreement’s entire text in order for everyone to review the provisions for themselves. Additionally, they are calling for an open press conference to be held by the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning and the National Investment Commission to outline the reasons behind workings without the legislature, and anticipated results of the agreement.
“Did the President of Liberia personally sign the agreement in the middle of the night or early Monday morning? If so, under what circumstances? What is the Government expecting in return from the US or Ivanhoe through this agreement? When will the full agreement be made available for public scrutiny?”
They are urged the Liberian Legislature to make sure that the agreement is ratified only after a thorough legislative review and public hearings. Additionally, the statement warned that any collaboration formed in secret damageed democratic government and confidence, and urged the international community to promote openness in all investment deals involving Liberia.
The civil society organizations stressed that they are not anti-investment in their demands. They asserted that the goal is to protect public confidence, guarantee that Liberia’s natural riches benefit its citizens, and steer clear of past blunders when nighttime transactions led to long-term impoverishment and national exploitation.
“This trend of hiding raises serious issues. It is impossible to cover up a deal of this size that could affect Liberia’s infrastructure, resource economy, and geopolitical position for decades. Liberians are the ultimate owners of the country’s natural resources. They should be informed of what has been agreed upon in their name.”
