Sierra Leone’s Poverty Reduction Pillars are Crumpling
by Karamoh Kabba
Sierra Leone’s progress report received a passing grade by the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently. The report stated, “Sierra Leone has made sufficient progress to reach the completion point under the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.” Amidst hiccups and waved unsatisfied criterion, “Sierra Leone becomes the 21st country to reach the completion point under the Initiative.” In 2005, the Executive Board of the IMF wrote; “The Board agreed to waive the nonobservance of a performance criterion on the accumulation of new external arrears under the previous PRGF arrangement that expired in June 2005 that resulted in a noncomplying disbursement under that arrangement.” On December 18, 2006, the Executive Board wrote:
To reach the completion point, Sierra Leone met the following conditions: (i) preparation of a full PRSP and implementation for at least one year, as evidenced by the joint staff assessment of the PRSP and the country’s annual progress report; (ii) maintenance of macroeconomic stability as evidenced by satisfactory implementation of the PRGF-supported program; (iii) completion of structural measures in the areas of governance and decentralization, private sector development, education and health; and (iv) an increase in spending on designated poverty reducing expenditure priorities that was proportionate to HIPC relief.And, it qualified Sierra Leone for the necessary debt relief according to IMF and World Bank officials. But it does not go without the fact that meeting the HIPC Initiative objectives have also coincided with the SLPP-led government’s double paddling efforts in the last two years in preparation for parliamentary and presidential reelections. Before that, the banks and donor nations, including UN officials, had nothing but warning for Sierra Leone against bad behaviors – bad governance, youth neglect, pervasive corruption in government and the unwillingness to comply with the World Bank, IMF and African Development Bank (AfDB) Poverty Reduction Growth Facility (PRGF) guidelines, which had delayed the upgrading of its Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (IPRSP) since 2002.
Sierra Leone’s progress report received a passing grade by the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently. The report stated, “Sierra Leone has made sufficient progress to reach the completion point under the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.” Amidst hiccups and waved unsatisfied criterion, “Sierra Leone becomes the 21st country to reach the completion point under the Initiative.” In 2005, the Executive Board of the IMF wrote; “The Board agreed to waive the nonobservance of a performance criterion on the accumulation of new external arrears under the previous PRGF arrangement that expired in June 2005 that resulted in a noncomplying disbursement under that arrangement.” On December 18, 2006, the Executive Board wrote:
To reach the completion point, Sierra Leone met the following conditions: (i) preparation of a full PRSP and implementation for at least one year, as evidenced by the joint staff assessment of the PRSP and the country’s annual progress report; (ii) maintenance of macroeconomic stability as evidenced by satisfactory implementation of the PRGF-supported program; (iii) completion of structural measures in the areas of governance and decentralization, private sector development, education and health; and (iv) an increase in spending on designated poverty reducing expenditure priorities that was proportionate to HIPC relief.And, it qualified Sierra Leone for the necessary debt relief according to IMF and World Bank officials. But it does not go without the fact that meeting the HIPC Initiative objectives have also coincided with the SLPP-led government’s double paddling efforts in the last two years in preparation for parliamentary and presidential reelections. Before that, the banks and donor nations, including UN officials, had nothing but warning for Sierra Leone against bad behaviors – bad governance, youth neglect, pervasive corruption in government and the unwillingness to comply with the World Bank, IMF and African Development Bank (AfDB) Poverty Reduction Growth Facility (PRGF) guidelines, which had delayed the upgrading of its Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (IPRSP) since 2002.
It will be unfair to state blatantly that progress that led to the passing mark this time was more for the SLPP to be reelected than for compliance with HIPC Initiative objectives. Nonetheless, we must examine and admonish the banks and donors to continue to be steadfast in their admonishment of the leaders of Sierra Leone against bad behaviors. Political parties in Sierra Leone are doing their part in highlighting SLPP shortfalls in good governance through the media both in Sierra Leone and abroad. The leaders of Sierra Leone are most certainly responding to something – it is not clear whether they are responding to international pressure or reelection bid. We do not know what is responsible for the quantum change from their bad behavior position of the past to the present double paddling efforts. Most important, Sierra Leone’s progress report received a passing grade, which is understood that prevailing multi-party activities could underpin a positive development in an underdeveloped country. But the Executive Board progress report for Sierra Leone did not go without the following statement: “Debt relief at completion point under the enhanced HIPC Initiative and MDRI is an important milestone for Sierra Leone toward debt sustainability while providing more resources for poverty reduction and the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals.” How will Sierra Leone accomplish such demands owing to its prevailing custom of lethargy in leadership?
The three pillars of the government of Sierra Leone’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) are Good Governance, Job Creation and Food Security. It is understood that the government of Sierra Leone, at least in theory, indeed zeroed in on the causes of the decade-long civil war. It is written in the government of Sierra Leone’s PRSP that : “The source of political instability has lain less in ethnic or religious rivalry, than in the history of extremely poor governance, widespread corruption, and the marginalization of rural communities, through overpowering, inefficient central government. These were compounded by the early collapse of local government, and worsening terms of trade for limited exports.”
A paper written by John Mannah, PhD, who is an SLPP official based in the United States, shared credit equally amongst the donors, the creditors, the government of Sierra Leone, the people of Sierra Leone and the ruling SLPP leaders, President Ahmad Tejan Kabbah and Vice Presidential Solomon Berewa, for the accomplishment of what IMF and the World Bank officials referred to as a milestone in economic recovery for Sierra Leone. But it was not without Mr. Mannah’s simplistic postulation on how Sierra Leone’s public external debt reached at US$1.6 billion by the end of 2003. Although Sierra Leone qualified for the consideration as a Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) earlier in the mid 90s when the program began, it met the conditions of the HIPC initiative objectives in 2002 and since accumulated more debts that are new since President Tejan Kabbah took office in 1996. Nonetheless, the 2003 cut off point makes much sense to be fair with President Tejan Kabbah’s SLPP-led government because in 2003, the country was about a year old into its post-war era when the official declaration of the end of the decade-long rebel war was announced in 2002.
Mr. Mannah, whose PhD is in economics stated: The political economy of over borrowing is easy to understand for economists at least. In the case of Sierra Leone, the APC government that ruled Sierra Leone for twenty seven years over borrowed to benefit its cronies, and now the SLPP government has had to deal with the consequences. There was a strong incentive to borrow because there were kickbacks in the loans and the projects that they financed, like the OAU conference that was hosted in 1980. It was easy for that corrupt government to be influenced by Western businessmen and financiers. They wined and dined those responsible for borrowing as they sold their loan packages, and told them why it was good time to borrow, why their particular package was attractive, why that was the right time to restructure debt.
First, in an overzealous effort to pass blame on the former All People’s Congress (APC) government, Mr. Mannah could not count how long the APC had ruled in his own country. He stated that the APC ruled for twenty-seven years when the APC actually ruled for twenty-four years. Creating additional three years from the figment of his imagination undermines the trusted surrogacy he bestows upon himself as the bearer of such important information. Why should we trust Mr. Mannah’s surrogacy when he could not go back to verify how long the APC ruled when the answer was just a click away if he did not know? Yet, he claims to be a civic competent man who also masquerades as a trusted surrogate. He only succeeds in showing that he is a trustworthy surrogate to President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah, Vice President Berewa and the SLPP. To say that the leaders of Sierra Leone accumulated $1.6 billion in debt over food and wine is an absurdity that deserves no attention especially when it came from someone who doubles as a party’s communications director and an economist. Thus, he should not have limited his erroneous postulation to the APC government alone owing to the SLPP-led government’s borrowing activities since 1996.
For the most part, the economy of Sierra Leone is growing: Growth has been above the 7 per cent benchmark set by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The largest GDP was reported in 2002 at 27.5 per cent. The reason behind the unusual growth rate in 2002 was donor activities and adding of new loans into an economy that was at a stand still before then. We saw 9.3 per cent growth in 2003, 7.4 per cent in 2004, 7.3 per cent in 2005, a 7.4 per cent projection for 2006, and a 6.1 per cent projection for 2007.
Now, where does Mr. Mannah derive his 7.5 per cent growth rate or the MDGs benchmark figure he sets at 7.5 per cent he provided us in his published work on Awareness Times newspaper in Sierra Leone, on December 25, 2006, entitled “The Significance of Debt Cancellation to the Socio – Economic Development of Sierra Leone”? (http://news.sl/drwebsite/publish/article_20054431.shtml) Even though Mr. Mannah did not specify the growth year for the 7.5 per cent growth rate figure he gave us, the average growth rate from 2002 to 2006 is not 7.5 per cent. Although we may credit the present SLPP administration for its effort in stabilizing the fragile peace, the growth rates over the past four years and the projections for 2006 and 2007 all have little correlation to ‘robust’ domestic economic activities as the government claims. The awkward growth rate pattern supports the position that there was no economic activity before 2002 and therefore, the GDP will respond in a quantum upward thrust to minute positive economic activities. The awkward growth pattern of 27.5 per cent in 2002 to a 6.5 per cent projection for 2007 is a clear manifestation of the fact that the Sierra Leone economy is more donor-driven than domestic economic activity driven. Clearly, the GDP diminishes with diminishing donor activities. Unfortunately, there is little or no ‘robust’ domestic economic activity to fill the gap created by the diminishing donor activities that is compounded by rising expenditures. The lesser the outpour of loans and donor funds into the economy, the lesser the growth as the growth pattern indicates. Sierra Leone is yet to see a real GDP that is reflective of robust domestic economic activities.
Mr. Mannah, whose PhD is in economics stated: The political economy of over borrowing is easy to understand for economists at least. In the case of Sierra Leone, the APC government that ruled Sierra Leone for twenty seven years over borrowed to benefit its cronies, and now the SLPP government has had to deal with the consequences. There was a strong incentive to borrow because there were kickbacks in the loans and the projects that they financed, like the OAU conference that was hosted in 1980. It was easy for that corrupt government to be influenced by Western businessmen and financiers. They wined and dined those responsible for borrowing as they sold their loan packages, and told them why it was good time to borrow, why their particular package was attractive, why that was the right time to restructure debt.
First, in an overzealous effort to pass blame on the former All People’s Congress (APC) government, Mr. Mannah could not count how long the APC had ruled in his own country. He stated that the APC ruled for twenty-seven years when the APC actually ruled for twenty-four years. Creating additional three years from the figment of his imagination undermines the trusted surrogacy he bestows upon himself as the bearer of such important information. Why should we trust Mr. Mannah’s surrogacy when he could not go back to verify how long the APC ruled when the answer was just a click away if he did not know? Yet, he claims to be a civic competent man who also masquerades as a trusted surrogate. He only succeeds in showing that he is a trustworthy surrogate to President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah, Vice President Berewa and the SLPP. To say that the leaders of Sierra Leone accumulated $1.6 billion in debt over food and wine is an absurdity that deserves no attention especially when it came from someone who doubles as a party’s communications director and an economist. Thus, he should not have limited his erroneous postulation to the APC government alone owing to the SLPP-led government’s borrowing activities since 1996.
For the most part, the economy of Sierra Leone is growing: Growth has been above the 7 per cent benchmark set by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The largest GDP was reported in 2002 at 27.5 per cent. The reason behind the unusual growth rate in 2002 was donor activities and adding of new loans into an economy that was at a stand still before then. We saw 9.3 per cent growth in 2003, 7.4 per cent in 2004, 7.3 per cent in 2005, a 7.4 per cent projection for 2006, and a 6.1 per cent projection for 2007.Now, where does Mr. Mannah derive his 7.5 per cent growth rate or the MDGs benchmark figure he sets at 7.5 per cent he provided us in his published work on Awareness Times newspaper in Sierra Leone, on December 25, 2006, entitled “The Significance of Debt Cancellation to the Socio – Economic Development of Sierra Leone”? (http://news.sl/drwebsite/publish/article_20054431.shtml) Even though Mr. Mannah did not specify the growth year for the 7.5 per cent growth rate figure he gave us, the average growth rate from 2002 to 2006 is not 7.5 per cent. Although we may credit the present SLPP administration for its effort in stabilizing the fragile peace, the growth rates over the past four years and the projections for 2006 and 2007 all have little correlation to ‘robust’ domestic economic activities as the government claims. The awkward growth rate pattern supports the position that there was no economic activity before 2002 and therefore, the GDP will respond in a quantum upward thrust to minute positive economic activities. The awkward growth pattern of 27.5 per cent in 2002 to a 6.5 per cent projection for 2007 is a clear manifestation of the fact that the Sierra Leone economy is more donor-driven than domestic economic activity driven. Clearly, the GDP diminishes with diminishing donor activities. Unfortunately, there is little or no ‘robust’ domestic economic activity to fill the gap created by the diminishing donor activities that is compounded by rising expenditures. The lesser the outpour of loans and donor funds into the economy, the lesser the growth as the growth pattern indicates. Sierra Leone is yet to see a real GDP that is reflective of robust domestic economic activities.Now that we have demonstrated sufficiently that Mr. Mannah is not a credible source of information about the economic, social and political activities of Sierra Leone, let us examine the three pillars of the Sierra Leone’s PRSP.
Good Governance:
A major accomplishment of the SLPP-led government is its lukewarm willingness to conduct elections. Let us bear in mind that conducting elections alone is not the beginning or the end to a democratic process. This time, we are hoping that the SLPP will have the nerve to repeat the good record of Sir Albert Margai of Africa who conceded to an extremely controversial APC victory in 1967 elections in Sierra Leone to become one of the few African incumbent leaders to be defeated in a democratic process. We are hoping that the SLPP of today will uphold such a good democratic principle by not only repeating that good record but also making it better by peacefully allowing free and fair elections and giving way to another party for the leadership when that need arise.
There is much at stake here as we approach 2007 elections. It is a sad story to learn that under the Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration program the country actually disarmed over 6000 childsoldiers, but could not account for an equal or at least close to an equal number of childsoldiers under its Reconstruction, Resettlement and Rehabilitation program that followed. It is only logical that the government and the NGOs that were concerned with these two phases of reconstruction had a good tally of youths that needed help when they disarmed them under the first phase of Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration program. But once their trigger-happy fingers were uncoiled from the triggers of their AK-47s, they became meaningless.
Recently, the outgoing UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, raised concerns that the youth problem persists in Sierra Leone. The SLPP-led Parliament is fond of making good laws and good policies, at least, in Parliament and on papers. In fact, the SLPP majority Parliament is known to have made the most laws, since 1996 to present, than the APC’s 24-year rule and the military regimes of the past. The SLPP-led government’s PRSP, which is tailored to the IMF, World Bank and the AfDB’s Poverty Reduction Growth Facility (PRGF) guidelines, is an outstanding document, at least, in theory. The Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (IPRSP) that was formulated in 2002 addressed the same problems as the PRSP that has just been approved only that nothing happened until now.
The SLPP government definitely is good at seeing the problems, but lacks the will power and the ability to address them through action. Nicely written papers have fooled the donors once more. While we commend the government for thoughtful law making and the writing of grade-making poverty reduction papers, we must be conscious that we need not just pen pushers in Sierra Leone under these challenging demands. It is time for the SLPP to give way to a government that will work in the interest of the people not just one that masters the art of writing donor confidence winning papers for the benefit of a selected few. The SLPP has failed miserably in entrenching the first pillar of the PRSP– it is very week and the structure is crumpling on the people of Sierra Leone.
A major accomplishment of the SLPP-led government is its lukewarm willingness to conduct elections. Let us bear in mind that conducting elections alone is not the beginning or the end to a democratic process. This time, we are hoping that the SLPP will have the nerve to repeat the good record of Sir Albert Margai of Africa who conceded to an extremely controversial APC victory in 1967 elections in Sierra Leone to become one of the few African incumbent leaders to be defeated in a democratic process. We are hoping that the SLPP of today will uphold such a good democratic principle by not only repeating that good record but also making it better by peacefully allowing free and fair elections and giving way to another party for the leadership when that need arise.
There is much at stake here as we approach 2007 elections. It is a sad story to learn that under the Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration program the country actually disarmed over 6000 childsoldiers, but could not account for an equal or at least close to an equal number of childsoldiers under its Reconstruction, Resettlement and Rehabilitation program that followed. It is only logical that the government and the NGOs that were concerned with these two phases of reconstruction had a good tally of youths that needed help when they disarmed them under the first phase of Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration program. But once their trigger-happy fingers were uncoiled from the triggers of their AK-47s, they became meaningless.
Recently, the outgoing UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, raised concerns that the youth problem persists in Sierra Leone. The SLPP-led Parliament is fond of making good laws and good policies, at least, in Parliament and on papers. In fact, the SLPP majority Parliament is known to have made the most laws, since 1996 to present, than the APC’s 24-year rule and the military regimes of the past. The SLPP-led government’s PRSP, which is tailored to the IMF, World Bank and the AfDB’s Poverty Reduction Growth Facility (PRGF) guidelines, is an outstanding document, at least, in theory. The Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (IPRSP) that was formulated in 2002 addressed the same problems as the PRSP that has just been approved only that nothing happened until now.
The SLPP government definitely is good at seeing the problems, but lacks the will power and the ability to address them through action. Nicely written papers have fooled the donors once more. While we commend the government for thoughtful law making and the writing of grade-making poverty reduction papers, we must be conscious that we need not just pen pushers in Sierra Leone under these challenging demands. It is time for the SLPP to give way to a government that will work in the interest of the people not just one that masters the art of writing donor confidence winning papers for the benefit of a selected few. The SLPP has failed miserably in entrenching the first pillar of the PRSP– it is very week and the structure is crumpling on the people of Sierra Leone.Food Security
For a country that has vast fallow land mass, the SLPP could only point to NGO sponsored youth subsistence-farming program in the Pujehun district and yam-faming project in Waterloo. Sierra Leone, after five years, is still unable to feed itself. Since 2002, Sierra Leone can no more blame its lack of massive rice farms to feed itself on the war. Rice can be cultivated two times a year in Sierra Leone to be modest based on the climate. Yet, there is no large-scale mechanized farming project going on; the country still dwells on donor money for the purchase of imported grains. The president had committed himself to food security by the end of the year 2007, which is yet to be accomplished and only has months left now on his presidential calendar. He had promised to revisit the land tenure of Sierra Leone, which is certainly an impediment to large-scale mechanized farming – that is yet to be done. How does he plan to achieve food security at the tail end of his second term when the land tenure has become impossible to touch because of ensuring election victory for the SLPP and Vice President Berewa? Agriculture at about 30 per cent of GDP is not an impressive figure for an agriculture-based economy as Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone’s economy has the potential to be more agriculturally driven at about 50 per cent of GDP. The country needs to attract investors to spend only half of the investment that is now being spent on the mining sector in Agriculture to yield a return that would be more than 30 per cent of GDP.
For a country that has vast fallow land mass, the SLPP could only point to NGO sponsored youth subsistence-farming program in the Pujehun district and yam-faming project in Waterloo. Sierra Leone, after five years, is still unable to feed itself. Since 2002, Sierra Leone can no more blame its lack of massive rice farms to feed itself on the war. Rice can be cultivated two times a year in Sierra Leone to be modest based on the climate. Yet, there is no large-scale mechanized farming project going on; the country still dwells on donor money for the purchase of imported grains. The president had committed himself to food security by the end of the year 2007, which is yet to be accomplished and only has months left now on his presidential calendar. He had promised to revisit the land tenure of Sierra Leone, which is certainly an impediment to large-scale mechanized farming – that is yet to be done. How does he plan to achieve food security at the tail end of his second term when the land tenure has become impossible to touch because of ensuring election victory for the SLPP and Vice President Berewa? Agriculture at about 30 per cent of GDP is not an impressive figure for an agriculture-based economy as Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone’s economy has the potential to be more agriculturally driven at about 50 per cent of GDP. The country needs to attract investors to spend only half of the investment that is now being spent on the mining sector in Agriculture to yield a return that would be more than 30 per cent of GDP.
Job Creation
Joblessness is a pervasive problem in Sierra Leone. Because of joblessness, 70 per cent of the people in the country live on less than $1 a day. In 2005, the country was at the bottom of the UN-Human Development Index (HDI). It moved up to second to last position in 2006. Upon examining the country that is now last on the HDI, we will be disappointed that the shift was by default not through any ‘robust’ domestic economic activity. In its PRSP, the government claims that the largest growing sector is utility—water and electricity: yet, not too long ago there was an absolute water shortage in the city. The country has been in darkness until few months to elections after which it will probably return once more into darkness. The SLPP government wants to be seen to be working when it gives streetlights in the city and ignores electricity in the households.
There exists no comprehensive policy in the mining sector, at least in practice; it is all spelt-out in the PRSP. Small to large mining companies still use the labor of the local people in the mining industry in inhuman and illegal ways. There are no government regulations in that sector to protect the rights of mineworkers. The work is backbreaking, but the return for the mineworkers is frugal, yet the wealthy benefits from the miners’ labor without providing the mineworkers with job security or health benefits. Until the mining industry is regulated, especially based on the capital one must declare to ensure that miners are provided with the right types of equipment, their health care is taken care of and their taxes are collected and paid to the central or local government before engagement in mining activities or employment of a certain set of miners, the industry would remain a none-meaningful source of employment. It is only under such regulated and organized mining activities that government will be able to absorb more people into the work force and collect income taxes from them. But the government has no innovation when it comes to creating jobs for its people and collecting taxes from them to improve their living standards and provide social welfare for the needy.n its PRSP, the government of Sierra Leone acknowledges it shortfall in capacity building for effective devolution process. It is clear now that the large sums of money Vice President Solomon Berewa distributed amongst the chiefs in the provinces several months ago in the name of decentralization were probably intended for campaign purpose in the absence of institutional capacity to ensure the funds were used rightfully for community projects.
This brings us to the conclusion that the donors, the World Bank and the IMF have much monitoring to do to ensure a proper use of donor funds. A nicely written paper cannot get up from the shelves and do the work. For the people of Sierra Leone, you have the greatest weapon that has been provided to you through the SLPP’s lukewarm willingness to conduct elections for you to determine who must deliver these expectations to improve your lives. Before we leave, let us not forget to commend the SLPP government for its willingness so far to conduct elections. There are many countries in Africa in dire need of such multi-party democratic process.But the fact remains that, Mr. Mannah’s suggestion that the SLPP-led government is transparent is pure propaganda. The hidden propaganda is disgusting more than the open disgrace. Which would the people and the nation rather hear – the concocted propaganda of Mr. Mannah painting a surrealist picture of the nation, or this true analysis of the state of our nation? Why cover or decorate the blemishes as if they do not exist. Democracy will only prevail if the politicians and the government accept their weaknesses, discuss their merits and demerits, and take prompt action to correct them. It is only through continuous exposure and disciplinary action that corruption can be reduced. Mr. Mannah must accept the fact that the SLPP-led government of Sierra Leone is not transparent, notwithstanding its passing progress report from the world organizations.
This brings us to the conclusion that the donors, the World Bank and the IMF have much monitoring to do to ensure a proper use of donor funds. A nicely written paper cannot get up from the shelves and do the work. For the people of Sierra Leone, you have the greatest weapon that has been provided to you through the SLPP’s lukewarm willingness to conduct elections for you to determine who must deliver these expectations to improve your lives. Before we leave, let us not forget to commend the SLPP government for its willingness so far to conduct elections. There are many countries in Africa in dire need of such multi-party democratic process.But the fact remains that, Mr. Mannah’s suggestion that the SLPP-led government is transparent is pure propaganda. The hidden propaganda is disgusting more than the open disgrace. Which would the people and the nation rather hear – the concocted propaganda of Mr. Mannah painting a surrealist picture of the nation, or this true analysis of the state of our nation? Why cover or decorate the blemishes as if they do not exist. Democracy will only prevail if the politicians and the government accept their weaknesses, discuss their merits and demerits, and take prompt action to correct them. It is only through continuous exposure and disciplinary action that corruption can be reduced. Mr. Mannah must accept the fact that the SLPP-led government of Sierra Leone is not transparent, notwithstanding its passing progress report from the world organizations.
BLOOD DIAMOND – Movie Makers owe Sierra Leone an Explanation?
The Warner Bros. Pictures movie Blood Diamonds starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Djimon Hounsou, and Jennifer Connely which opened in US Theatres Dec. 08, 2006, has to date grossed some USD 26,778,439 over a three week period since it’s released. Blood Diamonds is a classic, and is being touted as an Oscar contender (with actor Leonardo equally in pursuit of an Oscar).
Blood Diamonds set against the backdrop of the chaos and civil war that engulfed Sierra Leone in the 1990s, by all indications is a Sierra Leonean movie. This movie is not about Mozambique, yet it was filmed in Mozambique. Why was that, and how did it happened? Nobody can say. Excuses have been provided, which are all very flimsy.
According to a commentary from Emanuel Levy (website) titled: Blood Diamon- Shooting in Africa; the movie director was quoted to have acknowledged that “Equatorial West Africa (I’m sure he meant Sierra Leone) just didn’t have the infrastructure to accommodate all our needs for this size production. We needed other locations, as well.”
This is foolhardy to say the least. Granted that the movie was spectacular, but what was so extraordinary that Freetown wouldn’t have accommodated the production? Let’s be real here, there is absolutely no location that is on the movie that Sierra Leone cannot boast of? The filming needed locations like a lush jungle landscape, and of course the country is green all through. Is the crew blinded to note that diamond mines are all over Sierra Leone? Don’t even mention refugee camps or a school. These locations are all over the country. If infrastructure was the issue here, which I must admit Sierra Leone falls short of; what the heck did the crew made every location better than they met in Maputo? Like Sierra Leone, Maputo too had infrastructural bottlenecks. So what’s the point here?
The crew of Blood Diamonds in diverse ways made a mockery of Sierra Leoneans. For those who do not know, this is what they did. Sierra Leonean trees were taken in trucks to dress the locations in Maputo they were shooting in at. Could you imagine that! To simulate the explosive fall of the city as depicted in the movie, Maputo city was doubled for Sierra Leone’s capital city, Freetown. What a travesty! They even had their wardrobe, fabrics brought from Sierra Leone (by costume designer Ngila Dickson, who had previously worked with Zwick on “The Last Samurai”). The insanity of it all was having a Mr. Alfred Lavalie as Mende dialect coach, to teach and prepare the all non-Sierra Leonean crew (but one Frederick M’Cormac as RUF Trainers – born in Sierra Leone but grew in Kenya) speaks mende. I saw the movie, and must say that it was a great. Leonardo gave a hell of a performance. He gave a nice shot at Creole and it was clean. The rest of the cast pretended to be talking mende, but it was not even close. That is exactly my point. At least there should have been Sierra Leonean actors/actresses and “extras” who could speak the local dialect. It would have been value added to the project. These guys used extreme measures to deny Sierra Leoneans the joy of hosting a movie centerpiece to the country’s past.
Plain hypocrisy and outright mockery by the movie makers have left many Sierra Leoneans wondering that it is about time to start asking questions. Speak to some Sierra Leoneans and you would hear them say that there should have been a campaign in the first place to ensure that Blood Diamonds was filmed in Sierra Leone. There is an urgent desire for the movie maker’s to come out clean, and level with us on their actions. If Sierra Leone was infrastructural bad, and Maputo wasn’t; why did they create road systems out of footpaths to accommodate the trucks used? Did the movie Director Zwick not say that big bucks were actually spent on building roads? The amount of money used in those construction projects could have built the same type of roads in Sierra Leone.
Whilst the Blood diamond movie crew did not go to Sierra Leone, as they put it because of logistical elements, the US Hip Hop music stars in the persons of Paul Wall, Wu Tang Clan’s Raekwon, and reggaetón king Tego Calderon, actually visited Freetown for the filming of “Bling: A documentary which takes a hard-hitting look at Sierra Leone’s diamond trade and how “binging” in the flashy world of commercial hip-hop played a role in the country’s civil war. The “bling bling” crew even stopped by at Kono – the pivot of the diamond trade, considered by the Blood Diamond crew as taboo or no go – zone. Don’t tell me that Kono do not have the beauty, scenery and props for shooting the final movie scene, where rebel commando, Colonel Coetzee and Captain Poison were killed?
The question on the lips of many is: what benefits (if any) will Sierra Leone receive as a nation, since it tells our story. This story is not a Mozambique story? It is a Sierra Leonean story. The more than 50,000 innocent lives, men, women and children, who’s blood, were shed where not Mozambique lives? What about the more than 1 million of the populations who became refugees and displaced, were they Mozambicans? I don’t think so. The two-thirds of the nation’s handicapped infrastructures destroyed during the conflict, portrayed in the movie were not Mozambican infrastructures. True Mozambique too went through turbulent times in their chequered history, but that past is completely unrelated to what Blood Diamonds was set to portray?
When do we start holding Hollywood accountable for preying upon the stories and crisis of innocent, voiceless and vulnerable individuals and nations? Some individuals and groups in Hollywood continue to rake huge bucks from unfortunate event, unchecked and without the proceeds filtering down to the victims? The movie Hotel Rwanda released 2004, depicting the horrors of the Rwanda genocide that saw the loss of some 1 million lives, and half the population becoming refugees, was also filmed in South Africa and the US.
Countries, communities and actors that have no linkages to such movies have continued to benefit at the expense of the real hero’s. What we are saying is that if these nations by simply opening their locations to movie crew, stands to gain so immensely, then is time that a frame work be designed to ensure that the real victims of such big movie screens benefit; beginning with Blood Diamonds. Do you have any problems with that? Sierra Leoneans should take this call and lobby movie Director Edward Zwick, Actors Leonardo DiCaprio, Djimon Hounsou, and Jennifer Connely, Paramount Bros. Pictures for our own pie.
Do you know that Leonardo DiCaprio is now working with the Orphans from SOS Children’s Villages in Mozambique, where they visited? He has pledged his own funds to help out not one girl child but an entire orphanage. The 24 children, who acted as “extras” on set of Blood Diamond, got to spend quality time with the actors. Djimon Hounsou also took time out to visit an SOS Children’s Village. It should have been Sierra Leonean kids having their dreams fulfilled with Leonardo, Djimon and Jenefer, and getting such a wonderful experience on the set. The number of locals used as “extras” could have made a huge contribution on their lives, where Sierra Leonean extras being used.
Sierra Leone missed big time on some unique opportunities because of the non-filming of Blood Diamonds. The benefits would not only have been garnerec on a one and one perspective, but the impact would have rippled right through communities. Just take a look at what the Mozambique communities received, by the end of the day: most of the props, construction materials, costumes and personal belongings; distributed to local orphanages and hospitals. The construction crew volunteered and built desks and chairs for the orphanages and schools. The fishing village of Tombo, Goderich or Murray Town instead of Costa du Sol- Maputo, would have been the scenes where the Vandy family’s peaceful life was shattered by the sudden attack of brutal rebel soldiers.
Imagine for one moment what a whooping $ 40 Million would have done to the local Sierra Leonean economy? The Blood Diamond crew by staying some six months filming, poured into the Mozambique local economy $ 40 Million. This is no kidding. It is coming straight from the horses’ mouth, according to Nikki Finke Exclusive: ‘Blood Diamond’ Director Ed Zwick Blasts Gossip As “Appalling”; Says Production Set up Private Africa Fund, on Tuesday, October 24th, 2006. In this exclusive, the movie director Zwick was quoted to have said that “but the Blood Diamond production was also pumping as much as $40 million straight into the local economy: cash for building roads, hiring drivers, paying for hotel accommodations. When you make a film in a place where the need is desperate, money is like a shot in the arm of the local economy.”The Blood Diamond crew being warm, lovely and humanitarians could not see such deprivation in communities visited, and pass by without any intervention. As a matter of fact a “Blood Diamond Charity Fund” was organized and set-up. The fund managed by a Maputo-based international accountancy firm under the supervision of Laws and João Ribeiro, the production manager in Mozambique, is in the range of USD 200,000 up to USD 500,000, and it is still growing to date. Just a little suggestion from the Mozambique production manager Nick Laws led to this initiative. It could definitely have been a sierra Leonean initiative, had this film been shot in Freetown.
I hear that many African relief groups and charities are now lined up to be beneficiaries of the funds, but there is no mention of any charity from Sierra Leone? Sierra Leoneans deserve the right to know, the would-be recipients of the “blood diamond charity fund”. We are saying here loud and clear that Sierra Leonean NGOs and charities, should benefits from this fund. The more than 5,000 who had their limbs amputated during the crisis, are in dire need of prosthetics. Mr. Zwick, please ensure that those prosthetics find their way to Sierra Leone. There are also hundreds of school going kids, women and the elderly who lack access to basic services: affordable health care, education, water and sanitation; and assistance are needed in those areas. The funds support to the Charities and NGOs working around these issues will go a long way in addressing the problems. Even as the debate is ongoing on finalizing funding recipients, we are asking that Sierra Leone’s NGOs and Charities be prioritized and factored in the conversation.
Here was a rare opportunity presented, and we failed to capitalize upon it. Sierra Leone missed out in playing host to many of Hollywood’s most well-known humanitarians actors. DiCaprio, is an eco activist and has his own foundation to fight global warming and other environmental crises. Connolly on the other hand is an ambassador for Amnesty International. And guess what, Warner Bros. president and CEO Alan Horn, himself is a progressive political and environmental activist. The mere presence of these humanitarian Hollywood actors on the ground would have opened a flood gate of assistance in ways unimaginable.Questions are now being asked as to what actually happened. Whose idea was it to shoot the movie in other locations, order than Sierra Leone (not even a portion of it)? By the way, where was Sorious Samura – Movie Consultant, when this decision was taken to film in Mozambique and South Africa, and not in Sierra Leone? Sorious had done a good job, partly the reason he was chosen to be the movie consultant, and in part because clips from his famous documentary – “CRY Freetown” were used. Sorious being a Sierra Leonean (and consultant), was better placed to use his so called expertise to lobby hard and entice the crew and production team, shoot at least some portions of the film in Sierra Leone. All I heard Sorious say were nice sentiments lavished upon Leonrado DiCaprio. Sorious should be reminded that those colorful impressions on the movie celebrity’s care for his country and compatriots, are mere rhetoric’s, and mean nothing to the greater population who want to see those sentiments demonstrated in real terms. It is not yet late, and there is still time for Sorious to use his influence on Leonardo help out in some ways, if he actually cares?
Blood Diamonds weigh heavily on the minds of Sierra Leonean. It is a pretty reminder of the country’s ugly past captured on a big screen, and many Sierra Leoneans relate to it, directly and indirectly. Haven Blood Diamonds crew to Freetown and Kono would have brought so much meaning to us all. Those benefits that got diverted to Mozambique and South Africa would have made so much difference in the lives of those who would have been involved in this project. USD 40M would have given a whole lot of dimension to the government’s effort in fighting poverty.
Yet again it seems Sierra Leone diamonds instead of being a blessing has roared its ugly head as a curse. In 2001, according to UN estimates, the International Diamond Industry’s trading centers in Europe fueled the rebel crisis by buying up to $125 million worth of diamonds a year from the RUF. Remember too that only 3 percent of all diamond export sales actually inputs into the country’s economy. This is just ludicrous.
