By: Moses Kollie Garzeawu
Contrary to the current constitution of Liberia, that give the President the right to appoint several local officials Citizens from five Counties in Liberia have further defended why their local leaders must be elected by them.
The Citizens said the election of superintendents, Commissioners, Town and Clan Chief along with other local leaders will foster developments in their Counties.
They said the elections of these leaders will also make the leaders more responsive, accountable and productive.
Speaking at a one day open space dialogue the citizens further boosted the strength of the decentralization Policy drafted by the Governance commission which calls for the elections of several local official including Superintendent.
The Open Space Dialogue was organized by the Center for Media Studies and Peace Building with support from the Open Society Initiative of West Africa.
The one day dialogue which took place on Saturday brought together 100 delegates from Gbapolu, Bomi, Margibi, Grand Cape Mount and Montserrado Counties.
Speaking at the start of the dialogue CEMESP Executive Director Malcolm Joseph said the aimed of the gathering was to know from Citizens issues they taught were not included in the Policy documents.
He said the re-recommended issues will be further to the policy makers for key consideration in the Decentralization and constitution review process.
According to Mr. Joseph the Open Space which focus on Inspiring Citizens Actions for effective participatory in local governance and decentralization in Liberia has been divided in three clusters.
“ The first cluster is what we are having today bringing you delegates from mostly western Counties and the second and third will follow in Gbarnga in Bong County and Zwedru in Grand Gedeh County” the CEMESP Boss said.
The one day gathering was attended by officials of the governance Commission who made a presentation on the Decentralization Policy.
The claim is rigorous and the content is demonstrably true.
The statement is correct, although it needs clarification additional information or context.
Evidence publicly available neither proves nor disproves the claim. More research is needed.
The statement contains correct data, but ignores very important elements or is mixed with incorrect data giving a different, inaccurate or false impression.
The claim is inaccurate according to the best evidence publicly available at this time.
Upon further investigation of the claim, a different conclusion was determined leading to the removal of the initial determination.
A rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable comment that is somewhat likely to make you leave a discussion or give up on sharing your perspective. Based on algorithmic detection of issues around toxicity, obscenity, threats, insults, and hate speech;