Connect with us


No, US Gov’t has not deployed 200 Election Monitors to Observe Voter Registration


United States Sends 200 Election Monitors to Liberia for Biometric Voter Registration.

Rating Justification

Report by the Independent Probe published in a March 12, 2023 online edition that the US government has deployed 200 monitors to Liberia to observe the Biometric Voter Registration is false.

The US Embassy near Monrovia in a FrontPage Africa article is quoted as saying, USAID-Liberia would be funding the Elections Coordinating Committee, a local network of civil society organizations focused on elections and the Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa (EISA), a non-governmental organization based in South Africa, to deploy short and long-term observe in Liberia.

Local Voices Liberia iVerify team also reached out to Suzanne Truchard, of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), via WhatsApp to verify the information and she responded by saying, “this story is not accurate”.

Based on the evidence we gathered, we conclude that this claim that the United States sent 200 Election Monitors to Liberia for Biometric Voter Registration is false.

Local Voices Liberia, in partnership with the United Nations Development Programme, has implemented the iVerify Liberia system with the objective of strengthening capacities to address threats to information integrity, especially in view of the upcoming 2023 elections, to ensure all Liberian citizens have access to credible, reliable and verified information, everywhere and at all times.

This initiative is funded by Irish AidEmbassy of Sweden in MonroviaEuropean Union Delegation in Liberia and the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund. UNDP or its donors have no say in the production of this fact check report.

Evidence and References


Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



The claim is rigorous and the content is demonstrably true.

Half 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;

More in False