Few days ago I wrote an article expressing doubts about the explanation given by the Justice Ministry relative to the incident on the Capitol By-pass in which a former CID officer and a police officer were killed. I raised qualms over the explanation because the Justice Ministry's release at the time raised more misgivings than veracity, something which I said at the time will not augur well for government-public relationship. I said in that article that the public depends on the government whenever it is relating to the public to state the truth that will be convincing. In its press release following the incident, the Justice Ministry said the deceased officer, identified as Amos Tutu was set ablaze by an angry mob after he allegedly killed a resident of the area identified as Preston Davies, said to be a former member of the CID of the Liberia National Police. Further in its explanation, the ministry said the incident occurred while the officer was in pursuit of a “criminal gang.” The release reads thus:

”A senior  officer of the Police Support Unit (PSU) of the Liberia National Police (LNP), Chief Inspector Amos Tutu, was set ablaze last Saturday night at about 9 o'clock, in the vicinity of the Building Materials Center on the Capitol Bye-pass by an angry mob believed to be residents of the area. According to a Justice Ministry release, inspector Tutu, who was later pronounced dead, hours later at the John F. Kennedy Medical Center on Sunday at about 5:00 a.m. had gone to effect the arrest of a criminal gang. The release said it was in this pursuit when one member of the gang allegedly attacked and struck him with an iron rod. Reacting in self-defense, the late Inspector Tutu shot his attacker dead, according to eyewitnesses. The release said further that an AFL soldier who attempted to rescue Inspector Tutu, also sustained serious injuries when the angry mob spilled gasoline on him. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Justice is urging the public and families of all those affected in this tragic incident to remain calm while a thorough investigation is being conducted. The Government of Liberia expresses condolence to the bereaved families. The Ministry warns that Government will not condone any acts of lawlessness by any element in the Country, and has vowed to prosecute all those found culpable. The ministry said several arrests have been made as investigation continues”.

In my critique to that press release or statement, I expressed about the facts being presented by the ministry especially so as it relates to the issue of “criminal gang.” I wondered how possible it was for one police officer at night to pursue an alleged 'criminal gang. This, I felt was far from the truth and was very unconvincing and more so the former CID man who was killed was not a criminal.  The next point I raised was the impossibility of how a police officer in his sound mind will want to arrest a “gang” at night. This, again I felt was far from the truth. And truly to my concerns and doubts raised about the Justice Ministry's explanation, the police yesterday gave a different picture of the scenario. According to Police Inspector General Marc Amblard, Inspector Tutu did not go into the vicinity to effect an arrest of a criminal gang. He clarified that Chief Inspector Tutu's mission was not in pursuit of any criminal. He said though the late Tutu went in the area his presence there may have been on a different mission at which time the incident occurred. He said investigation into the incident is ongoing and will be made public as soon as it is concluded.  The Police boss further said that whatsoever may have happened does not give anyone the right to burn a person to death lest to say an officer of the Liberia National Police. 

Even though the police boss did not elaborate further as he said investigation was continuing, one thing that is clear is that the initial explanation by the Justice Ministry about criminal gang is untrue, and that he did not go to the area to carry on such arrest, but perhaps on a different mission, which is yet to be established. How-be-it, my concern has to do with the explanation given by the Justice Ministry because I knew it was not true for a single man to venture into an alleged criminal gang to effect an arrest, and that it was not true that a single man will want to carry on such an arrest at that time, knowing the risk and danger associated with such an exercise. As I said in the previous article, I questioned as to whether a single police officer went to arrest a “criminal gang”. The term gang does not denote a single individual or alleged criminal, but many criminals. A gang can be referred to as “a band of persons acting or going about together, for criminal purpose causing disapproval.” A gang can also be a bunch of criminals, mob, bunch of hooligans, team, squad, crew or group. Considering the definition of gang, one could deduce that the ministry was not telling the truth. This is unfortunate.

As I said previously in the area of public affairs which relates to government's information to the press, it is advisable for information being given to the public through the media be well coordinated and properly checked. Cross-checking of information or facts is not only circumscribed to the media, but even the very government because if it is observed that information from the government to the public is not true, this, will definitely bring about credibility and confidence problem, something no government will want to be associated with. Whenever it is said that ,”government should speak with one voice,” this in no way is intended to curtail freedom of speech of those in government, but that whenever there is something major for the public, the government should ensure that whatever is being presented is the truth and nothing but the truth. The whole issue of government is confidence and credibility. It they do not exist, then, the people will never believe what their leaders will tell them. In the areas of information dissemination, there is something referred to as the “clearing house.” Many times when people speak of “clearing house,” they only limit to the financial world. No, this is not true. There should also be a clearing house in certain quarters such as the government on information for the public. This is necessary because it is more confusing for the Justice Ministry, which is the mother of the police to be saying one thing and the child, saying a different thing. This is a disservice in public affairs or public administration.

To conclude, let me say that I welcome government's providing information to the public through the media because this is crucial in the running of government. But it must tell the people the truth. Even if the people doubt the truth, one day they will be convinced that the government spoke the truth at the time because the truth can never be crushed to the ground as it will always rise. Again as I said before, the Saturday's incident is regrettable. But the government through the Justice Ministry's initial explanation only added insult to injury, where the family members of the deceased also came out to challenge the government's explanation.When it comes to relating information to the public for its consumption, the government should be careful and mindful of how it communicates. I rest to wait for the real story or facts. As it is often said,“ We learn from mistakes.” Therefore, I know that a lesson has been learnt from this situation. Mr. Wesseh is a part time instructor in the Department of Mass Communication at the University of Liberia (UL) and the United Methodist University (UMU).