-For Alleged Killings of Unarmed Civilians in Kinjor
By Jerromie S. Walters
Bea Mountain, a mining company operating in Western Liberia(Grand Cape Mount County), is facing legal action in the form of a US$30 million special damages claim and a US$50 million general damages claim for the alleged killings of three unarmed civilians in Kinjor, Grand Cape Mount County.
The lawsuit was filed on June 25, 2024, at the Civil Law Court in the Temple of Justice, Montserrado County, Liberia. However, reports indicate that the Bea Mountain office in Kinjorhas refused to acknowledge the writ of summons and has allegedly instructed their security personnel to obstruct the Bailiff from the Civil Law Court.
The writ of summons, filed in the Sixth Judicial Circuit Civil Law Court, names Bea Mountain Mining Company, AvesoroResources Inc., Avesoro Jersey Limited, and the Government of Liberia as defendants. The plaintiffs, including family members of the deceased individuals, are seeking damages totaling US$30 million for various legal and factual reasons related to the tragic incident.
The lawsuit alleges that the late Essah Massaley and Abraham Kerkula, residents of Monrovia and Kinjor Town, respectively, were unlawfully killed by agents or representatives of Bea Mountain Mining Company and Avesoro Resources Inc. The plaintiffs, who are family members of the deceased, are seeking justice and compensation for the loss of their loved ones.
The writ reads: “The Management of Bea Mountain Mining Company (BMMC), hereinafter referred to as [THE 1ST DEFENDANT] is a purported Turkish-based company and a concessionaire of the Government of Liberia, that is involved in the mining of gold and other precious minerals in Kinjor, Grand Cape Mount County but its parent company, AVESORO RESOURCES INC. (formerly Aureus Mining Inc.). Plaintiff gives notice to the court that it will provide further information to prove the true identity, shareholders, and origin of the 1st Defendant during the trial.
AVESORO RESOURCES INC. (formerly Aureus Mining Inc.), is a Canadian-based company, which through its subsidiaries, is engaged in the exploration and development of gold deposits in Liberia and Cameroon and is hereinafter referred to as [THE 2nd DEFENDANT]. It is also the parent company or principal owner of the 1st Defendant Bea Mountain Mining Company(BMMC) and is located at 199 Bay Street, Suite 5300, Toronto, M5L1B9, Canada, and is registered and trading on the London Stock Exchange. Plaintiff gives notice that they will provide further information about the shareholders and other pertinent information about the 2nd defendant during trial.”
Avesoro Jersey Limited, hereinafter referred to as [ THE 3RD DEFENDANT] of 199 Bay Street Suite 5300 Commerce Court West Toronto, ON, Canada, M5L 1B9, is the parent company or principal of Avesoro Resources Inc., which also is the parent company of Bea Mountain Mining Company(BMMC).
5. The Government of Liberia, hereinafter referred to as the [4th DEFENDANT] is the sovereign and constitutional authority, responsible for defending and protecting the constitutional rights of all Liberians, irrespective of tribe, creed, or color, including but not limited to protecting life and property, advocating and defending the rights of Liberians against all forms of abuses, labor rights violations, labor unrest, unfair labor practices, illegal land grab, forceful eviction, destruction of crops and traditional shrines, pollution of streams and rivers being used by villagers for drinking purposes and their livelihoods, extra-judicial activities, and actions including killings, extra-judicial and actions being committed against peaceful citizens by concessionaires, among others.
Plaintiff says the residents, villagers, and community leaders of Kinjor, Grand Cape Mount County are law-abiding citizens and have been living a peaceful life in Kinjor, Grand Cape Mount County until the 1st defendant Bea Mountain Mining Company(BMMC) acquired a mining concession from the government of Liberia, the 3rd defendant by signing a Mineral Development Agreement(MDA), in which it made a sundry of promises to provide better working facilities for its employees, improve the quality of life, and to fulfill its corporate social responsibility to the communities by providing basic social services to improve the lives of communities and residents of Kinjor, Grand Cape Mount County. Plaintiff gives notice to the Court that he will subpoena as part of its material evidence the Mineral Development Agreement (MDA) between the 1st defendant and the 3rd defendant containing these promises during trial.”
“Plaintiff says the 1st defendant rather than fulfilling the countless promises made to its own employees and the residents and communities, the 1st defendant relying on its influence and connections in government, soon embarked upon a rebel style of commandeering properties in Kinjor and its environs, and in an apparent attempt to acquire more land for its mining operations, the 1st defendant as agent of the 2nd defendant, and acting within the apparent scope and authority of their relationship, which seems the overall objective of the 3rd defendant, started engaging in illegal land grab, pollution of the environment, forceful eviction of peaceful citizens from the ancestral land, pollution of streams, rivers and destruction of their livelihoods including but not limited to crops, and thereafter, started engaging in acts reminiscent of a rebel gang with posse of heavily armed riot police and members of the Armed Forces of Liberia(AFL) who have been trained and are being paid from taxpayers’ money serving as personal bodyguards and running riots by seizing and illegally grabbing lands with impunity to the detriment of residents. Plaintiff gives notice to the court that he will produce material witnesses to prove these allegations.”
Plaintiff submits and says at material time diverse, the employees and residents of Kinjor and its surrounding communities after complaining incessantly without any redress, reckoned that they had had enough of the 1st defendant’s deliberate and willful failure to live up to its everyday promises and had resolved to stage a peaceful protest by holding placards to highlight their plight of unfair labor practices, denial of wages and safety equipment, abuse and blatant violation of their basic human rights. Further, Plaintiff says to avert taking any responsibility for its atrocious illegal land grab policy, willful and deliberate pollution of streams and rivers from which villagers are fetching drinking, destruction of their crops, forceful eviction and destruction of traditional shrines and crops, the 1st Respondent solicited, and the 3rd defendant, provided and continues to provide a horde of heavily armed police and members of the Armed Forces of Liberia(AFL) who have been trained on taxpayers’ money to defend and protect the territory integrity of Liberia to serve, and are serving as mere personal bodyguards for a throng of Turkish and other nationalities to enforce nonresistance to Bea Mountain Mining Company(BMMC) illegal land grab, pollution of streams and rivers, forceful eviction of villagers from their land, and to crush bare by the use of disproportionate force of any public dissent. Plaintiffs give notice to the court that they will produce evidence and material witnesses to prove these allegations.
Moreover, Plaintiff avers and says the 3rd defendant as principal of the 2nd defendant and the 2nd defendant as principal of the 1st defendant are equally liable to Plaintiff for the act of their agent, the 1st defendant, on grounds that apart from being the principal benefactors of the 1st defendant’s atrocious conduct of illegal land grab, pollution of streams and rivers, forceful eviction of villagers and pollution of the environment, the 2nd and 3rd defendants have sat supinely and allowed the 1st Defendant to do whatever it can include but not limited to spreading misinformation intended to trigger the unnecessary deployment of security forces in its operations by the 4th defendant, and knowingly or unknowingly aided and abetted its illegal land grab campaign. The plaintiff gives notice to the court that it will produce witnesses including victims of the 1st defendant’s illegal land grab campaign in Grand Cape Mount.
Plaintiff says and submits that Bea Mountain Mining Company’s (BMMC) use of threats and intimidation as an effective weapon of its abusive and atrocious policy of silencing any dissent or its use of its heavily armed bodyguards to carry out extra-judicial activities and actions on peaceful citizen to quell any legitimate dissent, somehow failed when its employees holding placards and demanding better working conditions and complaining of unfair labor practices staged a peaceful protest on February 29, 2024, which was also joined by residents, and villagers who were themselves, demonstrating and demanding that Bea Mountain live up to its corporate social responsibility. Plaintiffs say the holding of placards by the employees, residents of Kinjor and its environs attracted curious crowds, i.e. villagers, community residents, and onlookers who were watching the peaceful and unarmed protesters holding placards and singing lousily to attract the attention of the Bea Mountain Management.”
Additionally, Plaintiff says the Bea Mountain Mining Management being self-conceited, defiant, and relying on its strong ties and connections with public officials, soon demonstrated its lack of respect for the legitimate rights of its employees and the residents of Kinjor and thereby described the peaceful protest of unarmed civilians holding placards and singing as a “clear and present” danger to its facility, and based on such false and misleading assumption, the 1st Defendant raised a false alarm under the pretext of being besieged and allegedly pleaded with the 4th defendant to be rescued. Plaintiffs say based on this false emergency call made by the 1st defendant for the benefit of the 2nd and 3rd defendants, that the 4th defendant ordered the Liberia National Police, some of whom were already assigned with 1st Defendant’s top officials as mere bodyguards, to “use whatever means necessary to put down the protest and restore law and order.” Plaintiffs give notice to court that they will produce material witnesses to prove these allegations.
It was made known by Plaintiff that the Liberia National Police as agents of the 4th Defendant, and acting on the fallacious information provided by the 1st Defendant, which is a subsidiary of the 2nd Defendant, the actual benefactor of 1st Defendant’s operations in Kinjor, Grand Cape Mount County, Liberia; and without any provocation, randomly began firing teargas into Kinjor Town and its environs, including a nursery school nearby, violently dispersed, forced out and chased the little kids that were in school including toddlers, forcing them to flee in panic, with many leaving behind their lunch kits; some could barely run, and all this was done in response to the false and misleading information provided by the Management of Bea Mountain to the detriment of the residents. Attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit P/1” is a photograph of some of the kids running from their school after being forced to run for their lives when the police began throwing teargas indiscriminately.”
“Plaintiff says the 1st defendant as a subsidiary of the 2nd defendant, performs and carries out corporate decisions approved by the 2nd and 3rd defendants and therefore the three corporations are the same body corporate; and the act of raising false alarm to solicit and call to action of heavily armed security personnel, some of whom are assigned to 1st defendant’s officials against peaceful unarmed protesters to enforce nonresistance to the abuse of its own employees’ rights, evade its corporate social responsibility, is part of the larger policy of noncompliance developed and employed by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants to unduly hurt its own employees and residents whose properties have been illegally taking away. Plaintiff gives notice to court to prove that the 1st and 2nd defendant are the same company.”
Further to count 10 above, Plaintiff says the indiscriminate throwing of teargas “on anything that moves or shakes” by the Liberia National Police, including kids and toddlers at a kindergarten school, created a state of pandemonium, and while the protesters including some of the bystander , onlookers, kids were running helter-skelter from the police for their personal safety, the (police) fired live bullets into the crowds of unarmed civilians and summarily killed three unarmed civilians including the late Essah Massaley and Abraham Kerkula who were not part of the demonstration but were simply bystanders watching the peaceful protest. Attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit P/2” are photographs of the lifeless bodies of Essah Massaley and Abraham Kerkula after being shot in their backs and killed by the Liberia National Police while running away from the scene of the demonstration.
“Plaintiff says and submits that the 4th defendant has not denied receiving misinformation and blatant lies from the 1st defendant; has not denied engaging in the indiscriminate throwing of teargas and indiscriminate shooting of live bullets in the crowds in Kinjor and its environs, thereby killing three unarmed and innocent civilians that included Essah Massaleyand Abraham Kerkula but alleged that the unarmed and peaceful protesters were seen with arms and even though not a single bullet was fired or the arrest of the said arms was made, and no injuries were sustained, the 3rd defendant shamefully justified and described the wanton killings of the three unarmed bystanders as the “necessary use of force” in a purported report written by a so-called Professional Standards Division presided by the very police that exonerated murderers of the three unarmed civilians. Plaintiffs give notice to court that they will file a petition to subpoena the report written by the Professional Standards Division during trial.”
Plaintiff says the late Essah Massaley and Abraham Kerkulawere killed simply for witnessing a peaceful demonstration staged by unarmed residents, community leaders and employees of the 1st defendant holding placards and merely exercising their rights of freedom of peaceful assembly under the Liberian Constitution, and the police turned the entire community and its surroundings into war zone based on the alleged misinformation that the 1st defendant provided that its facilities were under serious attack, and were on the verge of being invaded and vandalized which however turned out to be false. Plaintiffs say it is now clear that such misinformation became a proximate cause of the police using disproportionate force, shooting and killing in cold blood, the late EssahMassaley and Abraham Kerkula and another protester, and thereby wounding several other protesters.”
Plaintiff says the late Essah Massaley and Abraham Kerkulawould have been alive today if the police had not shot them in their backs in cold blood, and the kids at the nearby kindergarten school would not have lived in fear had they not been subjected to a horrific and indiscriminate throwing of teargas at their school. Further, if the 1st defendant as agent of the 2nd defendant had not raised false alarm and provided misinformation about a peaceful protest by calling on and ordering the Liberia National Police to come to its rescue. Plaintiffs say the late Essah Massaley, 28, has left behind two kids(a boy and a girl) of tender age and the late Abraham Kerkula, age 21, had his vision of becoming an economist cut short by his wanton killing based on the false information provided by the 1st defendant as agent of the 2nd defendant. Attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit P/3” is one of the death certificates of the late Abraham Kerkula.”
“Plaintiff says the two little kids of the late Essah Massaleywould not have been fatherless or orphans at such tender age, with a bleak future, and without a fatherly care and love, had the 1st 2md, and 3rd defendant not institutionalized a blatant lack of respect in fulfilling their corporate social responsibility to the communities or had not sported with or engaged in unfair labor practices which triggered the February 29, 2024 peaceful protest, and as a result of which the 4th defendant acted on the false information provided by the 1st , 2nd, and 3rd defendants in shooting at point blank and murdering three unarmed civilians mistaken for protesters. Attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit P/4” is a photograph of one of the children of the late Essah Massaley who was murdered by the 4th defendant in cold blood.”
More so, Plaintiff states that the 4th defendant acting on the false information provided by the 1st defendant, for and on behalf of the 2nd and 3rd defendants, the 4th defendant fired live bullets into the crowds as evidenced by the shells of the bullets seen in the photograph attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit P/5” to form a cogent part of this complaint.”
“Plaintiff says in an attempt to find an amicable solution, it solicited the help of a legal counsel who wrote the 1st defendant for a conference but in its usual fashion of blatant disregard for the rights of others and relying on its influence with the 4th defendant and other public officials, the 1st defendant woefully refused to take delivery of the communication, let alone honoring the invitation. Attached hereto and marked as “Exhibit P/6” is a copy of the communication to form a cogent part of the complaint. Plaintiff says and submits that given the priceless nature of human life, and the irreparable losses sustained as a consequence of the wanton and cold bloody murder of EssahMassaley and Abraham Kerkula by the 3rd defendant based on the mischief, false and misleading information provided by the 1st defendant, Plaintiffs are seeking a paltry sum of US$15,000,000 (Fifteen Million Dollars) each for the deceased’s families totaling US$30, 000, 000(US Thirty Million Dollars) as special damages for the injuries suffered and continue to suffer.”
Furthermore, the court document states, “WHEREFORE AND IN VIEW OF THE AFOREMENTIONED it is the prayer of the plaintiff as follows: 1. Your Honor will award special damages to Plaintiffs against the defendants collectively in the amount of US$30,000,000.00( US Thirty Million Dollars) collectively against the within named defendants; 2. Your Honor will award general damages against the defendants collectively for psychological injuries suffered, loss of parental and fatherly care and control, anguish, isolation, in the tone of US50,000,000(US Fifty Million Dollars) as general damages; 3. That Your Honor and this Honorable Court will grant unto Plaintiffs any and all further relief that Your Honor may deem just and legal in these confines’. .
