By: Stephen C. Neff, Reader in Law – Public International Law, University of Edinburgh Law School
Readers may be
forgiven for supposing that the era of international human rights law commenced
in 1948, with the modest fanfare accompanying the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. Less well remembered, however, is that the League of Nations
Covenant had included some potentially important human-rights provisions. These
were found in Article 23, in which member states promised that they would
“endeavour” to provide “fair and humane conditions of labour,” and that they
would also “secure just treatment of the native inhabitants” of territories
under their control.
On one occasion
– but only one – the machinery of the League of Nations was invoked against
allegations of serious violations of these undertakings. This was the case of
Liberia – a case that can hardly be said to have been forgotten, as it has
scarcely been remembered to begin with. A modest correction of that state of
ignorance is thought to be in order.
The League’s concern over Liberia arose out
of a spate of reports in the late 1920s about the use of forced labor in the
country. Most especially, it was alleged that the Liberia Frontier Force was
actively involved in the dragooning of laborers to work on the plantations of
the Firestone Plantations Company, which was a major American-owned rubber
producer, as well as in other parts of Africa (notably Fernando Po and Gabon).
These reports led to the establishment, by the League of Nations, of a
three-member investigatory commission.
The commission’s
leading member was a British figure, Cuthbert Christy, whose life reads like
something out of a novel by Rider Haggard or Rudyard Kipling. He was a
scientist-explorer in the larger-than-life Victorian manner, with extensive
experience in African exploration. He had also been active in the combatting of
trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness, to the unlettered). Also on the commission
was an American sociologist, Charles S. Johnson. The third member was a
Liberian – but not just any Liberian. He was Arthur Barclay, a former president
of the country – and also father-in-law of the then-current president, and (for
good measure) the uncle of a future president. Because of age and infirmity,
Barclay did not participate in investigations conducted outside the capital of
Monrovia.
Relations
between Christy and Johnson proved tense. Most importantly, they had different
views over what practices actually amounted to slavery. Johnson grumbled that
Christy was far too ready to employ the “s-word” where it was not appropriate.
In the event, though, a report was agreed and presented to the League in
December, 1930. It confirmed the presence of practices that amounted to
slavery within the definition of the international convention of 1926 on
slavery (to which Liberia was not a party). The sending of Liberian laborers to
other parts of Africa, in particular, was stated to be occurring under
“conditions of criminal compulsion scarcely distinguishable from slave raiding
and slave trading.” The Liberian Frontier Force was expressly found to have
participated in these practices. The Firestone Company was exonerated of
participation, although it was noted that it may have employed laborers who had
been obtained by force. The government of Liberia, as well as “leading
citizens,” were also absolved of wrongdoing.
International
Judicial Monitor