Foreign Ministry Denies Knowledge Over Concession, Access Agreement B/w Liberia, Ivanhoe Liberia

Monrovia-December 2, 2025: The House of Representatives special concession hearing became of key interedt Tuesday after senior government officials struggled to explain the status of the 2019 Liberia–Guinea Implementation Agreement

The agreement is the legal foundation upon which the controversial Concession and Access Agreement (CAA) with Ivanhoe Liberia (HPX/SMFG) now rests. What lawmakers heard instead was confusion, contradiction, and, most strikingly, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs openly disowning any involvement in the process.

Foreign Affairs, however, distanced itself entirely. Deputy Minister for Administration Gabriel Selee told lawmakers the Ministry was unaware of the agreement and “was not a part of it,” denying any involvement in negotiations or oversight of the CAA or the Implementation Agreement that supposedly forms its legal basis.

The hearing, convened by the Specialized Committee investigating the status of the Liberia–Guinea Implementation Agreement, quickly exposed a critical gap: Liberia ratified the agreement in 2021, but Guinea has not. The revelation left Representatives Jeremiah Sokan, Ivar Jones, Dorwon Gleekia, and Marcus Thomas visibly stunned, as the agreement is intended to govern all cross-border use of Liberia’s rail and port infrastructure.

Deputy Minister of Justice for Economic Affairs, Cllr. Charles F. D. Karmo II, repeatedly defended the legality of the Implementation Agreement yet avoided confirming whether Guinea had ratified it. When Rep. Ivar Jones asked directly, “Have our Guinean counterparts ratified this agreement up to date?” the answer never came.

Jones pushed harder, reminding him that the agreement is binding only on Liberia since “the Guinean Legislature has not ratified it.” He then pressed whether Liberia had even transmitted the ratified agreement to Guinea. Cllr. Karmo admitted it had not been sent, offering only that “Guinea and Liberian laws are not the same.” At one point he attempted to justify the government’s inactivity by saying, “We were trying to send a team to Guinea, but something happened.”

His responses clashed sharply with the structure of the 2019 Implementation Agreement, which lays out a meticulous, bilateral approval process for any Guinean company seeking access to Liberia’s rail and port facilities. The agreement requires Guinea to first determine a company’s eligibility, followed by Liberia’s review through a joint Monitoring Committee and the Inter-Ministerial Committee. It also mandates a standardized Access Agreement template — a safeguard intended to prevent one-off deals and ensure fairness.

None of these steps appear to have been followed in the case of the CAA with Ivanhoe Liberia. There is no evidence of Guinea completing an eligibility review, no record of an access request submitted to Liberia, no Monitoring Committee minutes, no IMC approval, and no confirmation that the CAA complies with the required template. Lawmakers took notice.

Representative Dorwon Gleekia questioned whether Guinea had ever granted explicit consent for its ore to transit Liberia, given that Guinea has already constructed its own railway. Cllr. Karmo responded only that SMFG — Ivanhoe’s subsidiary in Guinea — had obtained a mining permit. Gleekia countered with Article 3.3 of the Implementation Agreement, which states: “Neither Party shall sign any contract or undertake any action that directly or indirectly restricts or prevents the full effect of this Agreement.”

The hearing took a sharper turn when Representative Jeremiah Sokan criticized the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for failing to advise the Legislature on Guinea’s non-ratification before approving the deal. “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not advise this Legislature and did not even inform the Guineans in line with what we have ratified here. For me, that is disappointing,” Sokan said.

The committee suspended the hearing and instructed all witnesses to return next Tuesday as the investigation intensifies — with lawmakers now seeking clarity on not only the status of the Implementation Agreement, but also on how a multi-billion-dollar cross-border concession was advanced without the Ministry responsible for diplomacy, treaties, and international coordination.