Morlu Files US$30m Libel Suit
June 14, 2010
According to the suit which was filed today in the Civil Law Court, Sixth Judicial Circuit of Montserrado County, AG Morlu says Defendant Ruth Bailey Yeaher, out of venom, malice, vengefulness, ill-will, malevolence, spite and hatred decided and set out to deliberately and intentionally malign, vilify, slander, defame, and tarnish Morlu’s good name and professional reputation by writing him a letter, in which she falsely, untruthfully, baselessly and satanically accused AG Morlu of sexual harassment.
Count 11 libel suit states that despite the fact that the Defendant stipulated in her letter that the actions complained of started in 2007, defendant has, up to present, not lodged any complaint as required and spelled out in section 6.2.2, as found on page 41 of the Human Resources Policy Handbook of the General Auditing Commission which states among other things that if employees believe that they are or any other employee have been subject to sexual harassment or any unwanted sexual attention: they should report all incidents of harassment or inappropriate sexual conduct regardless of their seriousness; report the incident to the employee’s manager, human resources, or the GAC management; and should make a written record of the date, time, and nature of the incident(s) and the names of any witnesses.
Count 12 says Defendant‘s letter is not a letter of complaint, but one intended to destroy and tarnish Plaintiff’s hard won reputation, as can be gleaned from its contents; the contents will confirm the fact that Defendant deceptively decided to pretend to be reporting the matter to all institutions and individuals, but the right and proper forum, namely “the employee’s manager, human resources, or the GAC management” as spelled out in the Handbook.
Count 14 says Defendant Ruth Bailey Yeaher, determined to tarnish Plaintiff’s good name and reputation, defendant sent and circulated copies of her libelous letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President Pro-tempore of the Liberian Senate; Dr. C. William Allen, Director General of the Civil Service Agency; the European Union(EU);the Association of Female Lawyers in Liberia(AFELL),the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission(JPC);Rev. Dr. John S. Russel of GAC; and Honorable Varbah Gayflor, Minister of Gender and Development.
Plaintiff also says in count 8 that despite the audit findings of Ruth husband Alexander Yeaher engaged in corrupt and fraudulent acts, despite the discontinuance of his services at the Ministry of Internal Affairs for conflict of interest and despite the issuance of a write for his arrest, he was unknowingly appointed by the President and confirmed by the Liberian Senate to the position of Assistant Superintendent of River Gee County, on April 1, 2010.
Count 9 of the suit states that upon learning of the appointment and confirmation of Defendant’s husband, Alexander Yeaher, to the position of Assistant Superintendent of River Gee County, he (Plaintiff) informed the President of Liberia, Madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, during a meeting with Her Excellency on April 5, 2010, which development definitely infuriated Defendant, as the President declined to induct Defendant’s husband into office on account of the information received from Plaintiff.
In Count 3 Plaintiff says prior to Defendant suspension, she worked as Computer operator at the former General Auditing Office, predecessor of the new General Auditing Commission, prior to Plaintiff’s engagement and ascension to the position of Auditor General ;Defendant also worked in several capacities at the new General Auditing Commission, including Receptionist, Administrative Assistant to the Manager of Governmental Affairs, Junior Supreme Auditor and lastly Audit trainee.
Plaintiff says in count 4 that some of Defendant’s transfers were by requests, other represented promotions; while the last transfer was a result of an evaluation and reclassification, initiated by Defendant’s immediate boss, in consonance with the Program and policy at the General Auditing Commission.
Plaintiff also says during the evaluation and reclassification that led to Defendant’s last transfer, thirty(30) other employees similarly evaluated and reclassified ,in consonance with the Program and Policy of the new General Auditing Commission; defendant was, therefore, not the only employee affected by the exercise.
Plaintiff Morlu says he suffered damage to his name, his professional reputation and he has been demeaned and defamed by Defendant, for which damages will lie.
For Further Information, Please Contact Ernest S. Maximore
Director of Communications, GAC: Tel:06578796/04949926