THE VIDEO SPREADING across Liberian social media is not news. It is exploitation. And the women’s organizations demanding accountability for its circulation are not asking for favors — they are demanding that the law mean something in the digital age.
THE FOOTAGE INVOLVES an alleged 17-year-old girl and a 29-year-old man who reportedly offered her $500. The matter includes a serious allegation of rape. Yet what has traveled farthest and fastest is not the pursuit of justice, but the child’s face, name, and trauma — packaged for public consumption while platforms and bloggers wash their hands of the consequences.
THE ASSOCIATION OF Female Lawyers of Liberia (AFELL) and the Women NGOs Secretariat of Liberia (WONGOSOL) are right to call this what it is: a national failure. And they are right to demand that social media platforms and individual bloggers stop profiting from harmful content while disclaiming responsibility for its reach.
“The disregard shown for the child’s dignity, privacy, safety, and welfare is indefensible,” said Cllr. Bowoulo Taylor Kelley, AFELL’s First Vice President. She is correct. No child’s violation should become content. No child’s face should become a thumbnail for engagement. No child’s trauma should become public entertainment.
WONGOSOL’S INVOCATION OF Liberia’s Children’s Law (2011), the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is not ceremonial. These instruments establish binding protections for children’s privacy and dignity. They are not suggestions. They are obligations.
THE MINISTRY OF Gender, Children and Social Protection has condemned the video and confirmed it is working to contact the blogger and identify the survivor. That is welcome — but condemnation without enforcement is merely sentiment. The Ministry must ensure its engagement with the Liberia National Police produces action, not press releases.
AFELL’s DEMANDING FOR prompt, independent, and impartial investigation deserves emphasis. Where legally required grounds for arrest exist, the suspect must be arrested without delay. Where evidence supports prosecution, prosecution must follow. And it must proceed free from public pressure, intimidation, or interference — including the pressure to treat a child’s violation as spectacle.
THE ORGANIZATIONS’ DEMANDS on platforms are precise and reasonable: robust safeguards for minors, effective reporting mechanisms, prompt removal or restriction of harmful content, retention of evidence for lawful investigations, and full cooperation with authorities. These are not novel or burdensome requirements. They are the minimum price of operating in a society that claims to protect children.
FOR BLOGGERS AND online publishers, the message is equally clear: protect the identity and dignity of minors. Do not exploit, threaten, shame, sensationalize, or recklessly expose any child. “Ignorance of the law is not an excuse,” WONGOSOL correctly notes. Neither is the pursuit of clicks, influence, or advertising revenue.
WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT some may have acted without malice. But good intentions do not restore a child’s privacy. They do not undo the trauma of viral exposure. And they do not excuse the failure to exercise basic care.
WONGOSOL’S GUIDING PRINCIPLE — “When a child is involved, the child must come first” — should govern every actor in this matter. That means the Ministry of Gender must secure psychosocial and child-protection support for the alleged minor. It means the SGBV Crimes Unit must thoroughly investigate any evidence of sexual abuse, exploitation, or trafficking. It means the public must stop reposting material that exposes or humiliates the girl.
AND IT MEANS rejecting the impulse to blame or shame the victim. “If she was exploited, she deserves protection, support, and access to justice, not public condemnation,” WONGOSOL reminds us. That is not merely compassionate. It is lawful. It is just.
Cllr. Kelley’s warning bears repeating: “Freedom of expression is not a shield for unlawful conduct, reckless harm, or the exploitation of a child.”
THIS IS THE principle Liberia must now enforce — not just in this case, but across the entire digital space. A society that cannot protect its children from exploitation in the name of engagement and profit is not a society that values them at all.
THE AUTHORITIES MUST pursue this matter to a lawful conclusion. Platforms and bloggers must be held to account. And at every stage, the child’s protection, dignity, and welfare must remain paramount.
THAT IS NOT a radical demand. It is the bare minimum of a civilized society. Liberia must meet it.
