- \n
- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lied by suggesting The DayLight did not contact it for the online newspaper\u2019s story over a spillage of chemicals from a Bea Mountain Mining Corporation (BMMC) in a river in Grand Cape Mount County more than two months ago<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- The DayLight had actually contacted the EPA four days before its publication on April 19, accusing the EPA of concealing the pollution, Bea Mountain\u2019s second in two years<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- An analysis of EPA\u2019s website shows EPA published the report on the spillage on April 5, 2023, more than a month after the incident. There was no press statement as done in the past. The general public remained unaware of the pollution until The DayLight\u2019s report<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- But publishing the report only on its website apparently breaks the Environmental Protection and Management Law of Liberia, which requires the EPA to publish the spillage in a newspaper and broadcast it on a radio station<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- The DayLight has frowned on the other news outlets from publishing a press release from the EPA on the publication-concealment issue without contacting The DayLight or adding its side of the story provided in a well-circulated email<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
MONROVIA \u2013 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lied when it suggested The DayLight failed to contact the agency for a story on chemicals that spilled from a Bea Mountain Mining Corporation plant into a river in Grand Cape Mount County in February this year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over a week ago, The DayLight reported that the EPA had concealed the report<\/a> on the findings of the spillage. The report found that the waste plant at the New Liberty Goldmine leaked cyanide and copper sulphate into the Marvoe Creek and further into water sources in Jikondo in the Gola Konneh District. The chemicals, used to mine gold, are dangerous to people\u2019s health and can lead to death. The spillage is the second in the last two years and the fifth in the last decade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After the report, the EPA issued a press release<\/a>, calling The DayLight story as a \u201cdiabolical lie.\u201d It suggested that The DayLight did not check the site or contact its communication team before publishing its story.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe Agency encourages media houses and individuals seeking information on the workings of the EPA to check its website and or contact its media and corporate communications office for information about the agency,\u201d The EPA said in the release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/stage.thedaylight.org\/wp68\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/Email-Screenshot.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/stage.thedaylight.org\/wp68\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/Email-Screenshot-2.png\")
Screenshots of an email exchange between The DayLight’s Mark B. Newa and Danise Dennis-Dodoo, the head of the EPA corporate communications office show The DayLight contacted the agency over the publication of the report on Bea Mountain’s chemicals spills. <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe EPA is stunned that an online publication that [prides itself] as a credible outlet will depart from truth-telling as a core standard of journalism to telling lies to satisfy its funders\u2019 criteria,\u201d it added. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the release contradicts the facts. The DayLight had contacted Danise Dennis-Dodoo, the head of EPA\u2019s corporate communication office, four days before the story was published. In fact, one of seven questions Mark B. Newa, the reporter who did the story had raised, concerning the publication of the report. \u201cThe agency will answer your questions and revert to your soonest,\u201d Dennis-Dodoo said in a reply to the email at the time. Those answers have yet to come more than two weeks after this reporter’s email.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The DayLight has expressed concern over EPA\u2019s failure to acknowledge the environmental newspaper contacted the agency. \u201cThe fact that the press release here does not mention that is defamation in itself,\u201d said Director\/Managing Editor James Harding Giahyue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Report Concealed<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
The date EPA published the February 19, 2023 report\u2014and other documents on the website\u2014is not reflected. However, The DayLight analysis of the document shows it was published on April 5, 2023. That was more than a month after the pollution. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Following last year\u2019s spillage, the EPA issued three different statements. One booked<\/a> Bea Mountain for that spillage, one reaffirmed<\/a> its findings, and another dramatically cleared<\/a> the company of any wrongdoing. All those statements were posted on Facebook, a preferred medium of communication for Liberians at home and abroad.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Unlike last year, the EPA made no public statement on the current spillage, which apparently indicates the agency tried to keep the spillage out of the public glare. The pollution was grave and residents of affected towns and villages had been prevented from drinking from creeks in the area for at least 45 days, according to the report. It was unclear whether they are allowed to use the waterfronts now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The EPA probably violated the law by not widely circulating the report on the current spillage. The law says the EPA may choose to publish and broadcast the spillage\u2014pollution control, inspection and investigation, to name some\u2014in at least a newspaper and on a radio station. The environmental law mandates the EPA to \u201censure maximum participation by the Liberian people in the management and decision-making processes of the environment and natural resources.\u201d It guarantees \u201cenvironmental information and promotes disclosure for the ultimate benefit of the environment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But apart from that, the technical language in the report does not make it ideal for public consumption. That seemingly explains why there has been a public discourse on the spillage more than two months on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Amid all of this, there is no public record that the EPA fined Bea Mountain for the spills this or last year. Public access to information is a right under the Environmental Protection and Management Law<\/a>, while public participation is one of its guiding principles. The law also ascribes to the global \u201cpolluter pays\u201d principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The report said Bea Mountain did not implement some of the recommendations from last year\u2019s spillage but did not specify. It had called on the EPA to punish the company for violating the law and the terms of its waste permit. Bea Mountain has not commented on the spillage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- The DayLight has frowned on the other news outlets from publishing a press release from the EPA on the publication-concealment issue without contacting The DayLight or adding its side of the story provided in a well-circulated email<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- But publishing the report only on its website apparently breaks the Environmental Protection and Management Law of Liberia, which requires the EPA to publish the spillage in a newspaper and broadcast it on a radio station<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- An analysis of EPA\u2019s website shows EPA published the report on the spillage on April 5, 2023, more than a month after the incident. There was no press statement as done in the past. The general public remained unaware of the pollution until The DayLight\u2019s report<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
- The DayLight had actually contacted the EPA four days before its publication on April 19, accusing the EPA of concealing the pollution, Bea Mountain\u2019s second in two years<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n