A Pan-African Perspective on Urban Rights and Accountability in Liberia’s Growing Eviction Crisis

A cloud of tear gas hung over Red Light Market in Paynesville on November 1, 2025, as sheriff officers and police clashed with residents resisting what many describe as an illegal enforcement of a contested eviction order. The scene—characterized by thrown stones, burned tires, and business disruptions—represents more than an isolated incident. It exposes the deepening fractures in Liberia’s approach to property rights, urban development, and citizen protections against forceful displacements .

This confrontation in one of Monrovia’s busiest commercial corridors reflects a broader pattern of eviction-related tensions playing out across Liberia. From the controversial demolition of the opposition CDC headquarters to the everyday struggles of market vendors, the nation faces critical questions about where the line between legal enforcement and protected tenant rights should be drawn. As families see their livelihoods threatened and businesses face destruction, the Red Light clash becomes a microcosm of Africa’s wider urban rights struggle, where rapid development often collides with the survival strategies of the economically vulnerable .

Understanding Illegal Eviction Tactics: A Legal Framework

Across Liberia and much of Africa, property owners sometimes resort to questionable methods when seeking to remove tenants or occupants from properties. These tactics frequently violate both statutory protections and traditional understandings of fair treatment. While courts may issue legitimate eviction orders, the execution of these orders must follow proper procedures that respect human dignity and legal due process.

The table below outlines common illegal eviction practices compared with legal requirements:

These practices become particularly problematic when executed under the color of law but in violation of both the spirit and letter of legal protections. In the Liberian context, where formal tenant protections may be inconsistently enforced, residents often find themselves vulnerable to practices that would be clearly illegal in more regulated environments .

The Red Light Confrontation: A Case Study in Community Resistance

The recent violence in Red Light didn’t emerge from vacuum but stems from a long-simmering dispute between the Keita and Kamara families over a contested piece of land. The Supreme Court had ruled on August 14, 2025, that the Keita family rightfully owned one acre of land purchased from Charles S.B. Watkins in 1989, concluding that the Kamara family had encroached on two lots and collected rental income from businesses operating there .

When law enforcement arrived to enforce the Supreme Court mandate evicting the Kamara family, the situation quickly deteriorated into open confrontation. What began as a legal enforcement operation transformed into a nearly three-hour standoff that halted commercial activities throughout the area as residents and sympathizers blocked access routes in protest .

The Business Impact

The human cost of the eviction extends beyond the direct parties to the dispute. The operation displaced more than a dozen businesses operating on the property, many of whom maintained they were not illegal occupants but legitimate tenants who had been paying rent into a court-designated escrow account .

A representative of S & Sow Money Remittance Services expressed the frustration of business owners caught in the dispute: “We have followed every instruction from the court. Our rent has not expired. This is destroying livelihoods.” This sentiment echoes throughout Red Light, where the economic survival of countless families depends on the fragile ecosystem of small-scale commerce .

Community Division and Judicial Credibility

The Red Light case has exposed deep divisions within the community about property rights and judicial enforcement. Some residents, like Jackson Donzo, maintain that “the law is the law” and must be enforced regardless of consequences. Others voice skepticism about the neutrality of Liberia’s justice system, with one observer noting, “People don’t trust the system anymore. Justice depends on who has power.”

The Kamara family has challenged the Supreme Court’s ruling, alleging the deed used by the court refers to property in Omega, not Red Light. Family representative Yussif Kamara claims, “We brought evidence, but the court refused to receive it.” The family also disputes the credibility of the government-appointed survey that informed the Court’s decision, alleging they were not properly notified during the survey process—a claim several neighboring caretakers and local leaders have confirmed .

High-Profile Parallel: The CDC Headquarters Eviction

The tensions in Red Light mirror another high-profile eviction that has captured national attention—the forced removal of the Congress for Democratic Change (CDC) from its historic headquarters in Congo Town. In August 2025, the Civil Law Court ordered the immediate vacating of the party’s national headquarters, affirming a 2016 Supreme Court judgment that declared the 4.23-acre property belonged to the Barnards Family Estate .

The CDC’s legal team argued the party had entered into good-faith negotiations with the estate and made significant investments in the property. However, the court found no legally binding sales agreement existed, only rent payments made by CDC between 2018 and 2023 totaling US$360,000—a transaction the Supreme Court considered evidence of a landlord-tenant relationship, not a transfer of ownership .

Political Dimensions and Symbolic Demolition

The CDC headquarters eviction carried unmistakable political symbolism, occurring shortly after the party’s loss in the 2023 presidential elections. Bulldozers plowed through offices, a vocational center, and the iconic sycamore tree that had become a gathering place for CDC loyalists .

Former President George Weah characterized the eviction as “political mischief” directed from “the very top,” while President Joseph Boakai maintained that “the law is the law” and enforcement was necessary. The event revealed how easily property disputes can become politicized in Liberia’s volatile political landscape .

The Broader Context: Economic Survival and Urban Rights

The Red Light evictions cannot be fully understood without acknowledging the economic precariousness that characterizes daily life for many Liberians. The market represents one of the main commercial hubs where countless residents eke out livelihoods through small-scale trade and services .

As one observer noted during the Ebola crisis—another period when market disruptions threatened survival—”a hungry man is an angry man.” Vendors explained their dilemma: “If they stay away from the crowd, they may all either die by starvation or common illnesses… they rather depend on God to look for daily bread in crowded areas.” This survival imperative underscores why evictions trigger such desperate resistance .

Community Solidarity and Resistance

In both the Red Light and CDC cases, community mobilization played a crucial role in responding to eviction attempts. The solidarity exhibited by residents and business owners in Red Light—and by CDC supporters at their headquarters—demonstrates how perceived injustices can trigger collective action that temporarily stalls even court-ordered evictions .

This resistance reflects a growing awareness of housing and business rights across Africa, where urban populations are increasingly pushing back against displacements that lack proper consultation, compensation, or relocation assistance.

The Path Forward: Resistance and Resolution

As the dust settles in Red Light, the underlying tensions remain largely unresolved. The Kamara family continues to challenge the court’s ruling, while businesses struggle to recover from the disruption. The case exemplifies the complex interplay between formal property systems and informal economic realities that characterize urban development across much of Africa .

The future of Red Light—and similar communities across Liberia—will depend on developing more transparent processes for adjudicating property disputes, greater sensitivity to economic impacts on vulnerable populations, and stronger institutional commitment to balancing legal rights with community welfare.

What remains clear is that the residents of Red Light, like the CDC supporters before them, have demonstrated that organized resistance can at least temporarily challenge enforcement actions, buying time for legal challenges and political solutions to emerge. In doing so, they’ve written another chapter in Liberia’s ongoing struggle to define the relationship between property rights and human rights in a democratic society.

Conclusion

The clashes in Red Light Market represent more than a localized property dispute—they illuminate the broader challenges of urban governance and economic justice in contemporary Liberia. As the nation navigates its post-conflict development path, finding equitable solutions to land disputes will be critical to maintaining social stability and building inclusive prosperity.

The resilience shown by Red Light’s business owners and residents—their determination to maintain their livelihoods against substantial odds—mirrors the broader African experience of urban adaptation and resistance. Their story underscores the urgent need for legal frameworks that recognize both formal property rights and the informal economic systems upon which so many depend for survival.

How Liberia resolves these tensions will have implications far beyond Paynesville, offering lessons for other African nations grappling with similar challenges at the intersection of development, law, and human dignity.