MONROVIA – A viral video has cost two AFL sergeants their careers. Chief of Staff Major General Davidson F. Forleh moved fast and spoke harshly. He called the men “bad apples” and likened them to the Ebola virus. Yet the case is more complicated than the outrage. The young woman at its center says she has forgiven them. She even regrets their dismissal. Forleh insists social media did not drive the decision. The video plainly sharpened scrutiny all the same. An administrative discharge is not a criminal verdict. The Liberia National Police must now investigate; only courts can decide guilt. The AFL’s restructured image depends on discipline that works before cameras roll.  THE ANALYST GEORGE C. FLOMO reports.

The Armed Forces of Liberia (AFL) has dishonorably discharged two of its personnel, Sergeants Robertfield Mayon and Abu S.B. Sheriff, following a viral video showing the alleged assault of a young woman identified as Blessing, an incident that triggered widespread public outrage and drew the attention of the military’s top leadership.

The decision, announced Wednesday by AFL Chief of Staff Major General Davidson F. Forleh, marks a decisive disciplinary response to allegations that the two soldiers abused a civilian while away from their assigned duty station.

Speaking in the presence of senior military officers, the alleged victim and her mother, and representatives of the Liberia National Police (LNP), Forleh condemned the conduct of the former soldiers, describing them as “bad apples” and comparing them to an “Ebola virus” within the military.

He said the conduct displayed in the viral video was unacceptable and ran contrary to the professional standards the AFL has sought to uphold since its restructuring.

The Chief of Staff also announced that the two former soldiers would be turned over to the LNP for possible prosecution, emphasizing that their actions would not be tolerated within the military institution.

“These soldiers are bad apples. They are virus. They are Ebola virus,” Forleh said while explaining the gravity of the incident and the need to protect the integrity of the Armed Forces. He further described the incident as an abuse of the military uniform, stressing that members of the AFL are expected to demonstrate discipline, professionalism and respect for civilians, whether on or off duty.

Blessing’s Account and Forgiveness

According to the account attributed to Blessing, the incident began with an argument involving her younger brother and the two soldiers at a football field.

She reportedly intervened in the disagreement, but the situation allegedly escalated when Sheriff assaulted her. Mayon, according to the account, attempted to stop the assault but failed to prevent the incident from continuing.

The circumstances surrounding the confrontation have not been independently established in the information available for this report.

However, the video circulated widely on social media, attracting public attention and prompting questions about the conduct of military personnel in civilian communities.

Blessing reportedly said the soldiers later apologized and that she had forgiven them. She also expressed disappointment over their dismissal, explaining that although she wanted them punished for their actions, she had hoped they would retain their military careers.

Her reported position highlights a distinction between personal forgiveness and institutional accountability.

While an individual victim may choose to forgive those accused of harming her, the military remains responsible for enforcing its professional standards and addressing alleged misconduct by its personnel.

The AFL’s decision to discharge the two soldiers therefore reflects the institution’s stated position that conduct considered incompatible with military service must be addressed through its disciplinary system.

Tweh Ordered Action From Abroad

Forleh disclosed that the military leadership had acted following the receipt of information about the incident, including reports concerning the video circulating on social media.

He said the order and consultation came directly from Acting Minister of National Defense Cllr. N. Oswald Tweh, who, though reportedly on vacation in the United States at the time, had issued direct instructions concerning the gravity of the case.

According to the Chief of Staff, the military did not act solely because the video had attracted widespread attention online. Rather, he said, the military intelligence and military police mechanisms were activated after the information reached the command.

“When you see, for us the military, we do not react to social media. No, we do not do it that way,” Forleh said, explaining that the military follows its own channels for receiving information and responding to allegations involving its personnel.

He said that immediately after receiving the information, he dispatched military police to investigate and arrest the soldiers.

The Chief of Staff explained that the military had been engaged in other official activities the previous day, including engagements with Moroccan counterparts, which contributed to the timing of the formal disciplinary announcement.

He described Wednesday’s announcement as an appropriate opportunity to communicate the decision in the presence of relevant military authorities, the alleged victim and her mother, and police representatives. The statement suggests that the military sought to demonstrate that the matter had reached the highest levels of command and that action was being taken through its internal disciplinary procedures.

Special Order Formalizes the Discharge

During the announcement, the AFL’s Chief of Personnel read the special order formalizing the administrative discharge of the two sergeants. The order identified Mayon and Sheriff as personnel whose conduct was considered inconsistent with the professional standards expected of members of the AFL.

It cited Chapter 7, Section 7(j) of the National Defense Act of 2008 as the legal basis for their administrative discharge.

According to the order, the discharge was effective October 21, 2026, with the action taken in the interest of the service. The order further directed the military police to recover all government property in the possession of the discharged personnel and report the recovery to AFL Headquarters.

It also instructed military authorities to ensure that the families of the discharged soldiers were removed from the barracks, with arrangements made to transport them to the area of the Samuel Kanyon Doe Sports Complex. The Chief of Staff subsequently reinforced the decision, informing the two men that they were no longer members of the AFL.

He said the military would turn them over to the LNP, making clear that their discharge from the military would not prevent the police from pursuing the matter under the country’s civilian justice system.

The announcement did not establish the outcome of any criminal proceedings, and the two men are expected to be dealt with by the appropriate authorities in accordance with applicable law.

Stern Warning to the Ranks

Forleh used the occasion to issue a stern warning to officers and enlisted personnel, cautioning them against leaving their assigned posts and engaging in conduct that could undermine public confidence in the military.

He questioned why soldiers would leave their duty stations and become involved in a confrontation with a civilian without an apparent or legitimate reason. “This is unacceptable,” he stressed, condemning the incident in the strongest terms.

The Chief of Staff said the conduct of the two soldiers did not represent the standards of the current administration or the leadership of the Armed Forces. He emphasized that the military must not allow the actions of individual personnel to undermine the reputation of an institution expected to serve and protect the Liberian people.

Forleh also recalled the restructuring of the AFL following the country’s civil conflict, noting that the present military was established under a new framework after the previous Armed Forces were disbanded.

His remarks reflected the military leadership’s position that maintaining public confidence requires strict discipline and accountability, particularly where allegations of abuse against civilians involve personnel wearing the national uniform. The incident has placed renewed attention on the responsibility of military commanders to ensure that soldiers understand the limits of their authority and respect the rights and dignity of civilians.

From Viral Outrage to Institutional Accountability

The incident has generated widespread discussion on social media, with the video bringing the alleged assault into public view and prompting calls for action against the soldiers.

Although the AFL maintains that it does not base its decisions solely on social media reactions, the circulation of the video increased public awareness of the allegations and placed the institution under scrutiny.

The military’s response has consequently become a test of its commitment to discipline and accountability, particularly in circumstances where its personnel are accused of mistreating civilians.

The decision to discharge the two sergeants sends a strong message about the consequences the AFL says personnel may face when their conduct is found to violate military standards.

However, the administrative action and any subsequent criminal proceedings remain distinct processes. While the AFL has announced its decision concerning the soldiers’ continued service, the police and the appropriate judicial authorities are responsible for handling any criminal case in accordance with the law.

The case also raises broader questions about the relationship between military discipline and civilian protection. Soldiers are entrusted with responsibilities that require restraint, professionalism and respect for the public. Allegations of abuse, particularly when captured on video, can damage confidence in the institution and undermine the public trust that security forces depend on to perform their duties effectively.

For the AFL, the challenge extends beyond the dismissal of two individuals. It includes ensuring that its personnel understand and consistently observe the standards governing their conduct, including when they are outside their assigned posts.

In concluding his remarks, Forleh made clear that the discharge of Mayon and Sheriff should serve as a warning to other members of the military. He said the AFL would not tolerate conduct that brings dishonor to its uniform or undermines the institution’s responsibilities to the Liberian people.

The military’s decision has addressed the immediate question of whether the two men would remain in service. The next stage will concern the handling of the allegations by the LNP and any subsequent proceedings before the competent authorities.

For Blessing, who reportedly said she had forgiven the soldiers but wished they could have retained their careers, the outcome presents a difficult distinction between personal reconciliation and the institutional consequences of alleged misconduct.

For the AFL, the case presents an opportunity to reinforce its commitment to discipline, professionalism and respect for civilians. As the two former soldiers face the prospect of further police action, the incident stands as a reminder that military service carries responsibilities that extend beyond wearing a uniform: it demands conduct that protects, rather than threatens, the dignity and safety of the people the Armed Forces are established to serve.