In 1978, the poor West African country of Liberia borrowed $6 million from a New York bank. The Liberian government promised to use the money to buy and develop an oil refinery, and to pay the money back in seven years.

Today it's not clear if either of those things ever happened.

Two years after the loan, the Liberian government was overthrown in a coup, which later led to a 14-year civil war. Meanwhile, the loan was bought and sold several times, according to allAfrica.com.

But now two investment funds say they hold the note and are entitled to $20 million from the current government of Liberia — a claim upheld by a London court. Today Liberia is led by a democratic government whose president is working with the IMF and World Bank to settle old debts. The Guardian says Liberia struck deals with most of its private-sector creditors, but these two funds are refusing to settle, demanding full payment through the courts.

A representative for the Jubilee Debt Campaign, a coalition fighting for debt relief for the world's poorest countries, accuses funds like these of "profiting from poverty."

As Al-Jazeera's Barbara Serra reports:

So-called vulture funds have been condemned by several governments for preying on the world's poorest states. They buy up the debt of near-bankrupt nations at a cheap price from financial institutions. They then sue those nations in international courts for the full value of the debt, plus steep levels of interest and penalty charges. Every year, developed countries spend billions of dollars to help pay off the debts of poorer nations, but vulture funds siphon off that money for themselves.

Even the lawyer for Liberia says this is a moral issue as well as a legal one. Get the full scoop from this Al-Jazeera video:

Example of a user-based interactive map. Photo: whiteafrican (flickr)

Imagine being an aid worker isolated in rural Zimbabwe, where the worst cholera outbreak in 15 years has claimed more than 4,000 lives in recent months. You and your relief network are sprinkled across the country and the epidemic is evolving every day. How do you decide where help is most needed and coordinate your response?

What if there were a way to connect almost instantaneously by sending a text message to a website that indicated your location, status and needs on a map available to anyone in the world? This is what organizations like WikiMapAid are trying to make happen. Many humanitarian organizations are considering these user-based mapping systems, some of which integrate Twitter, SMS, email and collaborative wiki software to create interactive maps that track everything from poverty and infectious disease to natural disasters and political protests.

Using mapping systems in aid work is nothing new — more complex systems like GIS have been used in both governmental and NGO aid work in the development field for years. But there are limits to these mapping systems: They often take a long time to generate and distribute, which means they are not always up-to-date, nor are they accessible or user-friendly to the general public — especially in the developing world.

More simple user-based mapping technologies may be able to solve some of these problems. Proof of the potential are successful projects like Ushahidi, a text message–based mapping website that was used to monitor post-election violence in Kenya last year, or Al Jazeera's similar "crowdsourced" website, the War on Gaza.

The technology is catching on in the relief sector. Last week Reuters AlertNet hosted a workshop to discuss "how the aid world can use maps to communicate, advocate and plan for disasters" — seeking advice from both aid organizations that have used complex mapping systems for a long time, such as Map Action, and new wiki user-based mappers like Open Street Map and InSTEDD GeoChat.

There are definitely problems with newer mapping systems. One big one is possibly unreliable information. Some websites are going beyond content moderation and developing algorithms to rate their users' integrity based on whether other users have tagged the information as bunk. Others, such as HealthMap, have tried to confront the problem of legitimacy by generating content from diverse sources — NGOs, the media, government and individual users — in the hopes of being able to cross-check information.

But these websites also take time to generate enough content to be useful. And while many people in the developing world have access to cell phones to send input to these websites, few have reliable access to the internet to view the maps.

Problems aside, user-based maps certainly hold appeal. Part of it lies in their ability to empower everyday people to connect and speak out in times of crisis. This technology can be — and already has been — incredibly useful for reporting on conflicts where the media is not allowed. And in the aid world, it offers the possibility of swift action, unhindered by bureaucracy or lack of infrastructure.

What happens when tens of thousands of impoverished Africans sue one of Britain's biggest oil companies for sickening them with toxic waste?

In 2006, the British company Trafigura unloaded a ship full of untreated chemical slop at a household garbage dump in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire. Scores of people living nearby were diagnosed with poisoning, hundreds lost their livelihoods as trash-scavengers, and 17 died. Now, 30,000 residents are suing the oil trading company for exposing them to toxic sludge. The company paid for a clean-up and admitted to "neglecting its duty of care," but has denied responsibility for the poisonings. The trial starts this fall.

Al Jazeera chronicles this David-versus-Goliath tale of Britain's biggest-ever lawsuit in the first installment of Corporations on Trial, which covers five lawsuits that pit ordinary people against the world's most powerful and wealthy corporations.

The other shows are just as compelling: Yesterday, the program aired the story of why Native American villagers in Alaska are suing Exxon Mobil. Next week, learn why 40,000 Indonesians who fled their homes after a volcanic eruption blame a gas company for their troubles.

Anyone who's purchased a meal from a streetside cart knows that its food can often be tastier than what's offered in a restaurant. What you might not have considered is how street food is one of the best ways to learn about the local culture.

The new eight-part Al Jazeera series "Street Food" explores what street food can teach us about culture by taking us to the carts of Penang, San Sebastian, New York City, London, Nairobi, Beijing, Cairo and Jerusalem.

While food is the focus of the show, it is difficult to separate its influence on culture, politics and health. Topics such as the global food crisis, food shortages and the rise of Western diets and obesity are covered of the program. “The so called rich man’s diseases, like diabetes and high blood pressure, are starting to appear," warns a popular TV chef in Nairobi. Episodes also highlight the everyday struggles of both food-cart vendors and their customers.

Although the shows certainly showcase the distinctiveness of local foods, one also demonstrates how food can bridge differences: The Jerusalem episode features Chefs for Peace, an alliance of chefs from Israel and Palestine who bring together people of different faiths to share in the delight of great food.


Watch the first episode of "Street Food" in Nairobi, Kenya.