Institute for Drug Control and Human Security

15/08/2026

THE CONSTITUTION IS BIGGER THAN ANY PRESIDENT

A Warning About Power, Constitutional Amendments and the Lessons of History

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

Sierra Leone is once again engaged in an important national conversation about constitutional reform. This is not an ordinary political debate. The Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic, and any attempt to alter it must be approached with caution, transparency, and respect for the rule of law. It is the foundation of our democracy and should never be treated as a tool of convenience for those in power.

I am not a lawyer. But as a citizen, I believe every Sierra Leonean has a duty to understand and defend the Constitution. We do not need legal training to know that there are strict procedures governing how it can be amended, and those procedures exist to protect the country from impulsive or partisan change.

My concern is not whether the Constitution should ever be amended. It must evolve with time. My concern is how it is amended, who is involved, and whether there is genuine national consensus. Constitutional safeguards exist precisely to ensure that temporary political majorities do not permanently reshape the rules of the Republic for their own advantage.

The 1991 Constitution is clear. Section 108 requires that any Bill seeking to alter the Constitution must be supported by at least two-thirds of all Members of Parliament. This is a deliberately high threshold because constitutional change is not ordinary lawmaking. It is the rewriting of the nation’s foundational rules. In addition, entrenched provisions require not only parliamentary approval but also a referendum, ensuring that the people themselves have the final say.

This means constitutional amendment is not simply a matter of government numbers in Parliament. It is a national process that demands broad agreement across political, civic, and social divides. Any attempt to treat it otherwise misunderstands constitutional democracy.

Sierra Leone’s modern constitutional review journey did not begin with the present administration. It has been a long national process. After the civil war, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommended constitutional reform through inclusive consultation. In 2007, under President Ahmad Tejan Kabbah, a review process was initiated, leading to the Peter Tucker report in 2008. This reflected the understanding that the Constitution belongs to the nation, not to any single government.

Later, under President Ernest Bai Koroma, the process was expanded significantly through the Justice Edmond Cowan-led Constitutional Review Committee. Between 2013 and 2017, extensive nationwide consultations were conducted, reaching tens of thousands of citizens. The final report, submitted in 2017, contained wide-ranging recommendations on governance, rights, and institutions. Yet even such a comprehensive process did not automatically translate into law. Recommendations still had to pass through constitutional procedures and political consensus.

This history teaches an important lesson: constitutional reform is not the achievement of one administration. It is a continuous national responsibility that requires restraint, patience, and respect for process.

Today, the current Constitution of Sierra Leone (Amendment) Bill, 2025 has revived national debate. Parliament is considering significant changes affecting elections, governance, and representation. The Tripartite Steering Committee Secretariat has confirmed that the Bill requires a two-thirds majority in Parliament and that its progress has been affected by limited opposition participation. This highlights why inclusivity is essential. A Constitution cannot be legitimate if large sections of the political community and civil society feel excluded from its shaping.

Parliament must therefore not become a rubber stamp. It is a sovereign institution representing the people, not merely an extension of the executive. Opposition voices, civil society, traditional leaders, and ordinary citizens all have a right to scrutinise constitutional proposals. If reforms are sound, they should withstand public debate. Democracy is strengthened, not weakened, by scrutiny.

There is also a deeper warning from history. Constitutions must not be designed around the interests of those currently in power. Political fortunes change. Today’s ruling party may become tomorrow’s opposition. A Constitution shaped for short-term advantage can become a long-term national problem. That is why constitutional design must always ask one question: will this still protect Sierra Leone when the current leaders are no longer in office?

Ultimately, political power is temporary, but constitutional consequences are lasting. Presidents come and go, governments change, and parties rise and fall. But the Constitution remains. It is the framework that holds the state together beyond individual ambition. For that reason, it must be treated with humility and care.

My appeal is simple. Do not rush constitutional reform. Build consensus. Listen widely. Correct weaknesses through dialogue. Respect every requirement of Section 108. And where a referendum is required, allow the people to decide directly. This is not about SLPP or APC. It is about Sierra Leone.

We must remember that democracy is not defined only by elections, but by strong institutions, respect for the rule of law, and constitutional stability. If we weaken the Constitution for short-term political gain, we risk weakening the Republic itself.

Sierra Leone is bigger than any President. It is bigger than any political party. And the Constitution must always remain bigger than the interests of those who temporarily hold power.

12/08/2026

09/08/2026

TOMORROW, PARLIAMENT DECIDES—BUT HISTORY WILL JUDGE. 🇸🇱

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

Sierra Leone stands at a constitutional crossroads. If recommendations from the national review process have been altered, Parliament must ensure that the final amendments truly serve the people—not political interests.

President Bio must personally ensure that this process is transparent, inclusive and faithful to the aspirations of Sierra Leoneans. This is bigger than one Parliament, one party or one President.

This Constitution will outlive all of us. Its success or failure will become part of President Bio’s legacy—just as his declared wars on poverty, lawlessness and corruption will be judged by history.

Tomorrow, MPs should not simply ask, “What benefits us today?” They should ask: “What will this decision mean for Sierra Leone tomorrow?”

Vote for Sierra Leone. Let history be the judge. 🇸🇱

08/08/2026

WHEN “SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE” BECOME MASTERS OF THE PEOPLE

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

Our politicians have become experts at blowing their own trumpets. What they tell us about their achievements is sometimes far removed from the reality ordinary citizens experience.

When they are fighting for power, they call themselves “servants of the people.” They promise to listen, to serve, and to remain accountable.

But no sooner do they acquire power than the relationship changes.

The people who were once called their masters suddenly become people to be controlled, ignored, or silenced. Constructive criticism becomes “opposition.” Difficult questions become “disloyalty.” And those who praise everything the government does are often welcomed more warmly than those courageous enough to speak the truth.

That is not leadership. That is political worship.

A leader does not need a choir of praise singers. A leader needs people brave enough to say, “You are wrong.”

So when politicians deliver grand speeches about progress and achievements, citizens must ask:

What is the reality on the ground?

Are ordinary people actually better off? Are young people finding meaningful opportunities? Are basic services improving? Are our institutions stronger? Can citizens freely criticise those in power?

Because a speech can be beautiful while reality remains ugly.

We must stop confusing political propaganda with performance, and stop treating criticism as hatred while accepting praise as patriotism.

If you only want to hear praise, you don't need citizens—you need a choir.

Politicians must remember what they told us when they needed our votes:

“You are the people. You are our masters. We are your servants.”

Then let them behave accordingly.

Power is temporary. Public office is temporary. But the consequences of bad governance can remain with the people for generations.

Let us stop merely clapping for politicians.

Let us question them. Let us hold them accountable. Let us demand the truth.

— Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

31/07/2026

My Submission to the Constitutional Review Process

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

As Sierra Leone undertakes another constitutional review, we have a unique opportunity to strengthen our democracy, improve accountability, and promote national unity. Constitutional reform should not serve the interests of any political party or government; rather, it should safeguard the interests of all Sierra Leoneans for generations to come.

I respectfully submit the following recommendations:

1. Retain the Constituency-Based Electoral System

I do not support the adoption of the Proportional Representation (PR) system as a permanent electoral model.

The constituency-based system ensures that every Member of Parliament is directly accountable to the people who elected them. Citizens know their representative, can engage them on local development issues, and can vote them out if they fail to perform.

A permanent PR system weakens this relationship by making MPs more accountable to political party leadership than to the electorate.

2. Retain the 55% Threshold for Presidential Elections

The requirement that a presidential candidate must secure 55% of the valid votes before being declared elected should be maintained.

This threshold promotes national consensus and encourages presidential candidates to seek support across regional, ethnic, and political divides. If no candidate reaches the threshold, a runoff election remains the fairest democratic option.

3. Strengthen the Independence of Oversight Institutions

Institutions such as the Electoral Commission for Sierra Leone (ECSL), Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), Human Rights Commission, Auditor-General's Office, and the Judiciary should enjoy stronger constitutional protection from political interference.

Appointments to these institutions should be transparent, merit-based, and subject to parliamentary approval.

4. Deepen Decentralisation

Local councils should receive stronger constitutional guarantees regarding their powers, responsibilities, and financial autonomy.

Development is most effective when decisions are made closer to the people. The Constitution should ensure timely and adequate transfers of resources to local councils.

5. Protect Fundamental Rights Without Discrimination

The Constitution should clearly state that no citizen should be denied access to public office, education, employment, or political participation because of membership or non-membership of any secret society or association.

While Sierra Leone should preserve its rich cultural heritage, constitutional rights and freedoms must remain supreme.

6. Introduce Independent Candidacy

Qualified citizens should have the constitutional right to contest presidential, parliamentary, and local council elections as independent candidates, provided they meet clearly defined legal requirements.

This would broaden democratic participation and provide voters with more choices beyond political parties.

Conclusion

The Constitution belongs to the people—not to any political party or government. The reforms we adopt today should strengthen democracy, protect human rights, enhance accountability, and promote national development.

As citizens, we must seize this opportunity to build a Constitution that reflects the aspirations of all Sierra Leoneans and stands the test of time.

Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah
Executive Director
Institute for Drug Control and Human Security (IDCHS)

28/07/2026

A Nation Under Threat: Sierra Leone's Drug Crisis Must Concern Us All

I have just watched the BBC documentary on Jos Leijdekkers (Bolle Jos), one of Europe's most wanted drug fugitives, whose name has been repeatedly linked to Sierra Leone. It is painful to see our beloved country increasingly associated with transnational organized crime and international drug trafficking.

For some time now, I have been calling on West Africa to join Sierra Leone in addressing the growing drug crisis. If we fail to act decisively, this crisis will not stop at our borders. Drug trafficking networks operate across countries and continents, threatening peace, security, and development throughout the region.

For Sierra Leone, this is more than a drug problem. It is a war against our democracy, good governance, national security, and international reputation. It threatens our youth, weakens public institutions, and risks isolating us from our regional and international partners.

This is not the time for political point-scoring or denial. It is the time for national reflection and collective action. Government, civil society, traditional leaders, religious institutions, our regional partners, and the international community must work together to confront this challenge through evidence-based policies, prevention, treatment, harm reduction, and strong action against transnational organized crime.

Sierra Leone deserves to be known for its resilience, peace, and hospitality—not as a safe haven for international drug traffickers.

The time to act is now.

— Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah
*Executive Director, Institute for Drug Control and Human Security (IDCHS)*

19/07/2026

Has justice been served, deferred, or denied? The discontinuation of charges against former President Ernest Bai Koroma raises important questions about accountability, reconciliation, and equality before the law in Sierra Leone.

JUSTICE DEFERRED OR JUSTICE DENIED? THE DISCONTINUATION OF CHARGES AGAINST FORMER PRESIDENT ERNEST BAI KOROMA

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah
Executive Director, Institute for Drug Control and Human Security (IDCHS)

On 14 July 2026, the Office of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice announced the discontinuation of all criminal proceedings against former President Dr. Ernest Bai Koroma. The decision, made public between 14 and 15 July 2026, has generated widespread debate about justice, accountability, reconciliation, and equality before the law in Sierra Leone.

The charges arose from the events of 26 November 2023, when coordinated attacks on military barracks, correctional facilities, and other state institutions resulted in the deaths of security personnel and civilians. More than 2,000 inmates were released during the disturbances, making it one of the most serious security incidents in Sierra Leone's recent history.

HOW DID WE GET HERE?

➡️ 3 January 2024: Dr. Koroma was charged with treason, misprision of treason, and harbouring. He consistently denied any involvement in the events of November 2023.

➡️ 17 January 2024: The High Court granted him permission to travel abroad for specialized medical treatment, resulting in the suspension of his trial.

➡️ 19 January 2024: He departed for Abuja, Nigeria, under an ECOWAS-facilitated arrangement.

➡️ 14 July 2026: Attorney-General and Minister of Justice Hon. Alpha Sesay Esq. filed a notice under Section 45 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 2024, formally discontinuing the proceedings.

WHAT DOES A DISCONTINUANCE MEAN?

The Attorney-General's notice effectively means that:

✔️ The criminal proceedings are no longer before any court in Sierra Leone.

✔️ Dr. Koroma's medical bail arrangement has come to an end.

✔️ He is legally free to return to Sierra Leone at any time.

However, it is important to distinguish a discontinuance from an acquittal.

A discontinuance signifies that the State has elected to halt the prosecution. It does not amount to a judicial determination of innocence or guilt.

An acquittal, by contrast, is a court's finding that an accused person is not guilty after due legal process.

This distinction raises important questions about accountability, public confidence, and the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

THE QUESTION OF EQUAL JUSTICE

While the discontinuation may contribute to national reconciliation and political stability, it has also reignited concerns about equal treatment under the law.

Many of the individuals charged in connection with the 26 November 2023 events — including former members of the security services and other accused persons — have faced prosecution, conviction, and lengthy prison sentences.

For many citizens, the contrast between their circumstances and the discontinuation of proceedings against a former Head of State raises difficult but legitimate questions about fairness, consistency, and equality before the law.

The issue is not simply whether Dr. Koroma should or should not have been prosecuted. Rather, it is whether the principles that informed the decision in his case should also be considered in relation to others connected to the same events.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD

1. Publish the Full Rationale

The Ministry of Justice should provide a detailed public explanation of the factors that informed the discontinuation decision. Transparency strengthens public trust.

2. Establish an Independent Review Mechanism

If reconciliation and national cohesion were significant considerations, Government and stakeholders should consider an independent review mechanism to examine the cases of other individuals convicted or awaiting trial in relation to the 26 November 2023 events.

3. Support Victims and Their Families

Any discussion of reconciliation must include those who suffered loss. A dedicated support fund could provide educational assistance, medical support, and restorative justice measures.

4. Develop Clear Guidelines on Section 45 Powers

Parliament and the Ministry of Justice should develop publicly accessible guidelines governing the use of discontinuance powers to strengthen predictability, accountability, and public confidence.

5. Launch a National "No More Coups" Dialogue

Political leaders, traditional authorities, religious leaders, civil society organizations, and youth groups should reaffirm a collective commitment to constitutional democracy and the peaceful transfer of power.

CONCLUSION

The discontinuation of charges against former President Ernest Bai Koroma closes a significant chapter in Sierra Leone's post-2023 political and legal landscape. Yet it also opens an important national conversation about justice, reconciliation, and equality before the law.

If the decision was motivated by the pursuit of peace and national healing, then the principles underpinning that decision should be applied consistently and transparently.

Reconciliation is strongest when it is inclusive. Justice is most respected when it is impartial. Democracy is most secure when the law is seen to apply equally to all.

The challenge before Sierra Leone is not merely to move beyond the events of 26 November 2023, but to do so in a manner that strengthens public trust in both justice and democratic governance.

What are your thoughts? Does the discontinuation of the case advance national reconciliation, or does it raise concerns about equal justice under the law? Share your views respectfully in the comments.

18/07/2026

Sierra Leone Joins the African Human Rights Court System

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

Executive Director, Institute for Drug Control and Human Security (IDCHS)

It is now official: on 16 July 2026, the Parliament of Sierra Leone ratified the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights.

This means Sierra Leone is on its way to becoming a State Party to Africa's highest human rights court, reinforcing its commitment to justice, accountability, and the protection of fundamental rights.

The African Court serves as a continental mechanism for interpreting and enforcing the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. Its role is to ensure that States uphold the rights and freedoms guaranteed under African human rights instruments.

The Court hears cases involving a wide range of human rights violations, including:

Unlawful killings and enforced disappearances;

Torture, inhuman, or degrading treatment;

Arbitrary arrest and detention;

Restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly;

Electoral and political rights violations;

Discrimination based on gender, disability, ethnicity, religion, or other status;

Violence against women and girls, including harmful traditional practices;

Violations of children's rights;

Land, environmental, and indigenous peoples' rights;

Denial of fair trial and access to justice.

For example, the Court has previously ruled on cases involving opposition politicians barred from elections, journalists prosecuted for expressing their views, indigenous communities deprived of ancestral lands, and women seeking protection from discriminatory laws and practices.

This development comes at a particularly important time as Sierra Leone continues national debates on issues such as gender-based violence, female ge***al mutilation (FGM), freedom of association, political participation, land rights, and the protection of vulnerable groups.

By joining the Court, Sierra Leone is not only strengthening human rights protections at home but also contributing to a stronger African human rights system based on the principles of justice, dignity, equality, and accountability.

The next important step will be implementation. Ratification must be followed by stronger domestic laws, effective institutions, and greater public awareness so that citizens can fully benefit from these protections.

Human rights are strongest when national institutions and regional mechanisms work together. Sierra Leone's decision to join the African Court system signals a willingness to be held accountable to continental standards while giving greater meaning to the rights guaranteed under its Constitution.

Note: For individuals and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to directly bring cases before the African Court, Sierra Leone would still need to make a separate declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol. Whether the Government intends to make that declaration will be an important issue to watch in the coming years.

Examples of cases that could potentially reach the African Court from Sierra Leone in the future:

A victim of alleged forced initiation or FGM claiming the State failed to protect her rights.

A journalist challenging laws or actions that restrict freedom of expression.

A political candidate alleging unlawful exclusion from an election.

Communities displaced from ancestral lands without compensation.

Victims of prolonged detention without trial.

Persons alleging discrimination based on gender, disability, or other protected status.

Families seeking justice for extrajudicial killings or deaths in custody.

16/07/2026

Landmark Forced FGM Case Reaches Sierra Leone's High Court

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

A potentially historic case involving alleged forced Female Ge***al Mutilation (FGM) and forced initiation into the Bondo Society is now before the High Court in Freetown. The complainant alleges that she was forcibly initiated, subjected to FGM without her consent, and detained against her will before eventually escaping and reporting the matter to the police.

The case comes just days after the ECOWAS Court of Justice ruled that Sierra Leone has failed to adequately protect women and girls from FGM and urged the government to take stronger measures to prohibit the practice and safeguard human rights.

Together, the High Court trial and the ECOWAS Court ruling have brought the issue of FGM, consent, and traditional practices to the center of national debate. While many Sierra Leoneans view Bondo and other traditional societies as important cultural institutions, others argue that forced initiation and harmful practices violate constitutional rights and international human rights obligations.

The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for the future of FGM, secret societies, asylum claims, and the relationship between tradition, democracy, and human rights in Sierra Leone.

The conversation is no longer taking place behind closed doors—it is now in the courts, on social media, and in the national spotlight.

15/07/2026

When Democracy Meets Tradition: Why the West is Pushing for Reform in Sierra Leone

By Aiah Nabieu Mokuwah

Executive Director, Institute for Drug Control and Human Security (IDCHS)

Thousands of Sierra Leoneans have sought refuge abroad over the past three decades. During the civil war, people fled violence and insecurity. Since the war ended in 2002, however, the reasons have evolved. Alongside economic hardship and governance concerns, some asylum seekers now cite fear of harmful traditional practices, forced initiation into secret societies, female ge***al cutting (FGC), and other forms of social coercion as reasons they cannot safely return home.

In 2007, I witnessed a case that brought this reality into sharp focus. A university graduate reportedly fled a Poro Society initiation camp after undergoing the first phase of initiation and later sought asylum in the United States. He claimed that refusing to continue the process would place his life and safety at risk. Since then, I have encountered similar accounts involving Poro, Wonde, Gbangbani, Bondo, and Sande societies. Whether every claim is true or not, the growing number of such cases demonstrates a tension between traditional authority and individual rights that Sierra Leone can no longer ignore.

The Numbers: From Refugees to Asylum Seekers

According to UNHCR data, Sierra Leone produced large numbers of refugees during the civil war. By the end of 2001, more than 185,000 Sierra Leoneans were refugees or asylum seekers worldwide. Although most eventually returned home, asylum applications have continued long after the restoration of peace.

In 2024 alone, thousands of Sierra Leoneans applied for asylum in various countries, particularly in Europe and North America. While the majority of applications were rejected, many applicants cited fears related to forced initiation, gender-based violence, discrimination, and other forms of persecution. Increasingly, such claims are framed under the legal category of "membership of a particular social group," a recognized ground for refugee protection under international law.

Beyond Poro: The Wider Question of Traditional Authority

The debate extends beyond any single secret society. Across Sierra Leone, both male and female traditional societies continue to play influential roles in community life, socialization, conflict resolution, and cultural identity.

Male societies such as Poro, Wonde, and Gbangbani remain closely connected to traditional governance structures in many chiefdoms. Female societies, including Bondo and Sande, have historically served as institutions for social education, cultural transmission, and initiation into adulthood.

The challenge arises when participation ceases to be voluntary. Reports of forced initiation, intimidation of non-members, restrictions on political participation, and pressure to conform can create tension with constitutional guarantees of freedom of association, liberty, and personal autonomy.

For some citizens, membership in these institutions remains a source of pride and identity. For others, it represents an obligation imposed by community expectations. This tension lies at the heart of the current debate.

Why Western Governments and Institutions Are Concerned

The United States, United Kingdom, European Union, and various international organizations are not challenging Sierra Leone's culture as a whole. Rather, they focus on practices that may conflict with international human rights commitments that Sierra Leone has voluntarily accepted.

Among the most frequently raised concerns are:

1. Female Ge***al Cutting (FGC)

FGC remains one of the most controversial aspects of the Bondo/Sande initiation process. Human rights organizations, health professionals, and international agencies have documented concerns regarding health complications, bodily autonomy, and the rights of children. At the same time, many supporters view the practice as an important cultural tradition and rite of passage.

2. Forced Initiation

Reports of children and adults being pressured or compelled to undergo initiation continue to attract national and international attention. Human rights advocates argue that any initiation should be based on informed and voluntary consent.

3. Equality and Non-Discrimination

Questions relating to gender equality, freedom of belief, and the treatment of minority groups also feature prominently in international assessments of Sierra Leone's human rights record.

Religion and Political Reality

The issue remains politically sensitive. Many political leaders recognize the need for reform while also acknowledging the cultural significance of traditional institutions.

President Julius Maada Bio has noted that traditions cannot be changed overnight. Similarly, First Lady Dr. Fatima Bio has emphasized the importance of preserving cultural identity while avoiding harmful practices.

This reflects the broader dilemma facing Sierra Leone: how to respect cultural heritage while ensuring that fundamental rights are protected.

The Way Forward: Harmonizing Tradition and Democracy

The solution is not the destruction of tradition but its modernization and harmonization with constitutional principles and human rights standards.

Key steps could include:

1. National Dialogue involving traditional leaders, government, religious institutions, women's groups, youth representatives, and civil society.

2. Legal Reform to ensure that access to public office and public services is not conditioned on secret society membership.

3. Independent Oversight of allegations involving forced initiation, violence, or abuse.

4. Alternative Rites of Passage that preserve cultural education while eliminating harmful practices.

5. Community-Led Reform so that change is driven by Sierra Leoneans rather than perceived as external pressure.

Conclusion

The debate is not ultimately about choosing between democracy and tradition. It is about ensuring that both can coexist.

Sierra Leone's traditions are an important part of its identity, but democracy requires that participation in any cultural institution be voluntary and that the rights of every citizen be protected equally under the law.

If the country can successfully harmonize these principles, it will strengthen both its cultural heritage and its democratic future. The challenge is not whether reform will happen, but whether it will be shaped by dialogue and consensus or by continued conflict and external pressure.