MAADA BIO’S ACTION TO DECLARE CURFEW AFTER ARMY SHOOTING IN FREETOWN IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
By Kenneth Vandi
Sierra Leoneans at this time will frown at any fundamental breach of the 1991 Constitution of the country, especially with regards to the Fundamental Human Rights of citizens that the Constitution is there to protect.
At about 8:00 pm yesterday, 2nd of December 2023, the Head of State mentioned in his address to the nation that his government will adhere to the rule of law. Citizens and people living in Sierra Leone are tired of rhetoric and are expecting the President to take the lead in respecting the rule of law in accordance with the 1991 Constitution.
Most listeners of the Head of State’s address last night were expecting a statement as per law provides, for the lifting of the State of Public Emergency (Curfew Order).
The law states in Section 29 subsection (3) paragraph (a) of the 1991 Constitution: “Every declaration made under subsection (1) shall lapse (a) in the case of a declaration made when Parliament is sitting at the expiration of a period of seven days beginning with the date of publication of the declaration.”
The only inclination that Sierra Leoneans had of a public declaration of curfew was the fourth paragraph of the tweet of the Head of State that was last edited and published at about 8:34 am on the 26th day of November 2023, and it reads, “As the combined team of our Security Forces continue to root out the remnant of the fleeing renegades, a nationwide curfew has been declared and citizens are encouraged to stay indoors.”
Assuming however, that was the declaration, the law further provides that such a declaration must be published in the National Gazette.
O
What really obtained in this incident of November 26, 2023, is yet to be determined. If we are to go by the President’s Sunday tweet, and counting from Sunday, the curfew must have been over by yesterday – Saturday, when the nation was addressed by the Head of State.
This omission or disregard for the constitution, further explains the disappointment of many Sierra Leoneans. This must be addressed if we are to be taken seriously as respecters of the Rule of Law.
The Minister of Information has been posting about the Curfew Order since Sunday, 26th of November when the alleged security breach occurred.
In point of fact, most Sierra Leoneans got the information about the Curfew Order from the minister’s postings on social media on the day of the alleged security breach.
The same Minister posted on the same social media immediately after the Head of State’s address to the nation on the 2nd day of December, stating that the curfew remains in effect from 9:00 pm to 6:00 am until further notice.
The Minister of Information must be a respecter of the Rule of Law, if the President is to be taken seriously by the people of Sierra Leone and the international community.
The provision for a declaration of a state of public emergency is one that the President cannot delegate to a Minister. It’s a very serious and important provision made just for the President at any point in time.
In point of fact, the frequency of the Minister’s postings about the curfew created a lot of confusion in the minds of legal minded and liberal Sierra Leoneans. Let the needful be done; and the Minister must know his limitations as per law provides.
A very senior citizen of Sierra Leone had this to say about yesterday’s address to the nation by the Head of State: “I don’t know what the essence of the address was. Just to tell us that it was a coup?”
In situations such as the alleged attempted coup of Sunday the 26th day of November 2023, it is generally prudent to await the official findings of a thorough investigation, before declaring whether it was an attempted coup or not.
A high-ranking senior military officer was on a television interview that has gone viral, saying that the alleged security breach was not a coup. The senior military officer’s statement has now been controversially contradicted by the president’s address to the nation of yesterday, 2nd December, 2023.
The Head of State’s assertion that the alleged security breach was a failed coup raises questions about the timing and appropriateness of such characterization, especially before the investigation results are made public.
It is customary for official statements to align closely with verified information to avoid potential misinterpretations or premature conclusions. In this case, clarity and accuracy may be better served by waiting for the conclusive findings of the investigation which the Head of State mentioned in his address, before definitively categorizing the incident as a failed coup.
In the public domain, the Head of State’s contradiction of the senior military officer’s statement is now a big concern.
Critically analysing the Head of State’s address, one could argue that prematurely describing the incident as a failed coup before the completion of a thorough investigation may be perceived as prejudicial. By so doing, the Head of State may influence public opinion and create a narrative that could potentially shape perceptions prior to the release of the findings of the investigation.
The pre-emptive characterization might introduce bias into the public discourse and impact the way the incident is interpreted.
It would have been essential for the Head of State to have emphasized the importance of allowing the investigation process to unfold independently and objectively, so as to ensure that conclusions are based on concrete evidence rather than premature assumptions or clarification.
This is the essence of Justice and the Rule of Law.
