In Law, what is a criminally culpable threatening remark ?

IN LAW, WHAT IS THREATENING LANGUAGE REQUIRING A CRIMINAL CHARGE ?

By Kabs Kanu

We all studied Law, though we are not practising it.

Threatening language, in Law, requires a clear, specific , unconditional, and immediate intent to cause harm to lead to a criminal charge. To say that “ If SLPP rigs the election again in 2028, we will not accept it “ is conditional and non- specific . It did not specific actions that will cause fear or victims at the receiving end of the threat .

Unless Zainab Sheriff said that if the SLPP rigs the elections in 2028, we will resort to killings, mayhem and harmful actions, her statement should not have risen to a criminal charge and imprisonment.

In Sierra Leone, the SLPP government has not only criminalized free speech, it has weaponized the law to go after even people who make vague statements . This is not to say that vague statements cannot be construed as threatening language.

In contrast to Zainab’s statement ( Unless there was more that we did not hear ), What President Maada Bio said was more dangerous and had all the elements of threatening language requiring a criminal change. President Bio said : “ Any SLPP supporter in Bonthe who says that he is APC will die in the morning “ . This is stone- cold threatening language, unless you are interpreting the law standing on your head.

Threatening language in law refers to written, verbal, or electronic communication expressing a serious intent to inflict bodily harm, death, or property damage, causing reasonable, sustained fear in the victim. Not only that, it must be person, object and time- specific. Bio’s statement fulfilled the elements of the charge. But the lawless President has not even been cautioned.

President Bio’s statement is specific, unequivocal, and immediate, causing any SLPP member planning to join the APC or APC supporters to fear for their safety. In contrast, Zainab’s statement ( Unless there is more we do not know ) was not unequivocally threatening anybody immediate and specific harm . Her statement was even conditional . I am saying that, unless there was more to the statement attributed to Zainab that we do not know, it did not rise to the level of the criminal charge it resulted into , leading to a four year imprisonment.

Judge Momoh Jah , a man taking orders from ignorant people above, would say that in stating that the “APC will not accept any rigging in 2028, “ threat to the state of Sierra Leone is implied. This is the danger of enacting draconian laws that could be given political import in our chaotic political environment, but it need not be so. In law, a statement becomes a threat when it expresses a serious intent to commit unlawful violence or inflict harm on a specific person or property, causing the recipient to fear for their safety.

So, the point here could not be that in the context of the 1965 Criminal Order Act Zainab did not make a threatening remark , since we do not know everything else she was accused of saying . It is that the statement that the APC will not accept any rigging of the 2028 elections was not serious enough to have risen to the level of a criminal charge and imprisonment . The SLPP Government desired to use the law draconically to persecute Zainab Sheriff because of her political alignment with the APC.

And this is a very bad precedent to set in a country with fractious , chaotic politics and angry political actors inclined to vent their feelings now and again. That President Bio, of all people, and his top officials fell into the same trap proves my point.

We will talk about the SELECTIVE JUSTICE in a latter post .