Since the end of Sierra Leone’s civil conflict more than a decade ago, many reforms have been undertaken in order to address some of the underlying institutional weaknesses that contributed to the outbreak of the war. The security and justice sectors have benefitted from a number of reform programmes, thanks in a large part to support from the country’s international development partners. Reform projects for the judiciary have targeted training of judicial and support staff, establishing new court buildings, recruiting additional law officers, strengthening the administrative unit of the judiciary, and clearing a huge list of backlog cases. The local courts, which were previously supervised by the Ministry of Local Government, have now been brought under the direct supervision of the Chief Justice, pursuant to the Local Courts Act 2011. The security sector, particularly the police force, has also benefited from immense investment aimed at transforming the way the institution works. Reform efforts for the police have included the development of a training manual, developing an internal accountability structure, restructuring the operational and command structure of the force, developing a more proactive relationship between the force and local communities. All of these efforts are geared towards giving the police a better image than the one it had in the pre-war years.
Credible reports by both local and international organisations have chronicled the main challenges faced by Sierra Leone’s justice system. The United States Government State of Human Rights Report 2012 identified human rights problems such as abusive treatment by police, arbitrary arrest and detention, and limited access to justice for most citizens. A 2012 Prison Watch report also stated that “As of October 19, 2012 there were 3,870 prisoners, of whom 2,733 had been convicted and 1,137 were in custody awaiting trial. Pademba Road Prison, which was designed to hold 324 prisoners, held more than 1,333 inmates.” Amnesty International’s State of Human Rights Report 2013 stated as follows: “Human rights NGOs noted wide disparities in sentencing patterns from district to district. Sentences imposed were often disproportionate to the offense. Many prisoners served excessively long sentences for noncapital offenses, such as sacrilege (50 years), larceny (25 years), and burglary (45 years). The US Government’s State of Human Rights Report added: “Local civil society organizations attributed the harsh sentencing to the defendants’ inability to pay a fine or bribe. Impunity continued. As in previous years, cases of police brutality and police corruption remained a serious problem. Some police stole from detainees, falsely charged motorists with violations, and accepted bribes from suspects to drop charges or to have their rivals arrested and charged with crimes.
In spite of these efforts, immense challenges persist. The judiciary still faces serious funding constraints. Central government funding to the judiciary is still comparatively very low, amid increasing public perception about undue executive influence over the institution. Although funding to the judiciary slightly rose in 2014, it is still far below what is required to address the persisting challenges that confront the judiciary. The low investment in the judiciary clearly accounts for the paucity of courts and judicial officers across the country. These partially account for the delays in trials as well as the overcrowding in many of the prisons and police detention facilities across the country. Part of the reason for the huge backlog of cases and the overcrowding in detention and prisons facilities across the country is the absence of an alternative dispute resolution mechanism that provides a credible option for resolving many of the petty cases that wind up in the courts. The judiciary is still battling with the public perception gap with respect to the adjudication of bail applications, amid increasing doubts as to how Magistrates and Judges exercise their discretion in approving or rejecting bail applications. The unfettered use of discretionary power in adjudicating bail applications has been criticized by many human rights groups, and has urged more safeguards against violating citizens’ right to liberty. The Criminal Procedure Act amendment bill, which has been in the works for many years, offers a glorious opportunity to amend a number of anomalies in the criminal justice system. This can only be done, of course, if both state and non-state actors work together.
For good measure, security and justice are often times linked together. There are practical benefits of linking the two as a credible judicial system is critical to long term stability and development. At the heart of Sierra Leone’s justice system is the police, which has the primary responsibility of investigating alleged crimes. It also supports the Law Officers Department in prosecution. Sadly, as in almost every part of the world, Sierra Leone police officers are often accused of high-handedness in quelling riots, thus violating the rights of the citizens they are statutorily mandated to protect. While it is not entirely strange for police officers to be accused of human rights violations, it is particularly unhelpful that many of the serious violations committed by personnel of the Sierra Leone Police (SLP) since 2007 have either gone unpunished or have been downplayed. The leadership of the police has generally refused to comply with the recommendations of a number of Presidential Commissions and Committees of enquiry to hold alleged perpetrators of violence accountable. While it is easy to blame the leadership of the police, perhaps the political will has also been lacking. The Police Council, the highest decision-making body of the police, is chaired by the Vice President, while the Internal Affairs Minister is the Secretary to the Council. Impunity undermines respect for the rule of law, creates and fuels a cycle of violence. The Sierra Leone Police is not above the law, and must subject itself to the rule of law.
In truth, the Complaints, Discipline and Internal Investigations Department (CDIID) of the Sierra Leone Police (SLP) has done a brilliant job over the years in fostering accountability for personnel of the police alleged to have committed various infractions of the law or the SLP’s code of conduct. CDIID proceedings have led to suspensions, dismissals and other forms of disciplinary action against those found culpable. It is worth commending the efforts of the CDIID, but the fact that the disciplinary body is entirely composed of police officers and its proceedings are generally inaccessible to the public, has raised a number of questions about neutrality and the possibility of shielding some people from facing justice. There are a number of ongoing initiatives to address the growing impunity gap in the police by, among other things, establishing an Independent Police Complaints Board. The regulations have been approved, and the Chairperson of the Board approved. Once the Board is set up and fully functioning, it is expected that it will address the impunity gap in the Sierra Leone Police force.
To contribute to these efforts at addressing these perennial challenges, the ASJP has approved a grant totalling £155,000 over a period of 18 months to the Centre for Accountability and Rule of Law to undertake an evidence-based advocacy on a number of issues. Specifically, the project seeks to work with the SLP to monitor complaints with the CDIID, highlight progress made in resolving those complaints, and identify persisting challenges. Among other things, the project seeks to monitor the existing accountability structures within the Sierra Leone Police to determine how responsive, fair and accessible they are by analysing documents and monitoring police stations.
In addition to police accountability issues, the project also seeks to utilize credible data through strategic advocacy to help bring about policy, legal and institutional reforms as well as address the implementation gaps in the laws. The project’s advocacy efforts will focus on specific aspects of the justice and security system and how these aspects affect the ability of the system to deliver justice fairly and effectively. The project will keep tabs on any policy, legal and institutional reforms that occur at the national level, and ensure wider circulation of such reforms through CARL’s community and outreach programmes.
This project is about helping Sierra Leonean authorities to address these challenges in ways that ensure immense public participation.