In August 2013, the Sierra Leone Police arrested 18 personnel of the Republic of Sierra Leone Armed Forces (RSLAF) on suspicion that they were planning mutiny against the Government of Sierra Leone.
The personnel, including Private Momoh Kargbo, Warrant Officer Frederick Johnson, Private Abdulai Coker Suma, Corporal Momoh Conteh, Private Alpha Mansaray, Corporal Alex Jibao Koroma, Private Mustapha Quee, Private Kellie Kamara, Private Musa Fabai, Private Bobor Rogers, and Captain Prince Sesay were detained for nearly eight months (August 10 2013 to March 2014) without arraigning them before a court to respond to any allegations against them.
Human rights groups, including the Centre for Accountability and Rule of Law (CARL) criticized the government for violating the rights of the detainees (detaining them beyond the constitutionally-mandated period of 10 days without arraigning them). The Justice Ministry gave a number of excuses for the delay in commencing their trial, including the lack of resources to fund the judicial process. CARL described the prolonged detention of the personnel as a breach of their constitutionally guaranteed rights, and urged the state to either ensure their speedy trials or release them without delay. Consequently, in March 2014, the government announced the establishment of a court martial to try 14 of the 18 personnel who had been arrested. In the absence of information regarding the whereabouts of the others, CARL pressed the government to provide more information on the four others. In April 2014, the government decided to release the four personnel.
In May, CARL released a report chronicling a number of human rights and fair trial rights issues relating to the ongoing matter. In the report, CARL drew the attention of the government to a number of violations which the accused had suffered, and the need to respect their rights as accused persons going forward.
CARL urged the government to seriously consider a compensation package for the 18 military personnel who were illegally detained, and ensure that four soldiers who were later released are reinstated in the army. CARL characterized the detention as illegal because contrary to a constitutional provision requiring the suspects to have been brought before a judge within ten days, the state failed to arraign them and in fact kept them in custody for eight months.
Consistent with the cardinal principle of presumption of innocence in common law systems, CARL urged the tribunal allow the accused to have access to their bank accounts as they were not facing charges for financial or economic crimes. CARL also pointed out that the accused are family heads and needed to take care of their children.
In light of the excessively lengthy period it had taken for the state to set up the tribunal, CARL was disappointed that the tribunal was pretty much in a stop-start mode as defence lawyers were frequently boycotting proceedings for lack of pay. CARL urged the government to honour its obligation by paying the salaries of lawyers, while at the same time urging the tribunal to ensure expeditious and fair trial. Finally, CARL opined that by dismissing an objection to his qualification and competence to preside over the proceedings, the Judge Advocate may have breached a principle of natural justice – by being a judge in his own court.
Since the report was released, a number of commendable steps have been taken by the state to respond to the issues. First, a couple of days after the report was released; the State paid the fees owed the defence team. In addition, after several previous attempts, the defence team finally succeeded in their application for the accused to have access to their bank accounts.
A few days after the report was handed down, the Judge Advocate did mention during one of the sessions that in light of the huge public interest in the matter, he would no longer entertain unnecessary delays in the proceedings. He urged everyone to be efficient.
CARL will continue to monitor the proceedings and produce regular updates.
