The media in Sierra Leone eagerly wait to see the repeal of the 55-year-old criminal libel law – the repeal of which was approved by cabinet on Wednesday 11th September 2019, but was recently withdrawn from the House to the disappointment of journalists and civil society organisations.
Prior to cabinet’s approval, the Minister of Information and Communications, Mohamed Rahman Swarray, had informed journalists that a repeal of the said law would be confirmed before President Julius Maada Bio left the country for the United Nations General Assembly in September 2019. However, that did not happen.
President Bio, in his campaign promises made during the 2018 general elections, promised that he would repeal the law which criminalizes libel in Sierra Leone – found as part of the country’s 1965 Public Order Act.
This act states that: “Any person who maliciously publishes any defamatory matter knowing the same to be false shall be guilty of an offence called libel and liable on conviction to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding one thousand Leones or both.”
The bill, which was introduced and enacted in 1965 was brought in Sierra Leone’s House of Representatives by the country’s second Prime Minister, Albert Margai, in a bid to silence his critics.
The Prime Minister who succeeded him, Siaka Probyn Stevens, criticized the said law while in opposition – yet, still retained the law after assuming the seat of Prime Minister in 1968. Since then, year in, year out the draconian law has frequently been used as a tool by successive governments to silence opponents and cower the independent press.
Paul Mohamed Abu Bakarr Kamara, former editor and owner of For di People Newspaper is among other journalists who have faced charges on both the criminal and civil defamation laws in the country.
On 5th October 2004, Paul was sentenced by Justice Abel Rashid to four years concurrently in prison, with a recommendation of six months ban of his newspaper for referring to the late former President Alhaji Ahmad Tejan Kabba as a convict based on the report of the Beoku Betts Commission of Inquiry of 1967 which recommended that the (late) president should not hold any public office where honesty and integrity are the watchwords. Paul was consequently charged with seditious libel.”
“I would have [preferred] to be brought to court under the civil defamatory libel law,” says Paul Kamara, “which then does not make me a criminal, but unfortunately the law working together with the government has transformed journalism to seditious libel so that it becomes criminal for the journalist to write the truth.”
He continues: “It becomes criminal for a journalist to break the frontiers of tyranny and despotism and for the people to be enlightened as to what is happening. As a result of that, I have always found myself on the other side, so instead of civil it becomes criminal,” he pointed out.
He says his trial has damaged his belief in the law, stating that the current laws only act to “discourage courageous journalists and stifle investigative journalism.”
Paul served thirteen (13) months in solitary confinement at the Pademba Prison, in the same cell in which the former rebel leader, Foday Saybana Sankoh, was previously kept before his demise. Paul later won an appeal filed by his Lawyer, the late J.B Jenkins Johnston. The trial was presided over by a Judge brought by the British government from the Solomon Islands, Justice John Muriah, who was assisted by two Sierra Leonean judges, Justice Kamanda and Justice Abel Stronge.
During President Kabba’s tenure, the opposition leader Ernest Bai Koroma during his campaign in 2007 promised that if voted as President he would repeal Part V of the Public Oder Act – which deals with libel and defamation. However, this promise was not kept.
A series of libel arrests were made during Koroma’s regime and among such arrests was a case that involved the Managing Editor and Editor of the Independent Observer Newspaper, Jonathan Leigh and Baibai Sesay. They were arrested on 18th October 2013, and later taken to court on 26 counts of seditious libel charges, based on an article written about the president titled: “Who is molesting who: Ernest or Sam Sumana”. The article attempted to throw light on the dispute between the president and his vice at that time.
After spending some time in prison the two journalists were later cautioned, and the charges were dropped.
Ahmad Sahid Nasralla, President of the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) says that every executive in SLAJ since its formation in 1971 has made it their priority to see the repeal of the Criminal andSseditious libel law, because, he explains: “That is the main reason the media is not enjoying the freedom it deserves.”
“During Kelvin Lewis’ [time as SLAJ president], part of our policy was diplomacy and dialogue – to engage government,” says Nasralla, who at the time served as Secretary General of SLAJ. “We were shouting but we never put together any document or policy that served as a reason to repeal the law – [explaining how] the government and media will benefit, and giving a reason why the law is a bad law.”
However, he adds that, during the last two years of President Koroma’s regime, the Information Minister, Mohamed Bangura, called SLAJ and said the President has told him that he wanted to repeal the law before his term ended.
“At that time,” says Nasralla, “we realised that the law was not just for SLAJ, so we decided to broaden our alliance for advocacy. And the first national symposium was held on September 27th 2016. We brought together all the players and we all agreed that the law was bad. But the argument was: what should be the replacement? However, we referenced the civil libel law; because the criminal libel law can also give the government bad rating in the international platform.”
While this advice did not lead to any repeal of the criminal libel law under the last government, Nasralla says that during the 2018 campaign period, SLAJ was also approached by representatives of the opposition Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP). Based on those discussions, a promise to repeal the law was included in the official SLPP Manifesto.
“After [SLPP’s candidate won] the elections,” says Nasralla, “we met with President Bio and gave him the policy document that we had put together during the symposium.”
In this document, Nasralla says that SLAJ has laid out a number of safeguards to ensure that if the criminal libel law was repealed, other measures will still work to protect people’s reputation. These include: the SLAJ Code of Ethics for journalists, the SLAJ Disciplinary Committee, the Independent Media Commission, and the Civil Libel Law.
Under the Civil Libel Law, journalists have faced severe consequences in past. For example, on 13th November 2002, For di People newspaper editor Paul Kamara reported on an alleged corruption scandal involving the Sierra Leone Judiciary. After being found guilty of criminal charges and being jailed for six months, he faced further consequences under the Civil Libel Law. Under this law, he was forced to pay damages, and his newspaper properties were sold in order to cover the fines – including photocopiers, printers, and even Kamara’s new car.
“They pauperized me,” says Kamara. “It affected me greatly.”
The Honorable Martin Nyuma, when he was head of the Information and Communications Committee in Parliament, said that his committee recently held a meeting with the SLAJ leadership. Part of this meeting had to do with discussing what would replace the law, should it be repealed.
“We asked them to bring out suggestions mainly in protecting people from those who practice reckless journalism,” says Nyuma. “We have not yet done anything after the first reading. In parliament we don’t just make law we do lots of consultation, because we are making these laws for the people. You don’t just make the law for one set of people but for the people of Sierra Leone. So you have to do consultation. We also need to tell the people if we repeal the libel there are enough safeguards for people’s hard earned reputation.”
According to Nyuma, a date was yet to be set for the second reading.
Now the honourable MP is the Leader of Government Business and in his first official duty in Parliament he withdrew the criminal libel repeal bill from parliamentary proceedings referencing Section 59.2 of the Standing Orders of the Legislature.
“This bill has been here (Parliament) for more than four months without any follow-up or action. So procedurally we have to withdraw it and re-introduce it,” says Hon. Nyuma.
The withdrawal of the repeal bill angered journalists including SLAJ and the Ministry of Information and Communications. Whilst agreeing with the frustrations of journalists the SLAJ President says they are still very hopeful Parliament will repeal the law sooner than later.
“The withdrawal, though disappointing, might just be a blessing in disguise,” says Nasralla. “It has awakened everybody to the fact that it is taking unnecessarily long for Parliament to do the needful and there’s a cause for concern lest it becomes another unfulfilled political promise.”
Furthermore, Nasralla says they are going back to the drawing board and come back with all the necessary supporting documentation to Parliament.
Equally, the Ministry of Information and Communications issued a press release expressing shock and disappointment following the withdrawal of the repeal bill but assures that the Government of President Julius Maada Bio is still committed to the repeal and will ensure this manifesto promise is fulfilled.
As a manifesto promise, Nasralla makes reference to the Speaker of the Sierra Leone Parliament, Hon. Dr. Abass Bundu, who he describes as the co-author of the SLPP Manifesto.
“If he (Hon. Dr. Bundu) was not convinced repealing the criminal libel law was the right thing to do he would not have included it in the manifesto; so Parliament has an obligation to fulfill,” he says.
Meanwhile, Nasralla has announced that SLAJ will put together a criminal libel repeal lobbying group comprising mainly members of SLAJ who are in the corridors of power (both in governance and in opposition), as well as civil society organisations, to help in influencing MPs to finally repeal the law.
