legal analysis of the sierra leone 1991 constitution march 11 2015

ABA/UNDP International Legal Resource Center - 0 - UNDP/Sierra Leone Constitutional Review

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER

LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE SIERRA LEONE 1991 CONSTITUTION

PREPARED FOR UNDP

MARCH 11, 2015

Review of Sierra Leone’s 1991 Constitution


LEGAL ANALYSIS OF SIERRA LEONE’S 1991 CONSTITUTION

PREPARED FOR UNDP

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER

American Bar Association

Section of International Law

1050 Connecticut Ave, NW Ste 400

Washington, DC 20036

Christina Heid, International Projects Director

[email protected]; + 1 (202) 662-1034

Khalil Ali, International Program Associate

[email protected]; + 1 (202) 662-1662

Fax: + 1 (202) 662-1669

http://ambar.org/ilrc

mailto:[email protected]





The statements and analysis contained herein are the work of the ABA-UNDP International Legal Resource Center

(ILRC) which is solely responsible for its content. The views expressed herein have not been approved by the House

of Delegates or the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association (ABA) or the United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP) and, accordingly, should not be construed as representing the policy of the ABA or UNDP.

Furthermore, nothing contained in this report is to be considered rendering legal advice for specific cases, and

readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal counsel. The opinions expressed herein are

those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA or UNDP.

©2015 American Bar Association. All rights reserved.

Available only in electronic form.



Table of Contents

I. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 4 A. CHAPTER I – REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE .........................................................................................4

1. Declaration of Republic (Section 1) ............................................................................................ 4 2. Public Seal (Section 2) ................................................................................................................. 6 3. National Flag and National Anthem (Section 3) ........................................................................ 6

B. CHAPTER II – FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPALS OF STATE POLICY ..................................................................6 1. Fundamental Obligations of Government (Section 4) ............................................................... 6 2. Government and the People (Section 5) .................................................................................... 6 3. Political Objectives (Section 6) ................................................................................................... 7 4. Economic Objectives (Section 7) ................................................................................................ 9 5. Social Objectives (Section 8) ..................................................................................................... 10 6. Educational Objectives (Section 9) ........................................................................................... 11 7. Foreign Policy Objectives (Section 10) ..................................................................................... 11 8. Obligations of the mass media (Section 11) ............................................................................ 12 9. Enhancement of national culture (Section 12) ........................................................................ 12 10. Duties of the Citizen (Section 13) ............................................................................................. 12 11. Fundamental Principles Not Justiciable (Section 14) ............................................................... 13

C. CHAPTER III – THE RECOGNITION AND PROTECTIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND PROTECTION OF

FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL ........................................................................................................ 13 1. New Section Recommended to Chapter IV .............................................................................. 13 2. Additional New Section Recommended: ................................................................................. 14 3. Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms of the Individual (Section 15) ............................ 15 4. Protection of Right to Life (Section 16) .................................................................................... 18 5. Protection from Arbitrary Arrest or Detention (Section 17) ................................................... 19 6. Protection of Freedom of Movement (Section 18) .................................................................. 20 7. Protection from Slavery and Forced Labor (Section 19) .......................................................... 22 8. Protection from Inhuman Treatment (Section 20) .................................................................. 23 9. Protection from Deprivation of Property (Section 21) ............................................................ 23 10. Protection for Privacy of Home and other Property (Section 22) ....................................... 25 11. Provision to Secure Protection of Law (Section 23) ............................................................ 26 12. Protection of Freedom of Conscience (Section 24) ............................................................. 29 13. Protection of Freedom of Expression and the Press (Section 25) ....................................... 30 14. Protection of Freedom of Assembly and Association (Section 26) ..................................... 32 15. Protection from Discrimination (Section 27) ....................................................................... 33 16. Enforcement of Protective Provisions (Section 28) ............................................................. 35 17. New Section Recommended: Authority of courts to uphold and enforce fundamental freedoms and rights .......................................................................................................................... 38 18. Public Emergency (Section 29) ............................................................................................. 39 19. Interpretation of Chapter III (Section 30) ............................................................................ 43 20. New Section Recommended: Right to Dignity .................................................................... 44 21. New Section Recommended: Equality in Marriage ............................................................. 44 22. New Section Recommended: Children’s Rights .................................................................. 45 23. New Section Recommended: Rights of Persons with Disabilities ...................................... 46 24. New Section Recommended: Protection of Socio-Economic Rights .................................. 46

D. CHAPTER IV – THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ........................................................................ 47 1. Registration of Voters (Section 31) .......................................................................................... 47



2. Electoral Commission (Section 32) ........................................................................................... 47 3. Functions of the Electoral Commission (Section 33) ............................................................... 48 4. Political Parties Registration Commission (Section 34) ........................................................... 48 5. Registration and Conduct of Political Parties (Section 35) ...................................................... 48 6. Secret Ballot (Section 36) .......................................................................................................... 49 7. Referendum (Section 37) .......................................................................................................... 49 8. Constituencies and Elections (Section 38) ............................................................................... 49 9. Filling of Vacancies (Section 39) ............................................................................................... 49

E. CHAPTER V – THE EXECUTIVE ...................................................................................................... 49 PART I – THE PRESIDENT .................................................................................................................... 49 The experts provided several comments and recommendations regarding the specific sections within Part I, regarding the Office of the President. ...................................................................... 49

1. The Office of the President (Section 40) .................................................................................. 49 2. Qualifications for Office of President (Section 41) .................................................................. 50 3. Election of President (Section 42) ............................................................................................ 50 4. Period During Which Presidential Elections Shall Take Place (Section 43) ............................. 50 5. Parliament to Make Laws for Election of President (Section 44) ............................................ 50 6. Presidential Returning Officer (Section 45) ............................................................................. 50 7. Tenure of Office of President, etc… (Section 46) ..................................................................... 50 9. Incidents of Office, etc… (Section 48)....................................................................................... 50 10. Vacancy in Office of President (Section 49) ......................................................................... 50 11. Mental or Physical Incapacity (Section 50) .......................................................................... 50 12. Misconduct by President (Section 51) ................................................................................. 51 13. Temporary Filling of Vacancy (Section 52) .......................................................................... 51 PART II – THE EXECUTIVE ........................................................................................................................ 51 14. Exercise of Executive Authority in Sierra Leone (Section 53) ............................................. 51 15. Vice President (Section 54) .................................................................................................. 51 16. Vacancy in the Office of Vice President (Section 55) .......................................................... 51 17. Ministers and Deputy Ministers of Government (Section 56) ............................................ 51 18. Oaths to be Taken by Ministers, etc… (Section 57) ............................................................. 52 19. Ministerial Vacancies (Section 58) ....................................................................................... 52 20. Establishment of Cabinet (Section 59) ................................................................................. 52 21. Collective Responsibility (Section 60) .................................................................................. 52 22. Constitution of Offices (Section 61) ..................................................................................... 52 23. Administration of Ministries (Section 62)............................................................................ 52 24. Prerogative of Mercy (Section 63) ....................................................................................... 52 25. Establishment of the Office of Attorney-General and Minister of Justice (Section 64) ..... 52 26. Solicitor General (Section 65) ............................................................................................... 54 27. Director of Public Prosecutions (Section 66) ....................................................................... 54 28. Secretary to the President (Section 67) ............................................................................... 54 29. Secretary to the Cabinet (Section 68) .................................................................................. 55 30. Secretary to the Vice President (Section 69) ....................................................................... 55 31. Power of Appointment Vested in the President (Section 70) ............................................. 55 32. Other Statutory Appointments (Section 71) ....................................................................... 56 33. Office of Paramount Chief (Section 72) ............................................................................... 56

F. CHAPTER VI – THE LEGISLATURE .................................................................................................. 58 PART I – COMPOSITION OF PARLIAMENT ............................................................................................... 58

1. Establishment of Parliament (Section 73) ................................................................................ 58



2. Members of Parliament (Section 74) ....................................................................................... 58 3. Qualifications for Members of Parliament (Section 75) .......................................................... 58 4. Disqualifications for Members of Parliament (Section 76) ..................................................... 58 5. Tenure of Seats of Members of Parliament (Section 77) ........................................................ 59 6. Determination of Question as to Membership of Parliament (Section 78) ............................ 59 7. The Speaker (Section 79) .......................................................................................................... 59 8. Deputy Speaker (Section 80) .................................................................................................... 60 9. Election of Speaker and Deputy Speaker (Section 81) ............................................................ 60 10. Clerk of Parliament (Section 82) .......................................................................................... 60 11. Oath to be Taken by Members of Parliament (Section 83) ................................................ 60 Part II – SUMMONING, PROROGATION AND DISSOLUTION ......................................................................... 60 12. Sessions of Parliament (Section 84) ..................................................................................... 60 13. Life of Parliament (Section 85) ............................................................................................. 60 14. Sittings of Parliament (Section 86)....................................................................................... 60 15. General Election (Section 87) ............................................................................................... 60 PART III – PROCEDURE IN PARLIAMENT ..................................................................................................... 61 16. Presiding in Parliament (Section 88) .................................................................................... 61 17. Quorum in Parliament (Section 89) ..................................................................................... 61 18. Use of English in Parliament (Section 90) ............................................................................ 61 19. Voting in Parliament (Section 91) ........................................................................................ 61 20. Unqualified Persons Sitting and Voting (Section 92) .......................................................... 61 21. Committees in Parliament (Section 93) ............................................................................... 61 22. Regulation of Procedures in Parliament (Section 94) ......................................................... 61 23. Contempt of Parliament (Section 95) .................................................................................. 61 24. Criminal Proceedings (Section 96) ....................................................................................... 61 PART IV – RESPONSIBILITIES, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES ......................................................................... 62 25. Responsibilities of Members of Parliament (Section 97) .................................................... 62 26. Freedom of Speech and Debate (Section 98) ...................................................................... 62 27. Parliamentary Privileges (Section 99) .................................................................................. 62 28. Immunity from Service of Process and Arrest (Section 100) .............................................. 62 29. Immunity from Witness Summons (Section 101) ................................................................ 62 30. Immunity from Serving as Juryman (Section 102) ............................................................... 62 31. Immunity from Publication of Proceedings (Section 103) .................................................. 63 32. Privileges of Witnesses (Section 104) .................................................................................. 63 PART V – EXERCISE OF LEGISLATIVE POWER ............................................................................................... 63 33. Power to Make Laws (Section 105) ...................................................................................... 63 34. Mode of Exercising Legislative Power (Section 106) ........................................................... 63 35. Minister May Introduce Bill and Be Summoned to Parliament (Section 107) ................... 64 36. Alteration of Constitution (Section 108) .............................................................................. 64 37. Residual Authority of Parliament (Section 109) .................................................................. 64 PART VI - FINANCE ................................................................................................................................. 64 38. Authorisation for Imposition of Taxation (Section 110) ..................................................... 64 39. Consolidated Fund (Section 111) ......................................................................................... 64 40. Authorisation of Expenditure from Consolidated Fund (Section 112) ............................... 64 41. Authorisation of Expenditure in Advance of Appropriation (Section 113) ........................ 64 42. Withdrawals of Monies for General Revenues (Section 114) ............................................. 64 43. Remuneration of President and Certain Other Officers (Section 115) ............................... 65 44. Contingencies Fund (Section 116) ........................................................................................ 65



45. Public Debt (Section 117) ..................................................................................................... 65 46. Loans (Section 118) ............................................................................................................... 65 47. Establishment of the Office of Auditor-General (Section 119) ........................................... 65

G. CHAPTER VII – THE JUDICIARY .................................................................................................... 66 PART I – THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE....................................................................................... 66

1. Establishment of the Judiciary (Section 120) ........................................................................... 66 PART II – THE SUPREME COURT ............................................................................................................... 69 2. Composition of the Supreme Court (Section 121) ................................................................... 69 3. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (Section 122) ..................................................................... 69 4. Appeals to the Supreme Court (Section 123) ........................................................................... 70 5. Interpretation of the Constitution (Section 124) ..................................................................... 70 6. Supervisory Jurisdiction (Section 125) ..................................................................................... 70 7. Power of Justices of the Supreme Court in Interlocutory Matters (Section 126) ................... 71 8. Enforcement of the Constitution (Section 127) ....................................................................... 71 PART III – THE COURT OF APPEAL ............................................................................................................. 71 9. Composition of the Court of Appeal (Section 128) .................................................................. 71 10. Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal (Section 129) ................................................................ 71 11. Power of Single Justice of Appeal (Section 130) .................................................................. 71 PART IV – THE HIGH COURT .................................................................................................................... 72 12. Composition of the High Court (Section 131) ...................................................................... 72 13. Jurisdiction of the High Court (Section 132) ........................................................................ 72 14. Claims Against the Government (Section 133) .................................................................... 73 15. Supervisory Jurisdiction of the High Court (Section 134) .................................................... 73 PART V – APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES, ETC.. ................................................................................................ 73 16. Appointment of Judges, etc… (Section 135) ........................................................................ 73 17. Judicial Vacancies (Section 136) ........................................................................................... 73 18. Tenure of Office of Judges, etc… (Section 137) ................................................................... 74 19. Remuneration of Judges, etc… (Section 138) ...................................................................... 75 20. Oath of Office of Judges (Section 139) ................................................................................. 75 PART VI – JUDICIAL AND LEGAL SERVICE COMMISSION ................................................................................ 75 21. Establishment of the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (Section 140) ...................... 75 22. Appointment of Judicial and Legal Service Officers, etc… (Section 141) ............................ 76 23. Appointment of Court Officers (Section 142) ...................................................................... 76 24. Fees of Court, etc… (Section 143) ........................................................................................ 76 25. Official Document (Section 144) .......................................................................................... 76 26. Rules of Court Committee (Section 145) ............................................................................. 76

H. CHAPTER VIII – OMBUDSMAN .................................................................................................... 76 1. Parliament to Establish Office of Ombudsman (Section 146) ................................................. 76

I. CHAPTER IX – COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY ...................................................................................... 77 1. Appointment of Commissions of Inquiry (Section 147) .......................................................... 77 2. Powers, Rights and Privileges of Commissions of Inquiry (Section 148) ................................ 78 3. Report of Inquiry (Section 149) ................................................................................................ 78 4. Rules Regulating Commissions of Inquiry (Section 150) ......................................................... 78

J. CHAPTER X – THE PUBLIC SERVICE ............................................................................................... 78 1. Establishment of the Public Service Commission (Section 151) .............................................. 78 2. Appointments, etc… of Public Officers (Section 152) .............................................................. 79 3. Appointment of the Principal Representative of Sierra Leone (Section 153) ......................... 79 4. Appointment of Permanent Secretaries and Certain Other Officers (Section 154) ............... 79



PART II – POLICE FORCE .......................................................................................................................... 79 5. Establishment of the Sierra Leone Police Force (Section 155) ................................................ 79 6. Establishment of the Police Council (Section 156) .................................................................. 79 7. Appointments in the Police Force (Section 157) ...................................................................... 79 8. Functions of the Police Council (Section 158) .......................................................................... 79 PART III – RESIGNATIONS, RE-APPOINTMENTS AND PROTECTION OF PENSION RIGHTS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

HOLDING ESTABLISHED OFFICES ............................................................................................................... 79 9. Resignation and Effect of New Appointment of a Person Holding Established Office (Section 159) 10. Reappointments, etc… (Section 160) ................................................................................... 79 11. Protection of Pension Rights (Section 161) ......................................................................... 79 PART IV – POWER AND PROCEDURES OF COMMISSIONS AND COUNCILS, AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS .................. 80 12. Power of Commissions in Relation to the Grant of Pension (Section 162) ........................ 80 13. Power and Procedure of Commissions (Section 163) ......................................................... 80 14. Protection of Commissions from Legal Proceedings (Section 164) .................................... 80

K. CHAPTER XI – THE ARMED FORCES .............................................................................................. 80 1. Establishment of the Armed Forces (Section 165) ................................................................... 80 2. Prohibition of Private Armed Forces (Section 166) ................................................................. 80 3. Establishment of Defense Council (Section 167) ..................................................................... 80 4. Appointments in the Armed Forces (Section 168) ................................................................... 81 5. Functions of the Defence Council (Section 169) ...................................................................... 81

L. CHAPTER XII – THE LAWS OF SIERRA LEONE ................................................................................... 81 1. The Laws of Sierra Leone (Section 170).................................................................................... 81

M. CHAPTER XVII – MISCELLANEOUS ................................................................................................ 81 1. Interpretation (Section 171) ..................................................................................................... 81 2. Legislation (Section 172) ........................................................................................................... 81 3. Consequential Provisions (Section 173) ................................................................................... 81

N. CHAPTER XIV – TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS ................................................................................... 81 1. Existing Constitution — Act No. 12 of 1978 (Section 174)....................................................... 81 2. Effect of Transitional Provisions (Section 175) ........................................................................ 81 3. Existing Law (Section 176) ........................................................................................................ 82 4. Application of Existing Law (Section 177) ................................................................................ 82 5. Preservation of Existing Offices (Section 178) ......................................................................... 82 6. Existing Parliament (Section 179) ............................................................................................. 82

7. Delegated Powers (Section 180)………………………………………………………………………………………… 82 8. Continuation of Matters (Section 181) .................................................................................... 82 9. Legal Proceedings (Section 183) ............................................................................................... 82 10. Appeals (Section 184) ........................................................................................................... 82 11. Jurisdiction of the Courts (Section 185) ............................................................................... 82 12. Finance (Section 186) ........................................................................................................... 82 13. Financial Authorisation (Section 187) .................................................................................. 82 14. Official Seals, etc… (Section 188) ......................................................................................... 82 15. Continuation of the Police Force (Section 189) ................................................................... 83 16. Continuation of the Military Forces (Section 190) .............................................................. 83 17. Repeal of Act No. 12 of 1978 and Savings (Section 191) ..................................................... 83 18. Reprint (Section 192) ............................................................................................................ 83 19. Commencement (Section 193) ............................................................................................. 83


INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL ASSESSMENT1

This report compiles the comments, questions, and recommendations of legal experts to the 1991

Sierra Leone Constitution (hereinafter referred to as “the 1991 Constitution” or “the

Constitution”). This report summarizes the experts’ observations and recommendations

regarding the 1991 Constitution. The report is divided into the Chapters and subsections

currently present the Constitution.

I. Introduction

The purpose of this review is twofold: a) provide final recommendations for constitutional

reform; and b) to raise questions and possible options in the dialectic process of amendment

through the lens of a third party experienced in constitutional theory and practice.

Given the time constraints for submission, we recognize the realistic limits of our understanding

of the lives of the people of Sierra Leone. Thus, our external experience and advice must

continuously interact with the public consensus in Sierra Leone to form a sort of tapestry in

which external advice and the public consensus weave together to eliminate legal loopholes.

Background to the Constitutional Review Process:

Following his re-election for a second term in November 2012, Sierra Leone’s President Koroma

pledged to undertake the long awaited review of the country’s 1991 Constitution, as envisaged

under the Lome Peace Agreement and recommended by the Sierra Leone Truth and

Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The President also assured the wider public and the

international community, including the United Nations, that the review process would be

inclusive and transparent. If properly undertaken, this review process will provide Sierra Leone

with a unique opportunity to ensure its own transformation into a fully-fledged democracy, based

on the rule of law and international human rights standards. A reformed Constitution, based on

public input and participation, should also help Sierra Leone on the road to enduring peace and

prosperity.

Since its launch in July 2013, the CRC has carried out a series of activities, including civic

education, public consultations and workshops on thematic issues, with the support of the United

Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone (UNIPSIL) and the United Nations

Development Programme (UNDP). To complement the efforts of the CRC, UNIPSIL with

support from the Peace Building Fund, also organized a series of dialogues to facilitate

discussion of the process with political parties, women and youth groups and religious and

traditional leaders.

1 For nearly 15 years, the ILRC has assisted UNDP as well as several other United Nations (UN) entities and multinational organizations that work in developing countries with legal issues beyond democratic governance. The ILRC, which is housed within the ABA Section of

International Law, identifies experts for requests relating to technical legal assistance projects, knowledge management and advisory services

worldwide. The ILRC also conducts assessments of draft and current legislation, gauging their compliance with international standards where appropriate, and provides legal research and substantive advice to governments on policy formulation. The ILRC has engaged twelve (12) legal

experts as well as three (3) junior expert to conduct complimentary research. This report was compiled by Suzanne Lachelier and Kwangsup

Kim. All the experts’ biographies can be found in Annex A of this report. To date, the team of experts have provided over 500 pro bono hours of service valued at nearly $111,000. For more information, please contact [email protected].


http://www.americanbar.org/groups/international_law.html

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/international_law.html

http://www.ambar.org/ilrc




UNDP's support to the Constitutional Review Process will continue after UNIPSIL leaves. The

process aims to consolidate National Peace-Building and State-Building efforts through a

consultative, transparent and widely inclusive course of action.

Since December 2013, there has been significant progress and CRC sub-committees have

finalized their outreach and nation-wide consultation strategy with technical assistance from

UNDP. Sierra Leonean media practitioners have been trained on mediation, dialogue and conflict

sensitive reporting on constitutional issues.

In order to ensure that issues of gender and non-discrimination are prioritized in the process,

UNDP, with collaboration from the Ministry of Gender, Social Welfare and Children organized a

nation-wide Women’s Voices Conference on gender-mainstreaming in the Constitutional

Review Process in Bo in March 2014. Various women’s groups and leaders participated in the

conference and developed plans to promote gender equality issues throughout the constitutional

review process.

Throughout 2014 the UNDP-led constitutional review project will assist the CRC to implement

country-wide stakeholder consultations with women, youth, local government bodies, paramount

chiefs, civil society organizations and consultations trickling down to district and community

level.

In general, the Constitution is quite lengthy and detailed. In most of the proposed amendments

below, superfluous or other matters best provided for by statute are recommended for repeal

under the theory that enactment of specific legislation is the best response to evolving matters

rather than frequent amendment of the Constitution—a (rightly) laborious and time-intensive

process. Amendments were drafted in order to achieve a number of aims: Maintain as much of

the spirit and structure of the 1991 Constitution as well as analyze and reinforce as many of the

Constitutional Review Commission’s recommendations as set forth in its January 2008 report as

possible; Bring the Constitution into line with Sierra Leone’s international legal obligations;

Satisfy the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in its exhaustive 2004

report; and align with current constitutional experience, particularly those constitutions that have

been amended and enacted in Africa since 1991. In this regard, the 1996 Constitution of South

Africa and the 2010 Constitution of Kenya were most useful, not only because they are widely

regarded strong and effective instruments, but because they were both drafted in the wake of

internal conflict. The amendments below also change gendered pronouns to gender-neutral

pronoun (i.e., “their” instead of “his”) or restructure text so as to avoid the use of pronouns

altogether.

Most of the last third of the 1991 Constitution consists of provisions establishing constitutional

authorities, which are designedly independent of the President and Parliament. This review has

been trying to establish whether this respect exists mainly on paper, or whether it is also reflected

in reality; though without obtaining much information on this point. However, we believe that,

either way, it is valuable to set a good standard in the Constitution. At worst, this sets a standard

to which the authorities should aspire and, as resources become available, gradually achieve.



It is, of course, true that the question of the independence of these institutions depends as much

on that elusive thing, tradition or ‘culture’, as on the law or Constitution. But the Constitution is

a significant factor in shaping culture and so, if the Constitution tends to promote independence,

it will have, certainly in the medium term, a significant effect on the culture. They are intended

to ensure that the President and Parliament remain within the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

The most important of these authorities are the Courts. But they also include: Electoral

Commission; Political Parties Registration Commission; Directors of Public Prosecutions;

Ombudsman; Commissions of Inquiry; Public Service Commission; and Police and Defense

Councils.

In addition, it forms a strong policy in the Report of the Commission to Review the 2008

Constitution of Sierra Leone proposes several further examples of these constitutional

authorities, namely Parliamentary Service Commission; Human Rights Commission; NGOs

Regulatory Board; Forces Complaints Commission; Extractive Industries Transparency

Commission (paras. 105, 129, 140 and 138). If these proposals in the Report were adopted, it

would naturally require some adjustment to the Constitution, including the amendments

proposed later, in the matrix. This review not pursuing this further, since we are concentrating

here on the 1991 Constitution. But it would note that probably there should be some limit to the

number of these constitutional authorities, because the greater the number the less chance that

they will be taken seriously.

The independence and effectiveness of these constitutional authorities seems (and, it appears, the

2008 Report) to be of the first importance. After all, principles and values, however excellent,

cannot enforce themselves. Institutional machinery is needed to ensure respect for laws

promoting gender equality and non-discrimination; or respect for Human Rights. It remains as

true as ever that ‘power corrupts; and absolute power corrupts absolutely’. The inference from

this is that independent officers, so as to prevent it from being all-powerful, should at critical

points control the executive-legislative organ of state.

The importance of constitutional authorities of this type, in making good government work, has

been recognized internationally. For instance, see Uganda (1995); South Africa (1996); Kenya

(2010); Egypt (2014); Tunisia (2014). As noted, this idea of independent, specialized

Constitutional Bodies already exists in the Sierra Leone Constitution. Accordingly, the

remainder of this advice consists of a review of the existing divisions in this field, in order to see

how they can be improved.



I. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Within each Part, the experts' comments and recommendations generally fell within three

categories: (a) substantive comments regarding specific provisions and their legal implications

(b) substantive and lengthy recommendations as to additional language that should be included

in the Bill; and (c) editorial comments and recommendations focusing on grammatical issues and

clarity. Because of the high number of comments and the specific and in-depth nature of these

comments, this report has organized them on a per-section basis.

A. CHAPTER I – REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE

1. Declaration of Republic (Section 1)

All the experts noted that it would be important for the Constitution’s supremacy to be

emphasized in this Section.

One expert recommended adopting language that would specify the power to enforce provisions

of the Constitution. To that end, this expert proposed the following:

If any other laws are found to be inconsistent with

any provision of this Constitution, they shall be

rendered void.

Another expert pointed to the recommendation from the 2008 Review of the Sierra Leone

Constitution, which sought to establish the supremacy of the Constitution and the sovereignty of

the people. The 2008 Review proposed the following language for addition to Section 1:

1. The Constitution shall be the Supreme law of

Sierra Leone, and

2. Sovereignty belongs to the people of Sierra Leone

from whom Government through this Constitution

derives all its power, authority and legitimacy.

A third expert also suggested emphasizing the supremacy of the Constitution, with the following

additional language:

The Constitution shall be the Supreme law of Sierra

Leone. This Constitution binds all persons and all

State organs at all levels of government. Any law,

including customary or religious law, that is

inconsistent with this Constitution is void to the

extent of the inconsistency, and any act or omission

in contravention of this Constitution is invalid.

This expert referenced a number of international treaties, agreements other national constitutions,

as examples supporting the inclusion of the above language in Sierra Leone’s Constitution:

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter “ICCPR,”) art. 18(a); Human

Rights Committee, General Comment No. 22(48) (art. 18), U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4,



¶2 (Sept. 27, 1993); Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, General

Recommendation No. 28: On the Core Obligations of States Parties under Article 2 of the

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, ¶33, U.N. Doc,

CEDAW/C/GC/28 (Dec. 16, 2010); Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’

Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, art. 5; S. AFR. CONST., 1996 § 2; KENYA CONST., 2010

art. 2; GHANA CONST., 1992 art. 1(2); UGANDA CONST., 1995 art. 2; U.S. CONST. art. IV, cl. 2;

WITNESS TO TRUTH: REPORT OF THE SIERRA LEONE TRUTH & RECONCILIATION COMMISSION,

Vol. II, Ch. 3, ¶108 (2004) [hereinafter TRC REPORT].

This same expert further recommended that the Sierra Leone Constitution include a new

provision, acknowledging the place of international law in Sierra Leone’s domestic legal

structure. Citing a number of treaties, agreements and state constitutions, this expert proposed

the following addition:

Any treaty or convention ratified by Sierra Leone

shall form part of the law of Sierra Leone.

ICCPR, art. 2; Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31: The Nature of the General

Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, U.N. Doc. No.

CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add. 13, ¶13 (May 26, 2004); CEDAW, art. 2(a); Committee on the

Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, General Recommendation No. 28: On the Core

Obligations of States Parties under Article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms

of Discrimination against Women, ¶31, U.N. Doc, CEDAW/C/GC/28 (Dec. 16, 2010);

Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 4; Protocol to the African Charter on Human and

Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, art. 2(1)(a); S. AFR. CONST., 1996 § 2;

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 2(5), (6); RWANDA CONST., 2003 prmbl., §9, arts. 25, 28; S. AFR.

CONST., 1996 § 39(1)(b).

Another expert suggested writing a preamble in Section 1 that would not limit the Section to

defining the territory of Sierra Leone. Rather, this expert recommended that a preamble

underscore

the sovereignty of Sierra Leone through its elected

representatives or by referendum in this adoption of

the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land

regulating their affairs for the purposes stated in

Chapters II and III of the Constitution.

This expert further recommended that the preamble contain language which acknowledges

popular consciousness of the history of the nation,

its diversity and the resolve of the people to live

together as one nation, in peace, progress and

posterity, hereby make this solemn declaration

contained in this constitution.



The same expert referenced the preamble in South Africa’s Constitution (1996), which provides

that “We therefore, through our freely elected representatives, adopt this Constitution as the

Supreme law of the Republic so as to heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based

on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights; improve the quality of life of

all citizens and free the potential of each person. These ideals are expressed in Sections Chapters

II and III of this draft Constitution.”

The expert also noted that Section 171(15)’s affirmation of the primacy of the Constitution

should be placed in the recommended preamble to the Constitution.

2. Public Seal (Section 2)

There were no comments regarding the Public Seal.

3. National Flag and National Anthem (Section 3)

One expert commented that the Constitution should stipulate that Freetown is the capital of the

Sierra Leone. He pointed to Germany’s laws as an example where, in Article 22 (Federal capital

– Federal flag) of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, which declares Berlin as

the capital, and further provides that “[t]he Federation shall be responsible for representing the

nation as a whole in the capital. Details shall be regulated by federal law.”

In contrast, another expert recommended that the legislature determine the appearance of Sierra

Leone’s flag, since the Constitution currently provides that the flag shall contain the Public Seal,

and the design of the Public Seal is already prescribed by the legislature under Section 2 of the

Constitution. He therefore proposes the following conforming language for Section 3 of the

Constitution:

The flag of the Republic shall be as Parliament

shall prescribe.

B. CHAPTER II – FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPALS OF STATE POLICY

1. Fundamental Obligations of Government (Section 4)

There were no comments on this Section.

2. Government and the People (Section 5)

Several experts highlighted that this Section should address the role of Government in protecting

the rights and freedoms of the people, in representing and serving them. With that goal in mind,

an expert proposed the amendments (italicized) to the existing language in Section 5(2)(b):

and to this end it shall be the duty of the Armed

Forces, the Police, Public Officers and all security

and other public agents and representatives to

protect and safeguard the people of Sierra Leone

and all their rights and freedoms.



With a similar desire to focus this Section on Government representing the people and deriving

its power from them, another expert proposed re-lettering Subsections 5(2)(a), (b) and (c) as

5(2)(b), (c) and (d), respectively. He then recommended including the following language in a

new Section 5(2)(a):

Sovereignty belongs to the people of Sierra Leone.

It shall be exercised by the people through elected

representatives elected among the people or by

referendum following the procedure and conditions

specified in this Constitution.

An renumbered Subsection 5(2)(b), therefore, would delete the phrase

addressing sovereignty currently contained in it, but still contain the

existing language as modified below:

Through this Constitution the Government derives

all its powers, authority and legitimacy.

Another expert suggested the following amendment (italicized) to Section 5(1):

The Republic of Sierra Leone shall be a State based

on the principles of Human Dignity, Equality,

Freedom, Democracy and Justice.

3. Political Objectives (Section 6)

All of the experts expressed similar wishes with different language seeking to assure the

independence and integrity of public servants. One of these experts emphasized that this Section

should explicitly prescribe the impartiality of public servants, their independence from the

Executive and from political interests groups. To that end, the expert proposed creation of a new

subsection 6(6), which would contain the following language:

The status and political impartiality of public

officials shall be guaranteed as prescribed by

legislation. All public officials shall be servants of

the people and shall be responsible for and

accountable to the people.

The second expert proposed the following language for a constitutional assurance of public

servants’ integrity:

All organs of Government and all authorities and

persons employed in the service of the State shall

act ethically. No person employed in the service of

the State may act in any way inconsistent with their

office or this Constitution.



Two experts proposed specific language amendments to Subsection 6(2). These proposed

amendments were similar in that they seek to promote the widespread and non-discriminatory

protection of the rights assured under the Constitution. One of these expert’s proposed

amendments to Subsection 6(2) are:

1. to delete the word “discourage” and replace it

with “prohibit,” to make clear that discrimination is

not to be tolerated;

2. to delete “on the grounds” because the grounds

for which discrimination is prohibited are currently

specified in Section 27(3) (“Enforcement of

Protective Provisions”);

3. to change “citizen” to “persons,” so that the

Constitution protects all persons within the territory

of Sierra Leone as those rights are broadly

articulated in Section 15 (“Fundamental Human

Rights and Freedoms of the Individual”).

Also regarding Subsection 6(2), the other of these experts expressed concern that “integration”

could be contradictory to the goal of protecting diversity and the rights of minority groups of all

types. With this concern in mind, this expert proposed that the phrase “promoting national

integration” be removed, and the following sentence be added:

The state shall promote the ideals and principles

stated in section 5(1) as well as the pursuit of

happiness, social justice, promotion and protection

of fundamental human rights without discrimination

on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, status or

gender.

Regarding Subsection 6(3), an expert recommended continuing the promotion of egalitarianism

by adding the following language, after 6(3)(a):

(b) Promote gender balance, the interest of disabled

and disadvantaged people in the procurement of

government services, appointments and promotions.

It was further recommended to add a sentence (in italics below) to the existing Subsection 6(5):

The state shall take all steps to eradicate all corrupt

practices and abuse of power. For this purpose,

prior to taking and leaving office, all persons who

by the provisions of this constitution shall be

mandated to take an oath of office prior to taking

office and shall, in addition to the oath, declare

their affirmation under the conditions and

procedures to be specified by an act of parliament.



4. Economic Objectives (Section 7)

Experts’ responses on Section 7 diverged significantly. One expert recommended deleting it

entirely, and stated that the language currently in Section 7 involves more government policies,

and not principles typically articulated in a constitution; the policies contained in Section 7, he

advised, could conflict with rights in the constitution, including any environmental rights that

may be adopted.

Another expert recommended substantial changes to the language, designed to promote an

accountable government and transparent legal institutions, in the hopes of minimizing

government officials acting to the detriment of the people’s economic opportunities. This expert

therefore proposed the following new language for Section 7(1):

The State shall establish and implement a plan to

comprehensively develop and support farm and

fishing communities in order to protect and foster

agriculture and fisheries.

In order to protect the interests of farmers and

fishermen, the State shall endeavor to stabilize the

prices of agricultural and fishery products by

maintaining an equilibrium between demand and

supply of such products and improving their

marketing and distribution systems.

The State shall protect and foster small and medium

enterprises.

The State shall foster organizations founded on the

spirit of self-help among farmers, fishermen and

businessmen engaged in small and medium industry

and shall guarantee their independent activities and

development.

A third expert suggested adding, to Subsection 7(1)(c), the word “promote,” before “protect.”

He further recommended adding a new subsection to Section 7, with the following statement:

All other economic objectives promoted and

protected by international conventions to which

Sierra Leone is a state party.

This expert provided commentary to explain the basis for the above additional language, and to

expound on the purposes of Sections 6(5), 7, 8 and 9. Specifically, he noted that the distinction

between rights purportedly non-justiciable (i.e., economic, social and cultural rights described in

the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (“ICESCR”) (1966)), and

justiciable political and civil rights, is falling out of favor. He further noted that the ICESCR, at

Section 2 commits signatory nations to taking reasonable legislative measures that would make



these “second generation human rights” justiciable. He pointed to the efforts of many African

nations to stamp out corruption, correct injustices and minimize societal economic disparities,

including the fact that South Africa addressed these problems in its preamble, and Sections 11,

26 and 27 of its Constitution. He then recommended that the Sierra Leone Constitution do

similarly. To that end, and although the second generation rights themselves may not be

justiciable, this expert suggested that the Constitution could declare that policies, acts or

omissions of the Government which infringe on these rights could be made justiciable.

5. Social Objectives (Section 8)

There is a recommendation to add a requirement that

The government will to the greatest extent possible

promote and facilitate universal public access to

modern information and communications

technologies and to a diverse range of information.

The expert making this recommendation emphasized the crucial value of access to information in

promotion and advancement of Social Order. He suggested that the government should, through

language such as the above, facilitate access to important information, and the information

technologies and communications systems necessary to access such information.

Another expert made specific language change recommendations to Section 8. These are:

1. In Subsection 8(2)(a), delete “based on merit,”

because there may be other grounds for benefits

inuring to citizens, and limiting these to benefits

“based on merit” could conflict with any affirmative

action principles that may be adopted.

2. In Subsection 8(2)(c), delete “by reason of

economic….” There could be many other unlawful

reasons for denying access to courts, and thus the

wording in this section should not limit itself to

economic reasons.

3. In Subsections 8(3)(c) and (d), delete the phrase

“having due regard to the resources of the State.”

This phrase could provide a pretext, often used by

States, to deny access to the benefits afforded in

these Subsections.

A third expert commented on Subsection8 (2)(c), recommending deletion of the phrase “and that

opportunities for securing justice are not denied any citizen by reason of economic or other

disability,” to replace it with:



and that access to justice is not denied any citizen

by virtue of his economic status, social cultural

factors, disability or on religious, ethnic, gender or

any other discriminatory factors.

6. Educational Objectives (Section 9)

Two experts recommended gender neutral terms, or using “his or her,” in the language of this

Section, so as to promote women’s rights.

Another expert noted that this Section should include access to information technologies and

telecommunications systems. He emphasized that the State should commit itself to provide

necessary finance and structures that lead to universal access to modern computing and

communications technologies, as these are necessary to provide effective education and equal

educational opportunities for the public.

Two expert suggested deleting from Subsection 9(1)(c) the phrase “as and when practicable,” so

that the responsibility of the State to provide senior education is not be open-ended or free too

free to be ignored. One of these experts further recommended deleting Subsections 9(1)(a)

though (c), and replacing them with the phrase “free education for all at all levels,” so that the

description of free education levels to be afforded under the Constitution is more comprehensive,

and specific levels are not inadvertently omitted, as they could be through an itemized list.

7. Foreign Policy Objectives (Section 10)

An expert recommended the addition of the following language, so that the Constitution would

specify that treaties to which Sierra Leone are a party become part of domestic law:

Treaties duly concluded and promulgated under the

Constitution and generally recognized rules of

international law shall have the same effect as the

domestic laws of the Sierra Leone.

This expert further recommended that the Constitution specify the State would guarantee the

status of foreigners, such as travelers, investors, etc…, with the addition of the following

language:

The status of foreigners shall be guaranteed as

prescribed by international law and treaties.

Another expert shared a recommendation focused on assuring international rights and

obligations, proposing to delete in Section 10(a) the phrase “the protection of National interest,”

and adding the following:

promotion and protection of the national and

international policies of Sierra Leone and its sub-

regional, regional and global strategic interest.



A third expert suggested that the language in Section 10(d) could be modified to encourage the

adoption of complaint procedures in human rights treaties. To this end, he recommended

changing the phrase “or adjudication” to “adjudication, or complaint mechanisms,” in paragraph

10(d).

8. Obligations of the mass media (Section 11)

One expert suggested adding the following sentence to this Section, so as to safeguard the

freedom of expression this Section assures:

All means of mass communication including the

press, radio and television shall operate within the

principles and objectives set out in this constitution

regarding the responsibility and accountability of

the government of Sierra Leone

Another expert recommended adding social media, blogs and all other electronic media should

be included in this section, to ensure that the freedom guaranteed in this Section covers more

than traditional mass media.

9. Enhancement of national culture (Section 12)

Only one change was recommended for this Section, namely to delete, as unnecessary

restrictions, in Subsections 12(a) and (b) the phrases “which is compatible with national

development” and “compatible with national development,”

10. Duties of the Citizen (Section 13)

An expert endorsed the 2008 Constitution reports suggestion that the duty to protect the

environment should be added to Section 13, and for that purpose, he recommended adding the

following language:

Mindful also of its responsibility toward future

generations, the state shall protect the natural

foundations of life and animals by legislation and,

in accordance with law and justice, by executive

and judicial action, all within the framework of the

constitutional order.

The following specific language changes were recommended to Section 13:

1. In Subsection 13(b), delete “the National Flag,

the National Anthem,” because “ideals and

institutions” can be respected without requiring

respect to the flag or national anthem.



2. Also in Subsection 13(b), delete “so that

loyalty…” as unnecessarily restrictive to the reasons

for cultivating nationalism and patriotism.

3. In Subsection 13(g), delete “work conscientiously

in a lawful and chosen occupation,” because this

phrase is too vague as to the obligations it purports

to create.

4. Delete Subsection 13(j) (which imposes a duty on

citizens to render assistance to State agencies)

entirely because it places too great a burden on

citizens and might result in the State or government

officials undue interference with citizens and their

freedoms.

Another expert suggested that this phrase, “help enhance the power, prestige and good name of

the state,” be deleted from Subsection 13(d); he noted that the duty of patriotism is encompassed

already in Subsection 13(d), through the phrase “defend the state and render national service.”

He further recommended that the meaning of “citizen” be defined in this Section.

11. Fundamental Principles Not Justiciable (Section 14)

An expert recommended adding the following phrase to Section 14:

and courts shall be guided by the provisions in this

Chapter when interpreting this Constitution.

Another expert recommended deleting this Section altogether, noting that the principles created

in this Chapter becomes merely hortatory claims if they are non-justiciable.

C. CHAPTER III – THE RECOGNITION AND PROTECTIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL

HUMAN RIGHTS AND PROTECTION OF FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL

1. New Section Recommended to Chapter IV

Noting the examples of Kenya’s Constitution (2010), at art. 20, and the South African

Constitution (1996), at §8, an expert proposed the following new two new Sections to this

Chapter:

(1) This Chapter applies to all laws and binds all

State organs and all persons.

(2) Every person shall enjoy the rights and

fundamental freedoms in this Chapter to the

greatest extent consistent with the nature of the

right or fundamental freedom.

(3) In applying a provision of this Chapter, a court

shall—



(a) develop the law to the extent that it does

not give effect to a right or fundamental

freedom; and

(b) adopt the interpretation that most

favours the enforcement of a right or

fundamental freedom.

(4) In interpreting this Chapter, a court, tribunal or

other authority shall promote––

(a) the values that underlie an open and

democratic society based on human dignity,

equality, equity and freedom; and

(b) the spirit, purport and objects of this

Chapter.

(5) In applying any right under Sections [insert

Section number for new proposed provision on

socio-economic rights] if the State claims that it

does not have the resources to implement the right,

a court, tribunal or other authority shall be guided

by the following principles––

(a) it is the responsibility of the State to

show that the resources are not available;

(b) in allocating resources, the State shall

give priority to ensuring the widest possible

enjoyment of the right or fundamental

freedom having regard to prevailing

circumstances, including the vulnerability of

particular groups or individuals; and

(c) the court, tribunal or other authority may

not interfere with a decision by a State

organ concerning the allocation of available

resources, solely on the basis that it would

have reached a different conclusion.

2. Additional New Section Recommended:

An expert pointed to Constitutions from two other African nations, specifically, §7(2) of South

Africa’s Constitution (1996) and art. 21 of Kenya’s Constitution (2010), and proposed the

following additional section to this Chapter of the Sierra Leone Constitution:

(1) It is a fundamental duty of the State and every

State organ to observe, respect, protect, promote

and fulfill the human rights and fundamental

freedoms in this Chapter

(2) The State shall take legislative, policy and other

measures, including the setting of standards, to

achieve the progressive realization of the rights

guaranteed under Sections [insert Section number



for new proposed Section on socio-economic rights

discussed below]

(3) All State organs and all public officers have the

duty to address the needs of vulnerable groups

within society, including women, older members of

society, persons with disabilities, children, youth,

members of minority or marginalised communities,

and members of particular ethnic, religious or

cultural communities.

(4) The State shall enact and implement legislation

to fulfill its international obligations in respect of

human rights and fundamental freedoms.

3. Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms of the Individual (Section

15)

One expert suggested adding language that would assure that, even in public emergencies or

other emergent conditions, the State could not infringe on the essential aspects of the freedoms

articulated in Section 15. He proposed the following language:

Even when restrictions (for example, public safety

and order, etc.) are imposed, no essential aspect of

an affected freedom or right shall be violated.

An expert wrote that Section 15 should be streamlined in its language to make it consistent with

the human rights provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

(“ICCPR”), in particular, articles 1, 2 (a), (b), (c), and 3. He proposed the following introductory

language, to precede Subsections 15(a), (b), and (c). He also recommended deleting the

concluding paragraph to Section 15 that follows 15(c), commenting that what constitutes “public

interest” can be the subject to controversy, and thus such language should not be in a

constitution.

Pursuant to international conventions ratified or

acceded to by Sierra Leone for the promotion and

protection of the human rights, the people of Sierra

Leone recognize that citizens of Sierra Leone and

persons present within the national territory are

entitled to the following inherent and inalienable

rights without distinction on the basis of, tribe,

race, colour, sex, language, religion, ethnicity,

political, or other opinion, national or social origin,

economic or, birth or social status, subject to the

respect of the individual and collective rights of

others:

A few experts recommended adopting the rights articulated in the Constitution report, so that

Section 15 would expand protected rights and include, for example, the right to passport; the

right of protection of environment; the right to education; and the right to dignity of the person.



Along these lines, one of these experts proposed, below, specific amendments to Section 15,

relying on the constitutional and international treaty provisions of other nations (cited after the

proposed language below):

(1) Whereas every person in Sierra Leone is entitled

to the fundamental human rights and freedoms of

the individual, that is to say, has the right, whatever

his regardless of race, tribe, place of origin,

political opinion, colour, creed or sex, but subject to

respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for

the public interest, to each and all of the

following—

(a) life, liberty, security of person, the

enjoyment of property, and the protection of

law;

(b) freedom of conscience, of expression

and of assembly and association;

(c) respect for private and family life, and

(d) protection from deprivation of property

without compensation; and

(e) passport;

(f) protection of the environment; and

(g) education, health and dignity.

(2) The subsequent provisions of this Chapter shall

have effect for the purpose of affording protection

to the aforesaid rights and freedoms, subject to such

limitations of that protection as are contained in

those provisions, being limitations designed to

ensure that the enjoyment of the said rights and

freedoms by any individual does not prejudice the

rights and freedoms of others, or the public interest

and shall not be limited except by law, and then

only to the extent that the limitation is reasonable

and justifiable in an open and democratic society

based on human dignity, equality and freedom,

taking into account all relevant factors, including––

(a) the nature of the right or fundamental

freedom;

(b) the importance of the purpose of the

limitation;

(c) the nature and extent of the limitation;

(d) the need to ensure that the enjoyment of

rights and fundamental freedoms by any

individual does not prejudice the rights and

fundamental freedoms of others; and



(e) the relation between the limitation and

its purpose and whether there are less

restrictive means to achieve the purpose.

(3) The State or a person seeking to justify a

particular limitation shall demonstrate to the court,

tribunal or other authority that the requirements of

this Article have been satisfied.

(4) Despite any other provision in this Constitution,

the following rights and fundamental freedoms shall

not be limited––

(a) freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman

or degrading treatment or punishment;

(b) freedom from slavery or servitude;

(c) the right to a fair trial; and

(d) the right to an order of habeas corpus.

S. Afr. Const., 1996 §§7(2), 27(1), 36; Kenya Const., 2010 arts. 21, 24, 25, 43(1)(a);

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 12(1) (“ICESCR”);

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (“CEDAW”),

art. 12; CRC, art. 24; Banjul Charter, art. 16; Rwanda Const., 2003 art. 41; Uganda Const., 1995

arts. 43(1) and 44.

Another expert emphasized that the right to access all public information is vital in order to

permit individuals to exercise their full economic, social, and political potential, and thus

constitutes today a fundamental human right. He therefore recommended that this section

include the liberty to access all public information. He further noted that the many forms of

electronic surveillance now available interfere with basic human rights, including the freedoms

of expression and association. Accordingly, he also recommended that this Section include a

specific right to be free from unreasonable electronic surveillance.

An expert proposed the following specific language changes, for the reasons explained below:

1. In the preamble paragraph, insert “including”

between “right,” and “whatever.” This amendment

would allow for expansion of the bases for

protecting against discrimination, for example to

include sexual orientation and class.

2. Also in the preamble, delete “and for the public

interest,” as this phrase imposes an unnecessary

limitation on the exercise of the freedoms created in

Section 15.

3. Delete 15(c), as this language does not articulate

a right, but rather an obligation.



4. Delete the final concluding paragraph, as it

repeats the preamble paragraph of Section 15.

4. Protection of Right to Life (Section 16)

The majority of experts recommended changes that either would eliminate or reflect disfavor for

the death penalty. One expert noted that Subsections 16 (2) (a)(b)(c)(d) are inconsistent with

section 8(a) of the current Sierra Leone Constitution, which protects the sanctity of life, that they

promote violence, and that contravene the rule of law and Part III, articles 6(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6), 7

of the ICCPR.

Two experts recommended deletion of Subsection 16(2) in its entirety. One of these experts

noted that Subsection 16(2) actually lists specific defenses, and such detailed provisions do not

constitute fundamental human rights that should are ordinarily contained in a constitution. He

recommended that the Constitution not articulate pro and anti-death penalty positions, and to that

end, suggested the following language changes to Subsection 16(1):

1. Insert “unlawfully” between “shall be” and

“deprived”.

2. Delete “intentionally except….”

The other of the two experts who recommended complete deletion of Subsection 16(2) cited

other constitutions and treaties (listed below), and proposed the following new Subsection 16(2),

and changes to Subsection 16(1):

(1) Every person has the right to life.

(2) No person shall be deprived of his life

intentionally except in execution of the sentence of

a court in respect of a criminal offence under the

laws of Sierra Leone, of which he has been

convicted to the extent authorized by this

Constitution or other written law.

See ICCPR, arts. 6(1), 7, Banjul Charter, arts. 4, 5; U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture and

Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Interim Report, General

Assembly, ¶53, U.N. Doc. A/67/279 (Aug. 9, 2012); Kenya Const., 2010 art. 26(1) and (3), S.

Afr. Const., 1996 §11, Tanz. Const., 1977 (as amended to 2005), art. 14.

One expert modified the proposed language in the 2008 Constitution Report (see ¶41 of that

Report), similarly adding a new Subsection (3), to Section 16. The Constitution report language

is reflected below, with the experts proposed changes (in italics) and deletions (strikeouts)

(b) the death penalty should be abolished and

replaced by life imprisonment for all crimes but for

the temporary exception of acts in all cases of



treason or other crimes of a political nature which

does not directly cause the death of another

person(s), and replaced by life imprisonment.

(c) that Parliament shall review the death penalty

every two (2) years with a view to its total

abolition.

5. Protection from Arbitrary Arrest or Detention (Section 17)

An expert focused on the need for the Constitution to provide the right counsel for indigent

accused, as well as the provision of a victims’ assistance fund for victims of violent crimes. He

suggested the latter would be separate from any compensation such victims obtained in court,

and could be funded through fines imposed on offenders. To these ends, this expert proposed the

following additional language to Section 17:

If a criminal defendant is unable to secure counsel

by her or his own efforts, the government shall

assign counsel for the defendant as prescribed by

law.

Persons who have suffered bodily injury or death

due to criminal acts of others may receive aid from

the government under conditions as prescribed by

law.

Noting that the period of detention of 10 days currently authorized in Subsection 17(3) violates

article 14(3)(a)(c) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. He therefore

recommended reducing this time period to 48 hours “or such justifiable period not exceeding 7

days as the circumstances of the case may require.” This expert further recommended also

shortening, from 72 to 24 hours, the time period for bringing before the court someone accused

of a non-capital crimes, non-environmental offences, or offences involving less than a life

sentence.

Another expert proposed repealing Subsection 17(1) entirely, and replacing it with the following:

(1) Every person has the right to freedom and

security of the person, which includes the right:

(a) not to be deprived of freedom arbitrarily

or without just cause;

(b) not to be detained without trial;

(c) to be free from all forms of violence from

either public or private sources;

(d) not to be tortured in any way;

(e) not to be subject to corporal punishment;

and

(f) not to be treated or punished in a cruel,

inhuman or degrading way.



This same expert then recommended moving Subsections 17(2)-(4), which protect the rights of

arrested and detained persons, to a new version of Section 23 she proposes (further below, in

discussion of Constitution Section 23). Similarly, another expert recommended moving all of

Section 17 to Section 23, and modifying the language as follows:

1. To Subsection 17(1), insert “unlawfully”

between “shall be” and “deprived.”

2. 17(1), delete “except as…,” because the

language otherwise gives unfettered powers to the

state.

3. Delete Subsections 17(1)(a-j). Change

recommended for same reason as immediately

preceding recommended amendment.

4. A new Subsection 17 (2), “No person can be

detained without reasonable suspicion of his having

committed or of being about to commit a criminal

offence,” to retain language in current Subsection

17(1)(f), aimed establishing a legal standard that

would trigger detention powers.

5. Similarly to recommendation from expert

mentioned above, this expert suggested reducing the

number of days specified in 17(3)(a), from “ten”

with “seven,” and in 17(3)(b) from “seventy-two” to

“forty-eight.” This expert commented that these

changes would be consistent with the proposal in

the 2008 Constitution.

7. As to the final paragraph after 17(3), replace

with “Any person who is unlawfully arrested or

detained shall be entitled to compensation.” This

change would avoid implying that there is only a

private cause of action as a remedy for violating the

provisions of protecting against unlawful arrest or

detention.

6. Protection of Freedom of Movement (Section 18)

An expert suggested that Sierra Leone may wish to include biodiversity as a “natural resource.”

Two experts recommended deleting Subsection 18(2), with one of these commenting that it is

superfluous. The other expert proposed a streamlined change to Section 18’s language, making it

broader and more encompassing. Referencing other constitutions and treaties, this expert

suggested deleting Subsections 18(2)-(7) in their entirety, and making the following language

changes (in italics) and deletions (strikeouts) to what is now Section 18(1):

(1) Every person has the right to freedom of

movement.



(2) No person shall be deprived of freedom of

movement, and for the purpose of this section the

said freedom means the right to move freely

throughout Sierra Leone, the right to reside in any

part of Sierra Leone, the right to enter or the right to

leave Sierra Leone, and immunity from expulsion

form Sierra Leone.

(3) No citizen shall be deprived to the right to

enter, remain in, or reside anywhere in Sierra

Leone.

See ICCPR, art. 12(3); Ghana Const., 1992 art. 21(g); Kenya Const., 2010 art. 39; S. Afr. Const.,

1996 §21; Rwanda Const., 2003 art. 23; Tanz. Const., 1977 art. 17.

Several experts expressed concerns about Subsection 18(3), with one of these recommending

deleting it entirely on the grounds that this Chapter conveying human rights should not address

granting any State rights. Two suggested deleting Subsection 18(3)(g), noting that it is

inconsistent with section 18(1), and articles 12(1), (2), (3), (4) of the ICCPR. One expert

recommended replacing 18(3)(a)’s current use of “interest of national defence” with “national

security”, public order, public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are

consistent with other rights recognized, promoted and protected by this Constitution.” He

commented that the term “national security” better captures the spirit behind this Section, and

that subjecting civilians to military activities violates the intent behind the ICCPR.

Another of the experts expressing concern about the impact of Subsection 18(3) wrote that this

provision could significantly undermine one or more individual rights assured in the

Constitution. He proposed that, to minimize the chances of this occurring, the Subsection could

instruct the courts to interpret it consistently with other sections of the Constitution, and include

specific cross-reference to sections that address individual freedoms. In the alternative, he

proposed the following limiting language, directed at the courts, could be added to 18(3):

This provision should be construed narrowly by the

courts in order to provide the widest possible

protection for individual rights consistent with this

section.

As to Subsection 18(4), one expert recommended adopting the proposed language from the 2008

Constitution Report (text below), and he added (in italics) some language to clarify how the

commission created under this proposal would be structured:

18(a) if any person whose freedom of movement

has been restricted by virtue only of such a

provision as is referred to in paragraph (a) of

subsection (3) so requests at any time during the

period of that restriction not earlier than thirty days

after he last made such a request during that period,

his case shall be reviewed by an independent and



impartial tribunal, established by law, comprising

not more than three persons from amongst persons

of not less than fifteen years’ standing entitled to

practice in Sierra Leone as legal practitioners;

18(b) Any tribunal has been set up established

under paragraph (a), the Chairman of that tribunal

consist of three members:

i. The Human Rights Commission shall

appoint the Chairman of that tribunal, who

shall be a lawyer.

ii. The Human Rights Commission shall

appoint the second member of that tribunal,

who shall not be a lawyer.

iii. The Sierra Leone Bar Association shall

appoint the third member of that tribunal,

who shall be a lawyer.

Commenting on the above changes, the expert said that the intent appeared to be to create a panel

(Human Rights Commission, “HRC”) comprised of two lawyers and one non-lawyer. Note that

the clarification this expert proposes also goes with language proposed elsewhere; seeking to

assure the HRC has the powers to investigate and adjudicate, in order to fulfill its mission. The

expert comments that officials reviewing the Constitution should consider and decide if this

specific structure meant to cover all HRC hearings or is unique here, to Section 18 of the

Constitution. Drafters may wish either to (a) move this structural provision down to the section

dealing specifically with the HRC, or (b) include an express statement in the HRC section that

other tribunal structures are permissible in other circumstances.

Similarly relying on the proposed changes reflect in the 2008 Constitution report, an expert

recommended replacing the current Subsection 18(4)(a) with

If any person whose freedom of movement has been

unlawfully restricted by any public official so

requests at any time during the period of that

restriction not earlier than thirty days after he last

made such a request, his case shall be reviewed by

an independent and impartial tribunal set up by the

Human Rights Commission.

7. Protection from Slavery and Forced Labor (Section 19)

Both experts commenting on this Section recommended deletion of Subsection 19(2). One

expert noted that (2) is over-expansive, and seems to allow forced labor in times of emergencies.

The other expert noted that 19(2) is inconsistent with the non-derogable nature of the right to

protection from slavery and forced labor.



It was recommended that Subparagraph 19(1) be retained as is, as the sole paragraph in this

Section.

8. Protection from Inhuman Treatment (Section 20)

An expert recommended deletion of this entire Section, indicating that it is already encompassed

in the proposed Subsection 17(1)(f), above, which would guarantee the freedom “not to be

treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way.”

Three experts recommended deletion of Subsection 20(2). Two experts of these expressed

similar concerns that Subsection 20(2) is so broad that it effectively creates a blanket exception

which allows the continuation of laws that permit inhuman treatment. He advised that, if

Subsection 20(2) is intended simply to articulate an exception for events that occurred prior to

acceptance of the Constitution then, at a minimum, this intent should be stated explicitly with,

for example, the following language:

no law or action that violates this right is permitted

from 1991 forward.

This same expert notes that perhaps Sierra Leonese courts have interpretations of Subsection

20(2) that would make the proposed language above unnecessary.

The second expert recommending deletion of Subsection 20(2) noted that Section 20 generally

should be read to be consistent with art. 15 of the ICCPR, which precludes retroactive

application of a law to punish individuals for conduct preceding enactment of that law.

Another expert recommended language changes to Section 20 so that its wording conforms to the

wording used in the Convention Against Torture.

9. Protection from Deprivation of Property (Section 21)

Two experts proposed deleting Subsections 21(2) through (5), with one stating these are

overbroad exceptions to the protection of property rights. The other of these experts, citing

Article 14 of the Banjul Charter, which generally protects the right to property, and the

constitutions of several African nations (referenced below), proposed that Subsections 21(2)

through (5) replaced with the following additions (italics) and deletions (strikeouts) to the

existing language of Section 21(1):

Every person has the right, either individually or in

association with others, to acquire and own

property:

(a) of any description; and

(b) in any part of Sierra Leone.

(2) No person may be deprived of property of any

description or of any interest in, or right over, any

property of any description except in terms of law of

general application, and no law may:



(a) permit arbitrary deprivation of property,

or

(b) limit, or in any way restrict the

enjoyment of any right under this Section on

the basis of any of the grounds specified or

contemplated in Section 27(4)

(1) (3) No property of any description shall be

compulsorily taken possession of, and no interest in

or right over property of any description shall be

compulsorily acquired, except where the following

conditions are satisfied, that is to say—

(a) the taking of possession or acquisition is

necessary is for a public purpose or in the

public interest and is carried out in

accordance with this Constitution and any

Act of Parliament in the interests of defence,

public safety, public order, public morality,

public health, town and country planning,

the development or utilization of any

property in such a manner as to promote the

public benefit or the public welfare of

citizens of Sierra Leone; and

(b) the necessity therefor is such as to afford

reasonable justification for the causing of

any hardship that may result to any person

having any interest in or right over the

property; and

(c) (b) provision is made by law applicable

to that taking of possession or acquisition—

i. for the prompt payment of

adequate compensation; and

ii. securing to any person having an

interest in or right over the property,

a right of access to the court or other

impartial and independent authority

for the determination of his such

interest or right, the legality of the

taking of possession or acquisition of

the property, interest or right, and the

amount of any compensation to

which he or she is entitled and for

the purpose of obtaining prompt

payment of that compensation.

(c) Provision may be made for compensation

to be paid to occupants in good faith of land



acquired under clause (b) who may not hold

title to the land.

(4) Parliament shall enact legislation to support,

promote and protect the intellectual property rights

of the people of Sierra Leone.

(5) The rights under this Section do not extend to

any property that has been found to have been

unlawfully acquired.

Banjul Charter, art. 14; Kenya Const., 2010 art. 40(1)-(6); Rwanda Const., 2003 art. 29; Tanz.

Const., 1977 art. 24(1)-(2); S. Afr. Const., 1996 §25.

An expert suggested inserting, in Subsection 21(1)(c)(i), the words “just and” between “of” and

“adequate,” so that the elements of justness/fairness are included in the adjudication of

compensation for the deprivations of property lawfully authorized under this Section.

Another expert proposed adding to Subsection 21(5) a right to appeal from the proposed Lands

Tribunal, to some competent authority above it.

10. Protection for Privacy of Home and other Property (Section 22)

One expert recommended that this Section should articulate specific protections against

unreasonable searches and seizures for internet searches, searches of electronic computing and

communications devices, and of stored electronic communications. Such protections would

recognize that much personal property today includes electronic devices that store sensitive

personal information. This expert further suggested that this Section of the Constitution should

extend to protecting the privacy of information in electronic communications and activities (such

as e-mail addresses, website URLs). This expert commented that beyond the content of e-mails

themselves, e-mail addresses and websites an individual may access convey personal information

about that individual; the Constitution should contain protection this sort of data, “metadata,” as

well. Finally, the expert also recommended that this Section contain a prohibition on

unreasonably invasive surveillance and monitoring technologies, such as thermal imaging

devices, without appropriate authorization. The expert suggested that the Constitution create a

privacy interest that guards against modern tracking technologies that enable surveillance beyond

the expectations of individual citizens (e.g., “keystroke monitoring” software which tracks

keystrokes, and wireless communications “sniffers” which can identify phone numbers and

Internet addresses accessed).

Two experts suggested deleting Subsection 22(2) as an overbroad exception to the right sought to

be protected here. One of these also recommended deleting 22(1), and that the following

language substituted:

Every person has the right to privacy, which

includes the right not to have—

(1) their person, home or property searched;

(2) their possessions seized;

(3) information relating to their family or private

affairs unnecessarily required or revealed; or



(4) the privacy of their communications infringed.

See S. Afr. Const., 1996 §14; Kenya Const., 2010 art. 31. See also Uganda Const., 1995 art. 27;

U.S. Const. amend. IV.

An expert recommended deleting the phrase “reasonably justifiable in a democratic society” at

the end of Section 22, as it may be the subjection of controversial interpretations. He further

suggested that to clarify this Section, the following additions (italics) and deletions (strikeouts)

should be made to Section 22(1) and 22(2)(a):

Section 22(1): Add “Unless required by law or

with his express consent”…

Section 22(2)(a): Replace “defence” with “national

security”

Finally, one expert advised that Subsections 22(2)(a) through (d) should be deleted, but 22(a)(e)

should be kept as it offers child and spousal protection.

11. Provision to Secure Protection of Law (Section 23)

One expert recommended that the age of 21 referred to in Subsection 23(3) should be changed to

18, to be consistent with the right to vote that is set out in Section 31 of the Constitution.

Regarding Subsection 23(4), an expert advised deletion of the phrase “to the extent that the law

in question imposes on any person charged as aforesaid the burden of proving particular facts,”

commenting that this provision is inconsistent with the presumption of innocence and right to

remain silent, which are reflected in art. 14 of the ICCPR.

One expert recommended adding to Subsection 23(5) a right to free legal counsel upon

demonstration of lack of ability to afford one. Another expert commented that the proviso in

Subsection 23(5), which limits the right to legal representation created in this Subsection to those

persons charged with a criminal offense, should be deleted; this expert commented that the right

to legal representation should not be prohibited at any level.

As to 23(9), another expert recommended deleting the second proviso of in that subsection

(regarding the trial of members of the defence forces), noting that it violates the principles of

equality before the law and against double jeopardy, contained in art. 14(7) of the ICCPR.

It was further proposed that Subsections 23(10) and 23(11) be deleted, on the basis that the

former deletion is consistent with the 2008 Constitution report’s recommendation, and the latter

contains a definition of “legal representation” that could need to change over time and that

therefore should not be contained in the more static document that is a constitution.

Finally, one expert suggested comprehensive changes to the whole of Section 23, through the

language below. The expert cited examples and support for these changes, which are footnoted.

(1) An arrested person has the right—



(a) to be informed at the time of arrest2 in

language that the person understands, of—

(i) the reason for the arrest;

(ii) the right to remain silent;

(iii) the consequences of not

remaining silent; and

(iv) the right of access to a legal

practitioner or any person of their

choice.

(b) to remain silent;

(c) to communicate confidentially with a

legal practitioner of their own choice, and

other persons whose assistance is

necessary;3

(d) not to be compelled to make any

confession or admission that could be used

in evidence against the person;

(e) to be held separately from persons who

are serving a sentence;

(f) to be brought before a court as soon as

reasonably possible, but not later than––

(i) forty-eight hours after being

arrested; or

(ii) if the forty-eight hours ends

outside ordinary court hours, or on a

day that is not an ordinary court day,

the end of the next court day;4

(g) at the first court appearance, to be

charged or informed of the reason for the

detention continuing, or to be released; and

(h) to be released on bond or bail, on

reasonable conditions, pending a charge or

trial, unless there are compelling reasons.

2 Report of the Commission to Review the Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991 at 22, ¶44 (2008) [hereinafter

Commission Report] (deleting “and in any event not later than twenty-four hours, of the facts” from Section

17(2)(a)). 3 Commission Report at 23, ¶45 (deleting “at his own expense” from Section 17(2)(b)).

4 ICCPR, art. 9(3) requires that arrested persons “be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by

law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release.” Under the

Kenyan and South African Constitutions, 48 hours is the outside limit on pre-hearing detention. KENYA CONST.,

2010 art. 49(1)(f) (24 hours); S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §35(1)(d). The Commission has determined that 48 hours shall

be the standard for non-capital offenses in Sierra Leone. Commission Report at 23, §46 (changing seventy-two to

forty-eight in Section 17(3)(b) of the 1991 Constitution). Neither international nor comparative law provides a

different time standard for capital offenses which is why the 10-day time frame provided for in the 1991

Constitution, Section 17(3)(a) (amended to seven days by the Commission Report at 23, §46) is removed.



(2) Everyone who is detained, including every

sentenced prisoner, has the right—

(a) to be informed promptly of the reason for

being detained;

(b) to choose, and to consult with, a legal

practitioner, and to be informed of this right

promptly;

(c) to have a legal practitioner assigned to

the detained person by the state and at state

expense, if substantial injustice would

otherwise result, and to be informed of this

right promptly;

(d) to challenge the lawfulness of the

detention in person before a court and, if the

detention is unlawful, to be released;

(e) to conditions of detention that are

consistent with human dignity, including at

least exercise and the provision, at state

expense, of adequate accommodation,

nutrition, reading material and medical

treatment; and

(f) to communicate with, and be visited by,

that person’s—

(i) spouse or partner;

(ii) next of kin;

(iii) chosen religious counsellor; and

(iv) chosen medical practitioner.

(3) Every accused person has a right to a fair trial,

which includes the right—

(a) to be informed of the charge with

sufficient detail to answer it;

(b) to have adequate time and facilities to

prepare a defence;

(c) to a public trial before an ordinary

court;

(d) to have their trial begin and conclude

without unreasonable delay;

(e) to be present when being tried;

(f) to choose, and be represented by, a legal

practitioner, and to be informed of this right

promptly;

(g) to have a legal practitioner assigned to

the accused person by the state and at state

expense, if substantial injustice would

otherwise result, and to be informed of this

right promptly;



(h) to be presumed innocent, to remain

silent, and not to testify during the

proceedings;

(i) to adduce and challenge evidence;

(j) not to be compelled to give self-

incriminating evidence;

(k) to be tried in a language that the accused

person understands or, if that is not

practicable, to have the proceedings

interpreted in that language without cost;5

(l) not to be convicted for an act or omission

that was not an offence under either

national or international law at the time it

was committed or omitted;

(m) not to be tried for an offence in respect

of an act or omission for which that person

has previously been either acquitted or

convicted;

(n) to the benefit of the least severe of the

prescribed punishments if the prescribed

punishment for the offence has been

changed between the time that the offence

was committed and the time of sentencing;

and

(o) of appeal to, or review by, a higher

court.

(4) Whenever this section requires information to be

given to a person, that information must be given in

a language that the person understands.

(5) Evidence obtained in a manner that violates any

fundamental human right or freedom in Chapter IV

must be excluded if the admission of that evidence

would render the trial unfair or otherwise be

detrimental to the administration of justice.6

12. Protection of Freedom of Conscience (Section 24)

Two experts suggested deleting from Subsection 24(1) the phrase “except with his own consent,”

as this language raises unnecessary questions regarding voluntariness of consent to waive the

right to freedom of conscience. One of these experts also advised to delete the word “propagate”

from this Subsection, commenting that states may justifiably need to restrict proselytizing of

religion by a person or group.

5 1991 Constitution, §23(5)(e) (providing accused interpretation assistance “without payment”).

6 S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §35; KENYA CONST., 2010 arts. 49 and 50.



Also regarding 24(1), one of these experts, citing the Convention on the Rights of the Child

(CRC), art. 14, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (African Children’s

Charter), art. 9, proposed the following changes:

(1) Except with his own consent, no person shall be

hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of

conscience and for the purpose of this section the

said freedom includes Every person shall have the

right to freedom of thought of conscience, and of

religion, freedom to change his religion or belief,

and freedom either alone or in community with

others and both in public and in private to manifest

and propagate his religion or belief in worship,

teaching, practice and observance.

As to 24(2), an expert further suggested deleting the phrase “Except with his own consent (or if

he is a minor the consent of his parent or guardian).”

Another expert supported the idea of adding to Section 24(1) some affirmative obligation on the

part of the State to refrain from promoting religion. This expert commented that, although the

Constitution provides for freedom of religion and discourages political parties from becoming

exclusive organs of particular religions (see art. 35(5)), it would be desirable to further separate

the State and religion and insulate the State from religious takeover. Among other things,

prohibitions could be added that bar the State from becoming a propagator of religion, from

favoring religion over non-religion, or favoring some religions over others, and from supporting

religions financially or otherwise or taxing to support religion or religious group, as well as bars

on the State from establishing any religion, and from participating in the affairs of any religious

organization or group.

Three experts recommended that Subsection 24(5) should be deleted, commenting that it is

unnecessary, or overbroad. One of these experts commenting that such an exception --

particularly in a constitution, which is designed to resist change -- could be interpreted in ways

that could make the rights themselves chimerical. Another expert, concerned about avoiding

words that could be the subject of disputes of interpretation, suggested replacing “democratic

society” with the words “democratic values,” in the second proviso of Subsection 24(5)(b).

13. Protection of Freedom of Expression and the Press (Section 25)

A majority of the experts recommended deleting the proviso in Subsection 25(1) that limits to

the Government only any ownership of television and other broadcasting media. This proviso

was deemed inconsistent with the principle of freedom of the press, and violative of the ICCPR.

One of the experts cited several other African nations’ constitutions as models for the

construction of this Section. See S. Afr. Const., 1996 §16(1); Kenya Const., 2010 arts. 33(1)(b),

(c) and 34(1); Uganda Const., 1995 art. 29(a) and (b). She proposed the following substitutions

and deletions to the current Subsection 25(1); this proposal echoes some of the changes proposed

by other experts, including the deletion of the existing exception that allows that a person can

consent to hindering their freedom of expression:





expression, and for the purpose of this section the

said Every person shall have the right to freedom of

expression, which includes the freedom to hold

opinions and to receive and impart ideas and

information without interference,; freedom from

interference with his correspondence,; freedom to

own, establish and operate any medium for the

dissemination of information, ideas and opinions,;

freedom of artistic creativity;7 freedom of the press

and other media;8 and academic freedom in

institutions of learning and scientific research.9

Provided that no person other than the Government

or any person or body authorised by the President

shall own, establish or operate a television or

wireless broadcasting station for any purpose

whatsoever.

(2) Everyone person has the right to access to:

(a) any information held by the State; and

(b) any information that is held by another person

and that is required for the exercise or protection of

any rights.

Another expert commenting on Subsection 25(1) did not propose deleting the proviso which

allows only the Government to own television and broadcast media, but he did recommend that

the Constitution should permit the private ownership and operation of the full range of Internet-

enabled and wireless systems and platforms, including websites, social media networks, and

streaming media systems.

One expert suggested adding that the procedures for regulating broadcast media should be

spelled out by Parliament or regulated by a Commission set up by the Parliament. A second

expert also mentioned the creation of a Commission, but preferred that it be established and

structure under the Constitution, so as to ensure the political neutrality of any such Commission.

This second expert also recommended that, to promote women’s rights, the Commission

members should include at least one woman, nominated by civil society organizations. The

following broad language was offered, to begin structuring a commission to regulate

broadcasting media:

7 S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §16(1)(c); KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 33(1)(b).

8 S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §16(1)(a); KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 34(1).

9 S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §16(a)(d); KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 33(1)(c). See also UGANDA CONST., 1995 art. 29(a) and

(b).



(1)The political neutrality of the Media Commission

shall be maintained.

As to Subsection 25(2), there were several varying comments about how to modify this provision

which currently establishes exceptions to the freedom of expression and the Press.

Two experts proposed deleting Subsection 25(2) entirely, because it gives too much control to

the government over the freedoms of expression and of the press. Citing several other

constitutions as examples, one of these experts further suggested omitting the proposed

Subsection 25(3) in the 2008 Constitution Report. See S. Afr. Const., 1996 §16(1); Kenya

Const., 2010 arts. 33(1)(b), (c) and 34(1); Uganda Const., 1995 art. 29(a) and (b). The other

expert recommended adopting the following language from the 2008 Report:

Everyone has right to access to (a) any information

held by the State; (b) any information that is held by

another person and that is required for the exercise

or protection of any rights.

Also as to Subsection 25(2), another expert proposed adding language that would specify that the

courts should narrowly construe any exception to the freedom of expression created in that

Subsection.

Finally, one expert recommended changing the use of the term “democratic society” in

Subsection 25(2) with “democratic values.”

14. Protection of Freedom of Assembly and Association (Section 26)

Relying on rights assured in article 21 (right of peaceful assembly) and 22 (right of freedom of

association) of the ICCPR, and on the constitutions of a number of African nations, an expert

proposed the following new language (italics), and deletions (strikeouts) to existing language:



assembly and association, that is to say, his Every

person shall have the right to assemble,

demonstrate, picket, and to present petitions to

public authorities10

freely and associate with other

persons and in particular to form, or belong to, or

participate in the activities of11

any political party,

trade unions or other economic, social or

professional associations, national or international,

for the protection of his their interests.

10

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 37; S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §17. 11

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 36(1).



(2) A person shall not be compelled to join a

political party, trade union or other economic,

social or professional association of any kind.

See ICCPR, arts. 21 and 22; Kenya Const., 2010 arts. 36(1)-(2), 37; S. Afr. Const., 1996 §17;

Uganda Const., 1995 art. 29(1)(d) and (e); Ghana Const., 1992 art. 21(1)(d) and (e).

This same expert, as well as another, recommended deleting the current Subsection 25(2)

entirely; it was noted that this Subsection is unnecessary in light of the limitations proposed

(above) for Subsection 15(2). Relying on the 2008 Constitution Report, one of these experts

suggested substituting the following, in Subsection 25(2):

Every trade union, employers’ organization and

employers have the right to engage in collective

bargaining.

A different expert recommended replacing the term “national defence” with “national security,”

in Subsection 25(2)(a).

15. Protection from Discrimination (Section 27)

Most experts proposed substantial changes to the existing Section 27, including deletion of it

entirely. One of the experts recommending deletion suggested that the prohibitions on

discrimination contained in Section 27 should be included in legislation, and not in the

Constitution. Another expert recommending deletion proposed the following new language,

based on the international treaties and constitutions cited below:

(1) Every person is equal before the law and has the

right to equal protection and equal benefit of the

law.

(2) Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment

of all rights and fundamental freedoms.

(3) Every person shall have the right to equal

treatment, including the right to equal opportunities

in political, economic, cultural and social spheres.

(4) The State shall not discriminate directly or

indirectly against any person on any ground,

including race, sex, pregnancy, marital status,

health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age,

disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture,

dress, language or birth.

(5) A person shall not discriminate directly or

indirectly against another person on any of the

grounds specified or contemplated in clause (4).

(6) To give full effect to the realisation of the rights

guaranteed under this Article, the State shall take

legislative and other measures, including



affirmative action programmes and policies

designed to redress any disadvantage suffered by

individuals or groups because of past

discrimination.

(7) Any measure taken under clause (6) shall

adequately provide for any benefits to be on the

basis of genuine need.

See ICCPR, art. 26 (recognizing equality of all before the law, equal protection of the law, and

prohibiting discrimination); CEDAW, arts. 1 (prohibition on discrimination against women), 2(a)

(establishing obligation of State Parties to eliminate discrimination against women), 15(1) (State

Parties must accord women equality before the law); HRC Gen. Cmt. 31, ¶8; CEDAW Gen. Rec.

28, ¶16; S. Afr. Const., 1996 §9(1); Tanz. Const., 1977 art. 13(1) and (5); Rwanda Const., 2003

art. 16; Ghana Const., 1992 art. 17(1) and (4); S. Afr. Const., 1996 §9(2); Uganda Const., 1995

arts. 21(1), 32(1), 33(5); Kenya Const., 2010 art. 27.

Two experts recommended adoption of the Subsection 27(5), proposed in the 2008 Constitution

Report, which sets up a Human Rights Commission. One of these experts commented that it

should be clarified whether the HRC is meant to be the only forum for complaint, or if

individuals may also bring an action before the courts. He also suggested considering whether

an appeal from the HRC should go to the High Court, given that the HRC process is likely to be

less formal, and thus to offer less procedural protections. Including the Court of Appeals in the

process, this expert commented, would allow full hearings, with a formal record, assuring the

right to fair trial that may not be included in HRC proceedings as presently contemplated. If the

purpose of this proposed 27(5) Subsection is to assure expeditious resolution of claims before the

HRC, this expert suggested the following language, which would still include the procedural

protections of the High Court, while emphasizing speedy process:

any appeal from, or any case brought by, the

Human Rights Commission must be heard by the

High Court and a determination reached in an

expedited manner consistent with justice.

There were several more “surgical” suggested language changes to section 27, including the

following:

1. 27(1), delete as unnecessary the phrase “Subject

to the provisions of subsection (4), (5), and (7)”.

2. 27(2), delete as unnecessary the phrase “Subject

to the provisions of subsections (6), (7), and (8)”

3. 27(3), insert “by such attributes as” between

“by” and “race.” This change would assure that the

list in (3) is not exclusive, and other grounds for

protecting against discrimination can be included.



4. 27(4-8), delete each of these paragraphs as

unnecessary, and add the following new language to

(4):

Subsections (1) and (2) shall not apply to any law

so far as that law makes provisions for the taking by

the Government of affirmative action to remedy or

ameliorate the effects of past discrimination against

any group listed in section (3).

Relying on Articles 12, 13, and 14(1) of the ICCPR, another expert proposed deletion of

27(4)(b), which currently excepts from protections persons who are not citizens of Sierra Leone.

Similarly, and like two other experts, this expert recommended deleting 27(8). He commented

that both these provisions are inconsistent with international Sierra Leone’s international treaty

obligations affording equality before the law for friendly aliens and their businesses that are

lawfully within the territory of Sierra Leone or persons who acquired citizenship by lawful

means other than birth. He also noted that the many refugees residing in the territory of Sierra

Leone are protected by the 1951 Refugee Convention. Sierra Leone will be in violation of its

international treaty obligations is its Constitution permitted the enactment of laws that

specifically discriminate these category of persons by virtue of their status. This expert further

noted that Subsection 27(8) is a jurisdictional ouster clause that violates the access to judicial

process and rule of law provisions of this Constitution.

16. Enforcement of Protective Provisions (Section 28)

Two experts proposed completely deleting Section 28. One of these recommended adopting the

proposed language in the 2008 Constitution Report, which reads as follows12

:

1. If in any proceedings in any court other than the

Supreme Court, any question arises as to the

contravention of any of the provisions of Sections

16 – 27 inclusive, that court may, and shall if any

party to the proceedings so request, refer the

question to the Supreme Court.

(a) The Rules of Court Committee may make

rules with respect to the practice and

procedure of the Supreme Court for the

purposes of this section;

(b) Parliament may confer upon the

Supreme Court such powers in addition to

those conferred by this section as may

appear to Parliament to be necessary and

desirable for the purpose of enabling the

court more effectively to exercise the

12

See Report of the Commission to Review the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone, pp. 34-35 (2008).



jurisdiction conferred upon it by this

section.

2. Parliament shall make provisions –

(a) for the rendering of financial assistance

to an indigent citizen of Sierra Leone where

his right under this Chapter has been

infringed, or with a view to enabling him to

engage the services of a legal practitioner to

prosecute his claims;

(b) for ensuring that allegation of

infringements of such rights are substantial

and the requirement or need for financial or

legal aid is real.

3. The Supreme Court –

(a) consisting of not less than five Justices of the

Supreme Court shall consider every question

referred to it under this Chapter for decisions, and,

having heard arguments by or on behalf of the

parties by Counsel, shall pronounce its decision on

such question in open court as soon as may be and

in any case not later than thirty days after the date

of such reference.

The second of the experts proposing deletion of Section 28 also referenced the 2008 Constitution

Report, but proposed different language, relying as well on provisions of the South African and

Kenyan constitutions (footnoted):

(1) Every person has the right to institute court

proceedings claiming that a right or fundamental

freedom in Chapter IV has been denied, violated or

infringed, or is threatened.

(2) In addition to a person acting in their own

interest, court proceedings under clause (1) may be

instituted by––

(a) a person acting on behalf of another

person who cannot act in their own name;

(b) a person acting as a member of, or in the

interest of, a group or class of persons;

(c) a person acting in the public interest; or

(d) an association acting in the interest of

one or more of its members.13

(3) The Chief Justice shall make rules providing for

the court proceedings referred to in this Section,

which shall satisfy the criteria that––

13

S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §38.



(a) the rights of standing provided for in

clause (2) are fully facilitated;

(b) formalities relating to the proceedings,

including commencement of the proceedings

are kept to the minimum and in particular

that courts shall, if necessary, entertain

proceedings on the basis of informal

documentation;

(c) no fee may be charged for commencing

the proceedings;

(d) financial assistance is provided to

indigent citizens of Sierra Leone where their

rights under Chapter IV have been

infringed, or with a view to enabling them to

engage the services of a legal practitioner to

prosecute their claims, provided that that

allegation of infringements of such rights

are substantial and the requirement or need

for financial or legal aid is real;

(e) courts, while observing the rules of

natural justice, shall not be unreasonably

restricted by procedural technicalities; and

(f) an organisation or individual with

particular expertise may, with the leave of

the court, appear as a friend of the court.

(4) The absence of rules contemplated in sub-

section (3) does not limit the right of any person to

commence court proceedings under this Section,

and to have the matter heard and determined by a

court.

Another expert proposed adding the following to Subsection 28(6), which creates the Supreme

Court, increasing the number of justices to assure speedier trial rights, and creation of a post for

“preliminary” judges who would substitute if regular judges are absent:

The Supreme Court shall be composed of nine

Justices and one preliminary judge. The Supreme

Court shall establish lower courts as necessary to

ensure that all people have access to the justice

system. The Supreme Court and other courts of

Sierra Leone shall guarantee and uphold the right

to a speedy and fair trial, and guarantee and uphold

the rights and freedoms of the people.



This expert also suggested the following new language, aimed at giving the government the

ability to sue political parties that act against the democratic order, so as to preserve and further

democracy:

Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behavior

of their adherents, seek to undermine or abolish the

free democratic basic order or to endanger the

existence of the Sierra Leone shall be

unconstitutional. The Supreme Court shall rule on

the question of unconstitutionality.

Finally, an expert expressed concern regarding the grant of original jurisdiction being limited to

the Supreme Court. He commented that consideration could be given to expanding original

jurisdiction in constitutional cases to other courts, subject to review by the Supreme Court. In

this way, important constitutional issues could be fully explored by lower courts before they

reached the Supreme Court, giving the Supreme Court the benefit of more extensive arguments

and judicial consideration. This expert further recommended adding to the list of rights in

Section 28(1) the mention of Section 15, in addition to Sections 16-27 presently included.

17. New Section Recommended: Authority of courts to uphold and

enforce fundamental freedoms and rights

Citing the 2008 Constitution Report (¶106), as well as several African nations’ constitutions and

certain international agreements, documents and recommendations (referenced below), an expert

suggested adding a section granting to the judiciary the authority to uphold and protect the

human rights articulated in this Chapter, through the following new language:

(1) The High Court has jurisdiction, in accordance

with Section 132, to hear and determine

applications for redress of a denial, violation or

infringement of, or threat to, a right or fundamental

freedom in Chapter IV.

(2) In any proceedings brought under this Section,

a court may grant appropriate relief, including––

(a) a declaration of rights;

(b) an injunction;

(c) a conservatory order;

(d) a declaration of invalidity of any law

that denies, violates, infringes, or threatens

a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of

Rights and is not justified under Section 15;

(e) an order for compensation; and

(f) an order of judicial review.

Kenya Const., 2010 art. 23(1) and (3); Ghana Const., 1992 art. 33(1); S. Afr. Const., 1996

§169(1); ICCPR, art. 2(3); HRC Gen. Cmt. 31, ¶15 (May 26, 2004); CEDAW, art. 2(b); CEDAW



Gen. Rec. 28, ¶32; Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 16: On State

Obligations Regarding the Impact of the Business Sector on Children’s Rights, ¶24, U.N. Doc.

CRC/C/GC/16 (Apr. 17, 2013).

18. Public Emergency (Section 29)

One expert recommended that Section 29 define what constitutes a “State of Emergency,” and

that this definition conform with ICCPR articles 4(1)(2)(3) (setting out obligations of State

Parties in instances of public emergencies, and what rights are non-derogable), and 5(1)(2)

(stipulating that violation of one group’s rights by another is not authorized, and that

fundamental rights specified in the ICCPR are non-derogable). He further recommended that

members of commissions mentioned in Section 29 should take an oath of office.

An expert proposed deletion of Subsections 29(4)-(18), and the following deletions (strikeouts)

and additions (italics) to this Section:

(1) Whenever in the opinion of the President a state

of public emergency is imminent or has

commenced, the President may, at any time, by

Proclamation which shall be published in the

Gazette, declare that—

(a) a state of public emergency exists either

in any part, or in the whole of Sierra Leone;

or

(b) a situation exists which, if it is allowed

to continue, may lead to a state of public

emergency in any part of or the whole of

Sierra Leone.

(2) The President may issue a Proclamation of a

state of public emergency only when—

(a) Sierra Leone is experiencing at or in

imminent danger of war, an invasion, a

natural disaster, an actual breakdown of

public order and public safety, or other

public emergency; or

(b) Sierra Leone is in imminent danger of

invasion or involvement in a state of war; or

(c) there is actual breakdown of public order

and public safety in the whole of Sierra

Leone or any part thereof to such an extent

as to require extraordinary measures to

restore peace and security; or

(d) there is a clear and present danger of an

actual breakdown of public order and public

safety in the whole of Sierra Leone or any

part thereof requiring extraordinary

measures to avert the same; or



(e) there is an occurrence of imminent

danger, or the occurrence of any disaster or

natural calamity affecting the community or

a section of the community in Sierra Leone;

or

(f) there is any other public danger which

clearly constitutes a threat to the existence

of Sierra Leone.

(b) the declaration is necessary to meet the

circumstances for which the emergency is

declared.

(3) Every Proclamation made under subsection (1)

shall lapse—

(a) be prospective;14

and

(a) (b) in the case of a Proclamation made

when Parliament is sitting at the expiration

of a period of seven days beginning with the

date of publication of the declaration; and

(b c) in any other case, at the expiration of a

period of twenty-one fourteen15

days

beginning with the date of the Proclamation,

unless it has in the meantime been approved

by or superseded by a Resolution of

Parliament supported by the votes of two-

thirds of the Members of Parliament.

(4) Parliament may extend a Proclamation of a

state of emergency—

(a) by resolution adopted—

(i) following a public debate in the

Parliament; and

(ii) by two-thirds of the Members of

Parliament and

(b) for not longer than three months at a

time.

(5) The Supreme Court may decide on the validity

of—

(a) a Proclamation of a state of emergency;

(b) any extension of a Proclamation of a

state of emergency; and

(c) any legislation enacted, or other action

taken, in consequence of a declaration of a

state of emergency.

14

Per recommendation of the The Constitution Report, ¶69. 15

TANZ. CONST., 1977 art. 32(3).



(6) Any legislation enacted in consequence of a

Proclamation of a state of emergency––

(a) may limit a right or fundamental

freedom in Chapter IV only to the extent

that—

(i) the limitation is strictly required by the

emergency; and

(ii) the legislation is consistent with the

Government’s obligations under

international law applicable to a state of

emergency; and

(b) shall not take effect until it is published

in the Gazette.16

(7) No Proclamation of a state of emergency, or

legislation enacted or other action taken in

consequence of any Proclamation, may permit or

authorise:

(a) the indemnification of the State, or of any

person, in respect of any unlawful act or omission;

(b) any derogation from this Section; or

(c) any derogation from a section mentioned in

column 1 of the Table of Non-Derogable Rights, to

the extent indicated opposite that section in column

3 of the Table following this Section.

[insert here the Non-Derogable Rights under

Section 29(7)(c) specified in memorandum from

expert Amy Senier]

(8) Whenever any person is detained without trial in

consequence of a derogation of rights resulting

from a Proclamation of a state of emergency, the

following conditions must be observed:

(a) An adult family member or friend of the

detainee must be contacted as soon as

reasonably possible, and informed that the

person has been detained.

(b) A notice must be published in the Gazette

within five days of the person being

detained, stating the detainee’s name and

place of detention and referring to the

emergency measure in terms of which that

person has been detained.

16

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 58(6); S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §37(4); TRC REPORT, ¶72.



(c) The detainee must be allowed to choose,

and be visited at any reasonable time by, a

medical practitioner.

(d) The detainee must be allowed to choose,

and be visited at any reasonable time by, a

legal practitioner.

(e) A court must review the detention as

soon as reasonably possible, but no later

than ten days after the date the person was

detained, and the court must release the

detainee unless it is necessary to continue

the detention to restore peace and order.

(f) A detainee who is not released in terms of

a review under paragraph (e), or who is not

released in terms of a review under this

paragraph, may apply to a court for a

further review of the detention at any time

after ten days have passed since the

previous review, and the court must release

the detainee unless it is still necessary to

continue the detention to restore peace and

order.

(g) The detainee must be allowed to appear

in person before any court considering the

detention, to be represented by a legal

practitioner at those hearings, and to make

representations against continued detention.

(h) The state must present written reasons to

the court to justify the continued detention of

the detainee, and must give a copy of those

reasons to the detainee at least two days

before the court reviews the detention.

(9) If a court releases a detainee, that person may

not be detained again on the same grounds unless

the state first shows a court good cause for re-

detaining that person.

(10) Subsections (8) and (9) do not apply to persons

who are not Sierra Leonean citizens or residents

and who are detained in consequence of an

international armed conflict. Instead, the state must

comply with the standards binding on the

Government under international humanitarian law

in respect of the detention of such persons.

See 2008 Constitution Report, ¶¶64-74 and pp. 129-130; ICCPR, art. 4(2) (protecting certain

specified rights as non-derogable); Tanz. Const., 1977 art. 32(3); S. Afr. Const., 1996 §37;

Kenya Const., 2010 art. 58(5)-(7).



An expert proposed the specific language changes below, for the reasons indicated:

1. 29(2)(c,d), reverse the order of these

subparagraphs so that the threat to public order

comes as the first condition;

2. 29(3)(b), replace “two-thirds” with “three-

quarters,” so that broader parliamentary support is

required before a President is afforded the powers

created under this Section.

3. 29(5), delete “or expedient,” because this section

would otherwise allow the invocation emergency

powers out of mere usefulness, rather than only in

instances when such powers are actually necessary.

4. 29(6) (a-d), delete a-d, and the language

recommended in the 2008 Constitution Report

(below, italics), with the suggested changes

(underlined):

Where a state of emergency exists, the President

will not derogate from the recognized international

requirements pertaining, but not limited to, to

certain human rights which have been identified in

Article 4 (2) of the United Nations International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as non-

derogate under any circumstances, such as the right

to life, the prohibition of torture, the principles of

legality in the field of criminal law, and the freedom

of thought, conscience and religion.

5. 29(13), replace “twelve months” with “three

months, renewable by Parliament for up to twelve

months,” so that emergency powers are more

temporally limited.

Another expert emphasized the importance of ensuring that any mandatory public of statements

of “public emergencies” or other government notices should be published through electronic

media in addition to the traditional print platforms. He commented that all government

information and communications intended for public access should be made accessible, to the

greatest extent feasible, through electronic new media in addition to traditional systems.

19. Interpretation of Chapter III (Section 30)

One expert commented on this Section, suggesting that it should be moved to the end of the

entire Constitution, and its definitions applied throughout the instrument.



20. New Section Recommended: Right to Dignity

Relying on provisions of the constitutions of other African countries, as well as international

charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, an expert recommended adding an

explicit Right to Dignity in the Constitution:

Every person has inherent dignity and the right to

have that dignity respected and protected.

See Banjul Charter, art. 5; Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art. 1; Kenya Const., 2010

art. 28; Tanz. Const., 1977 art. 12(2); S. Afr. Const., 1996 §10.

21. New Section Recommended: Equality in Marriage

An expert recommended this new section, based on rights articulated in certain other African

nations’ constitutions, and assured as well in CEDAW:

(1) A child’s best interests are of paramount

importance in every matter concerning the child.

(2) Every child has the right––

(a) to a name and nationality from birth;

(b) to free and compulsory basic education;

(c) to basic nutrition, shelter and health care;

(d) to be protected from abuse, neglect, harmful

cultural practices, all forms of violence, and

inhuman treatment and punishment;

(e) to parental care and protection, which includes

equal responsibility of the mother and father to

provide for the child, whether they are married to

each other or not; and

(f) not to be detained, except as a measure of last

resort, and when detained, to be held –

(i) for the shortest appropriate period of time; and

(ii) separate from adults and in conditions that take

account of the child’s sex and age.

(h) to have a legal practitioner assigned to the child

by the state, and at state

expense, in civil proceedings affecting the child, if

substantial injustice would

otherwise result; and

(i) not to be used directly in armed conflict, and to

be protected in times of armed conflict.

(3) In this section “child” means a person under the

age of 18 years.

(4) Children are entitled to be protected from social

or economic exploitation and shall not be employed

in or required to perform work that is likely to be



hazardous or to interfere with their education or to

be harmful to their health or physical, mental,

spiritual, moral or social development.

(5) For the purposes of clause (4) of this article,

children shall be persons under the age of sixteen

years.

See CEDAW, art. 16; ICCPR, art. 23; TRC Report, ¶¶ 369, 394; Rwanda Const., 2003 art 26;

Uganda Const., 1995 art. 31(1); S. Afr. Const., 1996 §15 (3)(a)-(b); Kenya Const., 2010 art. 45.

22. New Section Recommended: Children’s Rights

A recommendation was made to adopt a provision that would explicitly protect the rights of

children. A similar provision is contained in certain African nations’ constitutions, and is

generally endorsed in international law (citations below):

1) A child’s best interests are of paramount

importance in every matter concerning the child.

(2) Every child has the right––

(a) to a name and nationality from birth;

(b) to free and compulsory basic education;

(c) to basic nutrition, shelter and health

care;

(d) to be protected from abuse, neglect,

harmful cultural practices, all forms of

violence, and inhuman treatment and

punishment;

(e) to parental care and protection, which

includes equal responsibility of the mother

and father to provide for the child, whether

they are married to each other or not; and

(f) not to be detained, except as a measure of

last resort, and when detained, to be held –

(i) for the shortest appropriate period of

time; and

(ii) separate from adults and in conditions

that take account of the child’s sex and age.

(h) to have a legal practitioner assigned to

the child by the state, and at state

expense, in civil proceedings affecting the

child, if substantial injustice would

otherwise result; and

(i) not to be used directly in armed conflict,

and to be protected in times of armed

conflict.

(3) In this section “child” means a person under the

age of 18 years.



(4) Children are entitled to be protected from social

or economic exploitation and shall not be employed

in or required to perform work that is likely to be

hazardous or to interfere with their education or to

be harmful to their health or physical, mental,

spiritual, moral or social development.

(5) For the purposes of clause (4) of this article,

children shall be persons under the age of sixteen

years.

See generally, CRC, passim; African Children’s Charter, art. 1(1); Banjul Charter, art. 18(3);

Kenya Const., 2010 art. 53; S. Afr. Const., 1996 §28; Uganda Const., 1995 art. 34; Uganda

Const., 1995 art. 34(4)-(5).

23. New Section Recommended: Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Citing Kenya’s Constitution (2010), art. 54, an expert recommended adopting the following

provision to protect the rights of persons with disabilities:

A person with any disability is entitled––

(1) to be treated with dignity and respect and to be

addressed and referred to in a manner that is not

demeaning;

(2) to access educational institutions and facilities

for persons with disabilities that are integrated into

society to the extent compatible with the interests of

the person;

(3) to reasonable access to all places, public

transport and information;

(4) to use Sign language, Braille or other

appropriate means of communication; and

(5) to access materials and devices to overcome

constraints arising from the person’s disability.

24. New Section Recommended: Protection of Socio-Economic Rights

Noting that the ICESCR, of which Sierra Leone is a signatory, protects socio-economic rights,

and that provisions of certain African nations’ constitutions contain this protection (citations

below), an expert recommend adoption of the following language in a new provision to this

Chapter of the Sierra Leone Constitution:

1) Every person has the right—

(a) to the highest attainable standard of

health, which includes the right to health

care services, including reproductive health

care;



(b) to accessible and adequate housing, and

to reasonable standards of sanitation;

(c) to be free from hunger, and to have

adequate food of acceptable quality;

(d) to clean and safe water in adequate

quantities;

(e) to social security; and

(f) to education.

(2) A person shall not be denied emergency

medical treatment.

(3) The State shall provide appropriate social

security to persons who are unable to support

themselves and their dependents.

See Kenya Const., 2010 art. 43; S. Afr. Const., 1996 §§26, 27, and 29.

D. CHAPTER IV – THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE

1. Registration of Voters (Section 31)

There were no comments regarding this Section.

2. Electoral Commission (Section 32)

An expert recommended moving Section 33 (Functions of the Electoral Commission),

immediately after Subsection 32(1), which establishes the commission, commenting that

defining the functions of the Commission should precede the composition of the Commission.

He added that an oath of office should be required of Commission members, just as it is currently

required of members of the Judicial Commission, under Constitution Section 104(5). This expert

further recommended adding to Subsection 32(7), the following language, in a new subsection

(d):

Has lost his civic rights by conviction in a criminal

trial, or serious ethical breaches after due process.

The commissioners must take the oath of office and

declare their asserts before after their mandates.

Another expert suggested the following additions and deletions to the subsections indicated

below:

1. 32(3), replace “President” with “Parliamentary

Service Committee.” Substituting legislative

oversight would ensure greater independence of the

Electoral Commission.

2. 32(4)(b), delete “or if….” This change would

eliminate age restriction, as recommended in the

2008 Constitution Report.



3. 32(7)(b), delete entire. This change would

eliminate age restriction, as recommended in the

2008 Constitution Report.

4. 32(8), delete “or for misbehavior,” because this

language is too broad, non-descript.

5. 32(12), insert “and Parliament” after “President”

and before “and a copy,” for the same reasons as

above, regarding 32(3).

3. Functions of the Electoral Commission (Section 33)

See comment in previous section, where expert recommended moving Section 33, and placing it

just after Subsection 32(1).

4. Political Parties Registration Commission (Section 34)

One expert commenting on this Section suggested merging the current Subsection 34(4) with

34(1), so that the membership of the Commission and responsibilities of the members are

delineated together. This expert further proposed that an oath of office should be required, to

promote the integrity, authority and independence of the members. He also recommended

parliamentary vetting of Commission members.

Somewhat similarly to the above expert’s recommendation, another expert proposed that

references to the “President” be replaced with “Parliamentary Service Commission,” so that the

Commission is assured greater independence through being overseen by the legislature, rather

than the president. He suggested deleting 34(2), such that the President would have not official

role in structuring the Commission.

It was also recommended that a new subsection be added, 34(1)(e), to bring this Section in line

with the 2008 Constitution Report’s general policy to increase the participation of women in the

government:

and a member nominated by women’s civil society

organizations.

Further noting the 2008 Constitution proposal, it was suggested that the provision in Subsection

34(4) be deleted.

5. Registration and Conduct of Political Parties (Section 35)

To prevent conflicts of interest and to depoliticize security forces, national defence and the

public service, it was recommended that the following language, disqualifying certain persons

from leading a political party, be added to Subsection 35(4):

has lost his civic rights or is a serving member of

the defence forces, security forces and a civil

servant.



6. Secret Ballot (Section 36)

An expert recommended that the definition of “secret ballot” should specify it includes all

private and secure electronic voting systems. He commented that there is a strong likelihood in

the future that electronic voting systems will be employed and appropriate for some elections;

accordingly, rules governing electoral processes and systems should be crafted to permit future

use of electronic voting platforms, where they are found appropriate.

7. Referendum (Section 37)

One expert comment was received for this Section. It suggested that section 37 include an

introductory statement (before Subsection 37(1)) asserting the right of Sierra Leoneans to

conduct referenda, and the circumstances under which such referenda may arise. The expert

recommended this addition to add clarity and consistency to this chapter of the Constitution.

8. Constituencies and Elections (Section 38)

An expert recommended that the Constitution specify here the circumstances and the procedure

for dissolution of parliament, loss of parliamentary seats and procedure for filing vacant seats,

etc…He commented that such issues are critical matters pertaining to the exercise of popular

sovereignty that should be addressed in a constitution.

9. Filling of Vacancies (Section 39)

As to Section 39(1), one expert recommended changing the earliest time for replacement of a

vacant seat in Parliament from six months to two months. He commented that six months is too

long to wait to replace a vacant seat.

E. CHAPTER V – THE EXECUTIVE

PART I – THE PRESIDENT

The experts provided several comments and recommendations regarding the specific

sections within Part I, regarding the Office of the President.

1. The Office of the President (Section 40)

One expert offered a recommendation for changes to this Section, relying on the 2008

Constitution Report proposals on this Section, which give more power to the legislature. He

suggested the following language changes:

1. In Subsection 40(4)(the Proviso), delete, “within

the legislative competence of Parliament”.

2. In Subsection 40(4)(iii), add: “or by referendum

where the Agreement alters or seeks to alter an

entrenched provision of the Constitution.”



2. Qualifications for Office of President (Section 41)

An expert recommended deleting 41(b)’s requirement that a person running for president be

affiliated with a party. He commented that elimination of this requirement would open up the

office to other persons, who are not necessarily affiliated with an official party.

3. Election of President (Section 42)

Similarly to the recommendation for the immediately preceding Section, an expert recommended

deleting 42(1), so that the office of president is opened to persons not affiliated with a party.

4. Period During Which Presidential Elections Shall Take Place

(Section 43)

There were no comments offered for this Section.

5. Parliament to Make Laws for Election of President (Section 44)

An expert recommended adding an additional paragraph to this Section, specifying the grounds

on which the mandate of a president can be terminated, such as resignation, incapacity due to ill

health clinically ascertained, expiration of mandate, death or impeachment. He recommended

this addition to preclude legitimacy for terminations taking place by any means not spelled out in

this Constitution, such as military coups.

6. Presidential Returning Officer (Section 45)


7. Tenure of Office of President, etc… (Section 46)

An expert recommended that the President take an oath upon entering the Office of President,

and upon leaving it. The expert commented that the taking of such a formal oath and make

assertions of compliance with the provisions of Subsection 46(3) (which bars a President from

holding other offices or remunerated position, and prohibits the President from taking any

unapproved emoluments in the service of Sierra Leone).

8. President in Parliament (Section 47)


9. Incidents of Office, etc… (Section 48)


10. Vacancy in Office of President (Section 49)


11. Mental or Physical Incapacity (Section 50)




12. Misconduct by President (Section 51)

As to Subsection 51(1), an expert suggested the following additional language, to assure the

President due process of law:

The President shall be notified of the motion

alleging misconduct and shall be provided an

opportunity to be heard in person or by counsel.

Another expert recommended deleting the phrase in Subsection 51(2) “it shall meet in secret

session and shall not debate the motion, but.” He noted that the Constitution should not mandate

secrecy; he further pointed out that Subsection 51(5) allows the use of secrecy in certain

circumstances.

13. Temporary Filling of Vacancy (Section 52)

There were not comments offered for this Section.

PART II – THE EXECUTIVE

14. Exercise of Executive Authority in Sierra Leone (Section 53)


15. Vice President (Section 54)


16. Vacancy in the Office of Vice President (Section 55)


17. Ministers and Deputy Ministers of Government (Section 56)

An expert recommended changing in Subsection 56(1) to read “nominated to be,” rather than

“appointed.” He noted that this change would make the language consistent with the proposed

language for Subsection 56(2), contained in the 2008 Constitution Report.

This same expert also suggested deleting 56(2)(b) entirely; he commented that this prohibition

on officials being appointed to an Executive office when they have lost an election in the

immediately preceding election cycle is an unnecessary restriction on nominees.

Another expert proposed an additional new Subsection that would come before the existing ones,

and would state as follows:



(1) Parliament shall have the power to confirm the

appointment of all ministers and major public

officials or deny confirmation to potential

appointee as required by parliamentary

legislation.

This expert commented that the addition of the above language would allow for a balance of

power, offering a check on the personnel the President appoints through a confirmation process

and public hearings.

18. Oaths to be Taken by Ministers, etc… (Section 57)


19. Ministerial Vacancies (Section 58)


20. Establishment of Cabinet (Section 59)

An expert recommended, regarding Subsection 59(3), that the word “Government” be replaced

with “Executive,” and commented that the Cabinet does not determine policies for the entire

Government.

21. Collective Responsibility (Section 60)


22. Constitution of Offices (Section 61)


23. Administration of Ministries (Section 62)


24. Prerogative of Mercy (Section 63)


25. Establishment of the Office of Attorney-General and Minister of

Justice (Section 64)



Two experts recommended adopting the proposal in the 2008 Constitution Report, which

promotes transparency, and the independence of the Judiciary from the Executive. The Report’s

proposed language is as follows:17

(1) delete the words “Attorney-General & Minister

of Justice” and replace with the word “Attorney-

General,”

(2) the Office of Attorney-General shall be a public

office which shall be filled in the same way as that

of the Solicitor-General, i.e. he shall be appointed

by the President on the advice of the Judicial and

Legal Service Commission, with approval of

Parliament, and he shall, before assuming the

functions of his Office, take and subscribe the oath

as set out in the Third Schedule of the Constitution,

(3) the holder of the Office of the Attorney-General

must be a Sierra Leonean, and

(4) if a President so desires, he can appoint a

Minister of Justice, whose portfolio shall

include the courts, the Prisons and the Probation

service for administrative and political

purposes.

Another expert recommended deleting Subsection 64(3). Generally, he commented that, as a

Member of the Cabinet appointed by the President, and the Principal Legal Adviser to the

Government, the Attorney General is associated with the Executive. The expert suggested that

this posture favors separating the Attorney General from prosecutorial decision-making, in the

interest of promoting transparency and to promote confidence in the impartiality of prosecutorial

decision-making. Based on his experience, this expert underscored the importance of

prosecutorial authority being independent of the Executive with demonstrable impartiality

through the structure of the prosecutorial decision-making process. He noted that although under

the language of Subsection 66(8) the Attorney General is not subject to the direction or control of

anyone else, this mere assertion is mitigated by the fact that the Attorney General is a member of

the Cabinet and exercises ministerial responsibilities. The expert suggested that if there are some

prosecutorial matters over which the Attorney General may need to have some oversight (e.g.,

matters with international or serious national ramifications), that any such situations may be

specifically provided for, and addressed, in the Constitution.18

17

See Report of the Commission to Review the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone, pp. 39-40 (2008).

18

This expert noted that, in a separate memorandum submitted with his comments, he provided

examples of the approach he proposes, adopted in other jurisdictions. This memorandum is

available in the Appendix.



26. Solicitor General (Section 65)

One comment was provided for this Section, suggesting that in Subsection 65(2), the phrase “and

subject to the approval of Parliament” be inserted between “Commission” and “and.” It was

suggested this change promotes the transparency and independence of the Judiciary from the

Executive which is recommended in the 2008 Constitution Report.

27. Director of Public Prosecutions (Section 66)

An expert proposed deleting Subsections 66(6) through (8) entirely, then adding new

Subsections (6) and (7), containing the following suggested language:

(6) The powers conferred upon the Director of

Public Prosecutions by paragraphs (b) and (c) of

subsection (4) shall be vested in him to the

exclusion of any other person or authority:

provided that where any other person or authority

has instituted criminal proceedings, nothing in this

subsection shall prevent the withdrawal of those

proceedings by, or at the instance of, that person or

authority and with the leave of the court.

(7) In the exercise of the powers conferred upon

him by this section the Director of Public

Prosecutions shall not be subject to the direction or

control of any person or authority”. The remaining

sub-sections of that section shall then be

renumbered accordingly.

This expert further proposed that in Subsection 66(4), the words “Subject to subsection (3) of

section 64” are deleted, leaving this Subsection to commence with the existing words: “(4) The

Director of Public Prosecutions shall have power in every case, etc…”

Another expert recommended replacing throughout this Section the use of term “Attorney-

General and Minister of Justice” with “Attorney-General,” to make this Section consistent with

the recommendation of the 2008 Constitution Report which seeks to promoted transparency and

independence of the Judiciary and of prosecutorial functions.

28. Secretary to the President (Section 67)

An expert recommended replacing, in Subsection 67(2)(a) the term “Executive” with “Public

Service.” He commented that the Secretary to the Cabinet, as Head of Civil Service according to

Subsection 68(1), should advise President on Public Service matters.



29. Secretary to the Cabinet (Section 68)

As to Subsection 68(3), an expert recommended adopting the proposal in the 2008 Constitution

Report, which suggested the following new language:19

The functions of the Secretary to the Cabinet shall

include:

(a) acting as the Principal Adviser to the

President on Public Service matters;

(b) having charge of the Cabinet

Secretariat;

(c) responsibility for arranging the business

for, and keeping the minutes of, the Cabinet,

and for conveying the decisions of the

Cabinet to the appropriate person or

authority, in accordance with such

instructions as may be given to him by the

President;

(d) coordinating and supervising the work of

all administrative head of ministries and

departments in the Public Service;

(e) such other functions as the President

may from time to time determine.

30. Secretary to the Vice President (Section 69)


31. Power of Appointment Vested in the President (Section 70)

An expert suggested the following language changes to Section 70:

1. Add insert “subject to the approval of

Parliament” between “appoint” and “in.” This

change would ensure legislative input in the

appointment process for members of the judiciary.

2. Add to Subsection 70(b), “(for life tenure)” after

“the Supreme Court” and “(for a 20 year renewable

term)” after “Court of Appeal” and “(for a ten year

renewable term)” after “High Court.” He noted that

this would provide term limits to judicial

appointments, which now appear to be lifetime

appointments at all court levels.

19

See Report of the Commission to Review the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone, pp. 41 (2008).



32. Other Statutory Appointments (Section 71)


33. Office of Paramount Chief (Section 72)

An expert recommended deleting Subsections 72(4) and (5), as suggested in the 2008

Constitution Report, and adding the proposed language from that Report, which follows here:

(a) Election of Paramount Chiefs

The Chiefdom Councilors [sic] shall, whenever the

office becomes vacant by death or otherwise elect a

Paramount Chief, having regard to native law and

customs to be in charge of the chiefdom. The

Ministry of Local Government or the supervising

Ministry shall be responsible for the conduct and

supervision of the elections of all Paramount

Chiefs.

Qualifications

All Aspirants who are direct descendants of

recognized and established Paramount

Chieftaincy Ruling Houses in existence at the time

of Independence in 1961.

Disqualifications

No person shall be qualified for election as a

Paramount Chief if:

(a) He is or was a ward of a Paramount Chief

(b) If he is a Regent Chief

(c) He has been convicted and sentenced for an

offence which involves fraud, dishonesty, or rape

unless has been granted the presidential pardon or

five years after he serves the sentence.

Duties

a) Every Paramount Chief shall supervise the

collection of local and other taxes within the area

over which he or she has jurisdiction.

b) Every Paramount Chief shall maintain order and

good government in the area over which he or she

exercises jurisdiction.

c) Every Paramount Chief shall use his best ability

to prevent the Commission of offences within the

area over which he or she exercises jurisdiction.

d) Every Paramount Chiefs is the guardian of the

tradition and culture of his chiefdom.

Powers of Paramount Chiefs

Every Paramount Chief in Council may make by-



laws as may be deemed expedient for promoting the

peace, good order and welfare of the people within

his chiefdom.

Removal/Deposition of Paramount Chiefs

A Paramount Chief may be removed from office by

the President for any gross misconduct in the

performance of the functions of his office if after a

public inquiry conducted under the Chairmanship

of a Judge of the High Court or a justice of the

Appeal Court or a Justice of the Supreme Court, the

Commission of inquiry makes an a adverse finding

against the Paramount Chief, and the President is

of the opinion that it is in the public interest that the

Paramount Chief should be removed.

The report of the Commission of Enquiry shall, for

the purposes of this Constitution, be deemed to be a

judgment of the High Court of Justice and

accordingly an appeal shall lie as of right from the

Commission to the Court of Appeal, and if

thereafter the President is of the opinion that it is in

the public interest that the Paramount Chief should

be removed, it should be done accordingly.

Another expert recommended adopting a new Subsection 72(4), and renumbering 72(4) and (5)

sequentially thereafter. He suggested the new subsection, so that the grounds for replacing can

be clarified and streamlined to minimize the abuse of power:

(4) The Paramount Chief, at the time of her or his

inauguration, shall take the following oath: “I do

solemnly swear before the people that I will

faithfully execute the duties of the Paramount Chief

as established under the laws of Sierra Leone,

follow and defend the Constitution, pursue the

peaceful unification of the homeland, promote the

freedom and welfare of the people and endeavor to

develop and preserve the culture of our people.

Parliament should hold the power of impeachment,

not the presidency. In this case, any person against

whom a motion for impeachment has been passed

shall be suspended from exercising her or his power

until the impeachment has been adjudicated.



F. CHAPTER VI – THE LEGISLATURE

PART I – COMPOSITION OF PARLIAMENT

1. Establishment of Parliament (Section 73)

One expert commented on this section, suggesting that to make Parliament more autonomous,

the proposed new language for Subsection 73(1) contained in the 2008 Constitution Report

should be adopted. That proposed language is as follows:

There shall be a Parliament consisting of:

The Senate, The House of Representatives (whose

members shall be referred to as Members of

Parliament), and The Speaker.

2. Members of Parliament (Section 74)

So that the Parliament can ascertain the integrity of its members and compliance with the

provisions of this Constitution, an expert recommended the addition of a Subsection 74(1)(c). IN

this Subsection, a Commission set up to validate parliamentary mandates would be established,

and would conduct this validation process before any members can take an oath of office.

Another expert recommended deletion of 74(1)(a) and (b), and adoption of the terms in the 2008

Constitution Report:

Members of the House of Representatives shall

consist entirely of members

elected by popular ballot.

3. Qualifications for Members of Parliament (Section 75)

Two experts recommended changing the age for holding a seat in Parliament, in Subsection

75(1)(b), from 21 to 18, so as to comply with international law, and to be consistent with the

change for the age for eligibility to conscript in the Sierra Leone armed forces, which is now also

18.

Two experts suggested that the phrase “otherwise than by naturalization,” be deleted as an

unnecessary discrimination against naturalized citizens, and the basis for such discrimination

appears unfounded. An expert also proposed to deleted 75(1)(c) and the proviso in 75(1), which

place conditions and restrict the pool of persons who could run for Parliament.

4. Disqualifications for Members of Parliament (Section 76)

An expert suggested changing the word “adjudged” in Subsection 76(1)(c), to “clinically

certified,” commenting that since lunacy is a medical condition, the assessment for that condition

should be conducted by a medical doctor.



Two experts proposed deleting Subsection 76(1)(a) as an unjustified discrimination on the ability

of naturalized citizens to serve in Parliament. One of these experts further recommended

deleting 76(1)(d), (e), (f), (g), and (h). He also suggested shortening the period during which a

person who has served on any commission created under the Constitution cannot run for

Parliament, from 12 months following departure from such a commission, to six months. This

change would allow someone to run for Parliament sooner than permitted under the current

Constitution.

5. Tenure of Seats of Members of Parliament (Section 77)

Two experts recommended deleting from Subsection 77(i). One of these experts opined that

financial woes should not serve as a bar to holding a seat in Parliament, and the other noted that

such a restriction on a Member of Parliament would compromise their independence.

An expert also proposed to delete Subsections 77(k), (l) and (m), commenting that matters of

party affiliation should not be used to determine whether a member continues to hold his seat.

Similarly to the preceding Section 76, an expert recommended changing the word “adjudged” to

“clinically certified,” in Subsection 77(2), with respect to determining the mental state of a

Member of Parliament, so that the assessment of such a medical condition is made by a medical

doctor. Also as to 77(2), this expert further proposes to delete the phrase, “sentenced to death or

imprisonment” and to replace it with “convicted of a capital offence.” He noted that this

amendment would make Section 77 consistent with Sierra Leone’s commitment under Article 6

of the ICCPR, which protects the right to life and bars deprivation of life without due process of

law.

6. Determination of Question as to Membership of Parliament (Section

78)

To clarify the grounds for appealing to determine the question of membership in Parliament, as

set out Subsection 78(2), an expert recommended inserting in Subsection 78(1)(a) the words “or

disqualified,” between, “elected” and “as.” This additional language therefore would provide an

appeal to review of the legitimacy membership in the Parliament, as currently allowed, as well as

the review of the basis for disqualification from such membership.

7. The Speaker (Section 79)

An expert suggested deleting from Subsection 79(1) the phrase “and who are qualified…” This

deletion would eliminate unnecessary language, while making no substantive change to the

requirements contained in this Subsection. He further recommended inserting in Subsection

79(2) and (4)(d) the word “all,” between “Two-thirds” and “the Members.” This change would

clarify the majority votes needed to elect the Speaker.

Another expert recommended adding to Subsection 79(3) a subsection providing that no one can

hold the post of Speaker if she or he is clinically certified to be of unsound mind. This expert

also recommended adding to Subsection 79(6) a requirement that a person taking the oath as

Speaker assert his qualifications and compliance with any applicable regulations for the position.



8. Deputy Speaker (Section 80)


9. Election of Speaker and Deputy Speaker (Section 81)


10. Clerk of Parliament (Section 82)


11. Oath to be Taken by Members of Parliament (Section 83)

To guard against corruption, to encourage transparency, and to help assure the integrity of the

Members of Parliament, and expert recommended adding to that Members should assert his or

her qualifications and attest he or she will comply with any applicable regulations to taking that

office.

Part II – SUMMONING, PROROGATION AND DISSOLUTION

12. Sessions of Parliament (Section 84)

An expert recommended deleting from Section 84(1) the phrase “President may by Proclamation

appoint,” and replacing it with “President may request and Parliament by a 2/3 majority

approve…” The expert noted that as currently written, Section 84 gives the President too great a

power to interfere with Parliament by controlling when sessions of Parliament may commence.

He opined that adding a requirement for the approval of two-thirds of the Members of Parliament

would assure Parliament’s role in commencing sessions of its own body.

13. Life of Parliament (Section 85)


14. Sittings of Parliament (Section 86)

To define the circumstances under which the President may convene the Parliament, and limit

the arbitrary use of the power to convene Parliament, an expert proposed the following new

language for Subsection 86(1):

The President may at any time request the meeting

of Parliament to address any matter of national

significance.

15. General Election (Section 87)




PART III – PROCEDURE IN PARLIAMENT

16. Presiding in Parliament (Section 88)


17. Quorum in Parliament (Section 89)


18. Use of English in Parliament (Section 90)


19. Voting in Parliament (Section 91)


20. Unqualified Persons Sitting and Voting (Section 92)

An expert recommended adding a requirement for a process validating the mandate of Members

of Parliament (see comments in Section 74 in this regard). He also suggested that the fine

specified here for any Member who violates the rules by voting when not permitted to do so,

underscoring that this kind of breach of the responsibilities of members of Parliament should be

punished with a greater fine.

21. Committees in Parliament (Section 93)

An expert recommended adding here the creation of a Committee or Commission to validate

parliamentary mandates (see reference to such Commission in comments regarding Section 74).

22. Regulation of Procedures in Parliament (Section 94)


23. Contempt of Parliament (Section 95)


24. Criminal Proceedings (Section 96)

One expert commented on this Section, noting that Parliament should be made to elect whether

to institute contempt proceedings, or forward for criminal prosecution in the courts. He noted

that to avoid infringing on Article 14 of the ICCPR, which prohibits double jeopardy, contempt

proceedings and criminal prosecution should not both be available for the same offense.



PART IV – RESPONSIBILITIES, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES

25. Responsibilities of Members of Parliament (Section 97)

One expert noted that a requirement should be added requiring Members to declare their duty to

comply with regulations and avoid conflicts of interest. He commented that since Parliament

exercises oversight over government services, Members should not be able to derive benefits

from the very services they oversee in their service to the Government. Therefore, a declaration

of compliance with regulations would help guard against corruption and conflicts of interests.

26. Freedom of Speech and Debate (Section 98)


27. Parliamentary Privileges (Section 99)

An expert recommended deleting Subsections 99(2), (3), (4), and (5) because they refer to

defamation claims against Members of Parliament, when the Parliamentary Privilege is designed

to ensure immunity against defamation claims.

28. Immunity from Service of Process and Arrest (Section 100)

An expert recommended adopting the proposal for this Section in the 2008 Constitution Report,

which suggested the amendments below (in italics) to the existing language:20

No civil or criminal process issuing from any court

or place out of Parliament shall be

served on or executed in relation to the Speaker or a

Member or the Clerk of Parliament

or Minister of Government or Deputy Minister

while he is at work or on his way to attending or

returning from any proceedings of Parliament or

Ministerial Office.

29. Immunity from Witness Summons (Section 101)


30. Immunity from Serving as Juryman (Section 102)


20

See Report of the Commission to Review the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone, p. 51 (2008).



31. Immunity from Publication of Proceedings (Section 103)

It was suggested that the phrase at the end of this Section, “or otherwise in want of good faith”

be deleted. This expert commented that perhaps an exception to the immunity created in Section

103 could be accepted upon a showing of “malice,” but that the above phrase extends too broad

an exception to this immunity. The expert cited to the case of Reynolds v. Times Newspaper

(1999), from the British House of Lords, as an example for the use of the “malice” exception.

32. Privileges of Witnesses (Section 104)

An expert commented that witnesses should elect whether to testify under oath, so as to promote

integrity of testimony given before the Parliament.

PART V – EXERCISE OF LEGISLATIVE POWER

33. Power to Make Laws (Section 105)


34. Mode of Exercising Legislative Power (Section 106)

To make the Constitution consistent with Articles 9(1), 15(1) of the ICCPRs, which prohibit

retroactive application of laws, an expert recommended deletion of the part of Subsection 106(5)

that allows Parliament to make retroactive laws.

This same expert also recommended changing the first phrase in Subsection 106(8), so that it

begins as follows:

Where a bill is returned to Parliament or deemed

returned at the expiration of the period stated in

subsection 7. . .

He further noted that the delegation of authority in Subsection 106(9), which would allow

Parliament to delegate to other entities or individuals the power “to make statutory instruments,”

should be delineated and clearly defined.

As to Subsection 106(4), an expert suggested replacing the word “President” with “the Clerk of

Parliament.” This change better reflects the practical operation of Parliament. He also

recommended deleting all words in Subsection 106(5) after “but Parliament may….” This

deletion would avoid giving Parliament the power to delay implementation of laws properly

passed and publicly noticed. Also, to make clear in Subsection 106(8) the number of votes

required to overcome a Presidential veto of legislation, it was recommended to insert “all”

between “two-thirds” and “the Members.”



35. Minister May Introduce Bill and Be Summoned to Parliament

(Section 107)


36. Alteration of Constitution (Section 108)

One expert commented that some constitutional provisions are more important than others in

preserving constitutional freedoms and rule of law principles and thus, such provisions may

warrant requiring a greater majority of Members voting to amend them, such as three-quarters of

all the Members of Parliament, rather than two-thirds. He therefore recommended amending this

Section to provide for different procedural requirements before amending specified sections of

the Constitution. Such an amendment could be accomplished, he suggests, by deleting the

current Subsection (3) and replacing it with (3) and (4) that would set out the different

requirements for amendment specified aspects of the Constitution currently listed under

Subsection (3). This expert further recommended that Subsection 108(5) be amended, so that in

addition to supervision of any referendum by an Electoral Commission, as currently provided, a

referendum should also be clearly presented to the public by ensuring that there is sufficient time

for the public’s review of it.

To make clear in Subsection 108(2) the number of votes from Members required to approve a

referendum, one expert recommended inserting “all” between “two-thirds” and “the Members.”

37. Residual Authority of Parliament (Section 109)


PART VI - FINANCE

38. Authorisation for Imposition of Taxation (Section 110)


39. Consolidated Fund (Section 111)


40. Authorisation of Expenditure from Consolidated Fund (Section 112)


41. Authorisation of Expenditure in Advance of Appropriation (Section

113)


42. Withdrawals of Monies for General Revenues (Section 114)




43. Remuneration of President and Certain Other Officers (Section 115)

To guard against corruption help promote the integrity of government officers, an expert

recommended adding the requirement of a declaration, to be given prior to and after assuming

office, in which the officers would assert their qualifications and attest they will comply with any

applicable regulations.

44. Contingencies Fund (Section 116)


45. Public Debt (Section 117)


46. Loans (Section 118)


47. Establishment of the Office of Auditor-General (Section 119)

An expert recommended adding two new Subsections, 119(a) and (b), with the following

proposed language:

119(a) The Independent Constitutional Offices shall

seek to support democracy and the Rule of Law. All

institutions of the state must facilitate their work.

These offices shall enjoy political, administrative

and financial independence and autonomy. They

shall be endowed, by law, with legal personality.

They shall submit an annual report to the

Parliament, with each report being discussed in a

special Plenary Session. Further, matters shall be

regulated by law, in the case of each Independent

Constitutional Office.

The Independent Constitutional Offices comprise:

the Electoral Commission; the Political Parties

Registration Commission; Auditor-General of

Sierra Leone; Director of Public Prosecutions;

Judicial and Legal Service Commission;

Ombudsman; (any) Commissions of Inquiry; Police

Council; Defence Council … [Add additional

bodies, if new Offices are created]

119(b)

1. The provisions of this section apply to the

members of the Independent Constitutional



Offices who have been directly appointed as

member.

2. A member may be removed from office

only by way of the procedures specified in

Section 137 of this Constitution.

3. (i) The term of office of a members shall

be seven years; (ii) A member may be re-

appointed once.

Another expert suggested word changes to Subsections 119(1) and 119(14), replacing “Public

Service Commission” with “the Civil Service Commission and the Audit Service Commission.”

Finally, one expert recommended adding the requirement of a declaration, to be given prior to

and after assuming office, swearing compliance with any applicable regulations, so as to promote

integrity and transparency of the office undertaken.

G. CHAPTER VII – THE JUDICIARY

PART I – THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE

1. Establishment of the Judiciary (Section 120)

As to Subsection 120(1), an expert recommended adoption of the 2008 Constitution Report’s

proposal to add here the elements of administration and supervision of the Judiciary, so as to

promote the independent operation of the Judiciary. The Report’s proposal is as follows (in

italics):21

The Judicial power of Sierra Leone shall be vested

in the Judiciary of which the Chief Justice shall be

the Head and shall be responsible for the

administration and supervision thereof.

As to Subsection 120(3), an expert opined that the phrase “or any other law…” is ambiguous,

and could suggest that the legislature can enact statutes that supersede the Constitution. To

remove this ambiguity, the expert recommended adding a clause or sentence to this subsection

stating as follows:

In the event of conflict between this Constitution

and any other law, the Constitution shall prevail.

One expert suggested adding “national security” to Subsection 120(6), which lists the grounds

for closing judicial proceedings.

The following changes to specific subsections were also recommended, for the reasons articulate

below:

1. As to Subsection 120(1), add “and shall be

responsible for the administration and supervision

21




thereof.” This will ensure that the supervisory

functions over the courts are controlled by the

Judiciary.

2. As to Subsection 120(3), delete “or any other

law,” to make clear that the Judiciary is subject to

the Constitution, and that other laws enacted would

not control the Judiciary.

3. As to Subsection 120(6), delete “Save as may

be….order,” because all court decisions should be

public.

4. Regarding Subsection 120(14), add “Any

member of the Judicature should recuse himself

from any judicial proceeding of which he has or has

had an interest.” This addition would promote the

impartiality and independence of the Judiciary.

Another expert recommended deleting Subsections 120(5), (7), (10)-(14), (16). The expert

further suggested the following additions (italics) and deletions (strikeouts) to the existing

language of Section 120 (citations and comments supporting these amendments are footnoted):

(1) The Judicial power of Sierra Leone shall be

vested in the Judiciary of which the Chief Justice

shall be the Head and shall be responsible for the

administration and supervision thereof.

(2) The Judiciary shall have jurisdiction in all

matters civil and criminal including matters relating

to this Constitution, and such other matters in

respect of which Parliament may by or under an Act

of Parliament confer jurisdiction on the Judiciary.

(2) In the exercise of its judicial functions, the

Judiciary shall be:

(a) subject to only this Constitution or any other

law, and shall not be subject to the control or

direction of any other person or authority;22

(b) guided by the following principles:

(i) justice shall be done to all, irrespective of status;

(ii) justice shall not be delayed;23

(iii) justice shall be administered without undue

regard to procedural technicalities; and

22

This captures the spirit of Section 23(2) of the 1991 Constitution (“Any court or other authority prescribed by law

for the determination of the existence or extent of civil rights or obligations shall be independent and impartial”). 23

This expands upon Section 23(2) of the 1991 Constitution (“where proceedings for such determination are

instituted by or against any person or authority or the Government before such court or authority, the case shall be

given fair hearing within a reasonable time.”).



(iv.) the purpose and principles of this Constitution

shall be protected and promoted.24

(3) (a) The Judicature shall consist of the Supreme

Court of Sierra Leone, the Court of Appeal and the

High Court of Justice which shall be the superior

courts of record of Sierra Leone and which shall

constitute one Superior Court of Judicature, and

such other inferior coordinate, subordinate, and

traditional courts as Parliament may by law

establish.25

(b) Parliament shall determine the jurisdiction and

functions of the courts contemplated in clause (a).26

(6) (5) (a) Save as may be otherwise ordered by a

Court in the interests of public morality, public

safety or public order, all proceedings of every

Court, including the announcement of the decision

of the court, shall be held in public.

(b) The Chief Justice shall promulgate Rules to give

effect to the publicity of proceedings contemplated

in subsection (a).

(6) A Judge of the Superior Court of Judicature

shall not be liable to any action or suit for any

matter or thing done by him in good faith in the

lawful performance of his judicial functions.27

(15) (7) No office of Judge of the High Court,

Justice of Appeal or Justice of the Supreme Court

shall be abolished while there is a substantive

holder thereof.

24

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 159 (same as proposed amendment); S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §165 (“(1) The judicial

authority of the Republic is vested in the courts. (2) The courts are independent and subject only to the Constitution

and the law, which they must apply impartially and without fear, favour or prejudice. (3) No person or organ of state

may interfere with the functioning of the courts. . . (6) The Chief Justice is the head of the judiciary and exercises

responsibility over the establishment and monitoring of norms and standards for the exercise of the judicial

functions of all courts.”). 25

S. AFR. CONST., 1996 §166 (courts include: “(c) . . . any high court of appeal that may be established by an Act of

Parliament to hear appeals from any court of a status similar to the High Court of South Africa . . . and (e) any other

court established or recognised in terms of an Act of Parliament, including any court of a status similar to either the

High Court of South Africa or the Magistrates’ Courts.”); KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 162(2) (permitting Parliament to

establish labour and environment courts). 26

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 162(3) (same as proposed). 27

KENYA CONST., 2010 art. 160(5) (same as proposed).



PART II – THE SUPREME COURT

2. Composition of the Supreme Court (Section 121)

As to Subsection 121(1)(b), an expert recommended against adopting the proposal in the 2008

Constitution Report, which requires between four and seven Justices on the Supreme Court. He

noted that the precise number of judges is not as relevant as is avoiding the current language in

Section 121(1)(b), which states “not less than,” providing only for a minimum number of justices

on the Court. He commented that this wording would allow a court-packing scheme, in which

simply adding more sympathetic judges to the Court could enable the appointing power to alter

an anticipated ruling of law by directly manipulating who and how many sit on the Court. He

therefore suggested adding instead the words “not more than [a given number],” so that the

maximum number of justices is set by the Constitution.

This same expert also recommended deleting Subsection 121(c), as it currently allows the Chief

Justice to pack the court. In order to make sure that whatever upper limit on the number of

judicial seats provided for in (1)(b) is capable of being consistently and regularly enforced,

subsection 121(c) should be deleted.

Two other experts also opined regarding Subsection 121(1)(b) and the number of justices

required for a quorum. One of these, relying on Article 161(2) of the Kenya Constitution (2010),

recommended that five judges, rather than three, be required for a quorum. The other proposed

changing it from four in the current Subsection 121(1)(b) to eight.

3. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (Section 122)

Relying on the Constitution Report’s proposal that a mechanism be added for the Speaker of

Parliament to refer matters to the Supreme Court,28

an expert suggested the following changes

(italics) to Section 122:

(1) The Supreme Court shall be the final court of

appeal in and for Sierra Leone and shall have such

appellate and other jurisdiction as may be conferred

upon it by this Constitution or any other law:

Provided that notwithstanding any law to the

contrary, the President or Speaker of Parliament

may refer any Petition in which he has to give a

final decision to the Supreme Court for a judicial

opinion that the Court may render under original

jurisdiction.

(2) All courts are bound by the decisions of the

Supreme Court.

(3) The Supreme Court shall make rules for the

exercise of its jurisdiction.

28




(4) An Act of Parliament may make further

provision for the operation of the Supreme Court.

Another expert suggested inserting in the proviso to Subsection 122(1)(Proviso) “or any Member

of Parliament” between “President” and “may refer,” so that Members of Parliament, as well as

the President, can refer matters to the Court. In addition, this expert also recommended

replacing, in Subsection 122(2), the phrase “when it appears right to do so” with “when

necessary.” The expert noted that the current phrase is too vague, and would allow overturning

precedent of the Court too easily.

4. Appeals to the Supreme Court (Section 123)

An expert recommended adding to Subsection 123(1)(a), which sets out civil cases that can be

taken on appeal as of right to the Supreme Court, the following language “including causes or

matters arising under Chapter IV of this Constitution.”29

As to 123(1)(b), two experts recommended adoption of the 2008 Constitution Reports proposal

to remove the requirement that a case taken on appeal must arise under the High Court’s original

jurisdiction. This change supports appeals being taken from any case. One of these two experts

also recommended adding to subsection (1)(b) the words “or Court-Martial,” to allow the Court

of Appeals to hear cases from military courts.

Regarding Subsection 123(1)(c), an expert suggested also following the Constitution Report’s

proposal to delete the requirement of obtaining leave of the Appeals Court before a case can be

heard on appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court should be able to determine on its

own what cases it will hear.

Also as to Subsection 123(1)(c), an expert suggested adding that the Appeals Court itself can

refer matters to the Supreme Court that involve the public interest or which may significantly

impact of the interpretation or application of the Constitution to the Supreme Court. He noted

that such an amendment would enhance development of the law, and the public interest

objectives of the law.

5. Interpretation of the Constitution (Section 124)

To make this Section consistent with changes recommended regarding Sections 28(1) and 127,

an expert proposed adding to Subsection 124(1): “otherwise provided in sections 29 and 122.”

6. Supervisory Jurisdiction (Section 125)

An expert proposed adding language that would preclude the Appeals Court from having

jurisdiction over the Human Rights Commission (HRC), as follows (italics): “over any

adjudicating authority except the Human Rights Commission.” This expert opined that this

change would assure the full independence of the HRC, in accordance with the Paris Principals.

Only the Supreme Court would have supervisory jurisdiction over the HRC.

29

The expert referred to comments provided regarding Sections 28(1) and 127.



7. Power of Justices of the Supreme Court in Interlocutory Matters

(Section 126)

An expert recommended increasing from one to three the number of judges required for

reviewing applications regarding interlocutory matters in criminal cases.

8. Enforcement of the Constitution (Section 127)

An expert proposed changing the use of “person” in 127(1) to “citizen or resident person.” In

connection with such a change, however, he also cautioned that a policy decision should be made

as to whether “person” will include or exclude corporations or any form of business. The expert

noted that disagreement over this issue is currently causing great controversy and disruption in

the United States, and many people believe that defining corporations as persons for all purposes

(including freedom of speech and religion) is enabling corporations to abuse their power.

To harmonize the language in Subsection 127(1) with the amendment proposed to Subsection

28(1), an expert proposed adding “Save as otherwise provided in Section 28, any.”

Two experts suggested deleting Subsection 127(4), as proposed in the 2008 Constitution Report.

He noted that a “failure to obey” is vague wording, and carries with it an unnecessary penalty

since the contempt powers already given to the Court can handle such concerns. Another expert

expressed concern about the criminalization under this Subsection, suggesting that the crime be

specified more clearly.

PART III – THE COURT OF APPEAL

9. Composition of the Court of Appeal (Section 128)

Regarding 128(1)(b) and (c), an expert referred to the comments made and changes proposed

with respect to Subsection 121(b) and (c), with respect to specifying a maximum number of

judges, rather than a minimum. Having a maximum number would avoid the possibility of the

President or Chief Justice trying to stack the court.

Another expert also addressed the composition of the court, proposing to adopt the

recommendation of the Constitution Report, and change the number of judges from seven to

nine. He commented that this change in numbers would leave a total of ten judges, and therefore

allow for split decisions.

To make Subsection 128(3) consistent with changes proposed for Subsection 122(2), an expert

suggested adding the phrase “and those of the Supreme Court.”

10. Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal (Section 129)


11. Power of Single Justice of Appeal (Section 130)




PART IV – THE HIGH COURT

12. Composition of the High Court (Section 131)

The expert who noted above, regarding Section 121 (Composition of the Supreme Court) and

128 (Composition of the Court of Appeals), concerns about court packing and the need to specify

a maximum number of judges, commented that the same concerns are not present here, with

respect to the High Court. This expert opined that because High Court judges sit alone, and

additional High Court judges may be needed in additional courts along with the growth in

population and growth in the economy, there is no danger of court packing on any given issue

that might be presented to any given High Court.

Another expert suggested that Parliament should be able to adapt to changing needs as to the

number of sitting High Court judges, referencing as an example Article 165(1)(a) of the Kenya

Constitution (2010). The expert proposed the following language (italics) could be added to

Subsection 131(1)(b):

not less than nine High Court Judges the number of

judges prescribed by an Act of Parliament;

Also addressing the composition of the High Court, another expert recommended changing the

number of judges on the Court from nine to ten.

13. Jurisdiction of the High Court (Section 132)

An expert recommended that the High Court have “unlimited and original” jurisdiction in the

matters specified under Subsection 132(1). The expert commented that this would increase the

access to justice under Chapter IV of the Constitution.30

Regarding Subsection 132(2), an expert offered the following additions (italics) and deletions

(strikeouts):

(2) The High Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction

to determine (c) any matter relating to industrial and

labour disputes and administrative complaints; and

(d) jurisdiction to determine the question whether a

human right or fundamental freedom in Chapter IV

has been denied, violated, infringed or threatened.

(2) The High Court of Justice shall not have

jurisdiction in respect of matters—

(a) reserved for the exclusive jurisdiction of the

Supreme Court under this Constitution; or

30

This expert also suggested looking at the discussion regarding the proposed new section “Authority of courts to

uphold and enforce fundamental freedoms and rights above for basis of proposed change.”



(b) falling within the jurisdiction of the courts

contemplated in Section 120(4)(b).

14. Claims Against the Government (Section 133)


15. Supervisory Jurisdiction of the High Court (Section 134)

An expert recommended adding language that would remove the Human Rights Commission

from the supervisory authority of the High Court.

PART V – APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES, ETC..

16. Appointment of Judges, etc… (Section 135)

Citing the Kenya Constitution (2010), Article 166(2)(c), one expert recommended adding the

following language, in a new Subsection 135(6):

(6) Any person appointment a Judge of the Superior

Court of Judicature must have a high moral

character, integrity and impartiality.

Another expert opined that Subsection 135(3) as currently written contains too many restrictions

on serving in the Judiciary. This expert recommended deleting Subsections 135(3)(a) through

(c). He further recommended deleting a provision in 135(3) that allows a person to serve as a

judge when licensed in another state, as follows:

or any other country having a system of law

analogous to that of Sierra Leone and approved by

the Judicial and Legal Service Commission, and has

been entitled as such Counsel in the case of

appointment to—

17. Judicial Vacancies (Section 136)

As to Subsection 136(2), two experts recommended adoption of the proposal in the 2008

Constitution Report,31

which provides for Parliamentary input on the appointment of judges to

vacancies and removes the age limitation on judges taking over such vacancies, which would

make Section 136 consistent with Section 137 in this regard. One of these experts suggested a

slightly modified proposal on the 2008 Report, still deleting the current final phrase in this

Subsection, and adding the requirement of parliamentary input in this final place:

[…]notwithstanding the fact that he has already

attained the retiring age prescribed by section 137. ,

subject to the approval of Parliament.

31




Both experts recommended the same change for Subsection 136(4).

As to Subsection 136(6), two experts commented on the 2008 Constitution Report’s

recommendation to change the three-month limitation on actions by an outgoing judge to three

months. One of these experts recommended adoption of the change from three to six months.

The other expert did not recommend adoption. This latter commented that maintaining a three-

month limitation on continued actions by an outgoing judge would keep Section 136 consistent

with the requirement in Subsection 120(16), which currently sets a three-month deadline for

rendering decisions. He suggested that, if there should be concerns about the ability to enforce

decisions post-issuance where a seat is vacant, a new judicial appointee could take over duties of

the outgoing judge, to obviate the need for extensions of time and limit unreasonable delays in

issuing important decisions.

18. Tenure of Office of Judges, etc… (Section 137)

As to Subsection 137(1), an expert recommended adding the phrase “for the period specified by

law,” after “shall hold office,” to make clear there is a limitation on the period a judge may hold

office.

Regarding Subsection 137(2), an expert commented that it is appropriate for the Constitution to

contain an age limitation for judges, as recommended in the 2008 Report, and he, along with

another expert, suggested that the current limit at age 65 should be changed to 70. A third

expert also commented on the age restriction, and favored removing it and replacing it with a

ten-year term limit on service as a judge.

An expert expressed similar concerns here as articulated with respect to Subsection 136(6),

regarding maintaining a three-month maximum on the amount of time a retiring judge may stay

on the bench once reaching the age limit. Another expert, however, favored adopting the 2008

Report’s proposal to raise the maximum time period from three months to six months.

As to Subsection 137(4), one expert expressed concern that “statement misconduct” is too broad

and unspecific a ground for removal of a judge. He noted that the ambiguity in this term could

lead to removal of a judge for political or ideological reasons, thereby undermining the

independence of the judiciary.

Also commenting on Subsection 137(4) regarding the grounds for removing judges, and citing

the Kenya Constitution, Article 168(1), an expert proposed the following changes to this

Subsection, breaking up the current grounds for removing a judge into subsections, and adding

further grounds (italics):

(a) inability to perform the functions of his office,

whether arising from infirmity of body or mind; or

(b) for statement misconduct a breach of a code of

conduct prescribed for Judges of the Superior Court

of Judicature by an Act of Parliament; or

(c) incompetence;



(d) gross misconduct or misbehavior; and

(e) shall not be so removed save in accordance with

the provisions of this section.

Also regarding 136(4), another expert recommended removing the word “statement” and adding

the word “gross” before “misconduct,” to specify the nature of the misconduct that can result in

disqualifying a judge.

Another expert commented on Subsection 135(5), suggesting the addition of a provision that

would allow a judge who is subject to removal from office to be heard in person or through

counsel, would institute an in camera procedure for such removal hearings, and require that any

resulting decision be made public.

As to Subsections 137(8) through (10), an expert noted that the grounds on which the Chief

Justice, may be "investigated" or removed from office are very broad, and not the same as those

for Superior Court judges. He recommended making the grounds for removal of judges the same

and narrowing those presently existing for the Chief Justice, which currently could open that

Justice to removal on political or other grounds not related to his ability to function in the office.

19. Remuneration of Judges, etc… (Section 138)

Two experts commented on this Section, and recommended against any authorization for the

receipt of remuneration or emoluments from outside sources (such authorization is contained in

the proposal of the 2008 Constitution Report). One of these experts opined that any such

provision could be abused. He cautioned that if any such provision is retained in the

Constitution, then a process for appealing should be added for citizens/persons to raise concerns

of corruption or conflicts of interests stemming from any additional pay that is authorized. The

expert further suggested that the best approach may be to have such issues addressed by the

Judicial and Legal Service Commission, which could review claims of corruption or breach of

judicial ethics while remaining immune from executive or legislative interference.32

20. Oath of Office of Judges (Section 139)


PART VI – JUDICIAL AND LEGAL SERVICE COMMISSION

21. Establishment of the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (Section

140)

32

Note: this expert attached to his written commentary, four examples relevant to Section 138. These include the

existing constitutional provision in operation in the State of Washington, United States, along with enabling

legislation, rules of judicial ethics and procedure established thereunder, which carefully govern the manner of

handling complaints of corruption or unethical conduct.



Two experts endorsed the 2008 Constitution Report’s proposal to add a judge from the High

Court Justice to the Legal Service Commission, in order to give the Commission a broader

composition of members.

An expert approved of the 2008 Reports recommendation for the creation of a Local Courts

Service Commission that would oversee the competence and conduct of judges.33

The expert

recommended that, rather than creating a Commission for local courts and having the other

commission currently created under Subsection 140(1), there should be only one Commission,

overseeing the conduct of all judges at all levels of the courts. This expert suggested that if in

fact a Local Courts Commission is created under Section 140, then whatever language used to

create it and describe its responsibilities should match whatever language is used to describe the

Commission currently created in Subsection 140(1). Consistency in language will ensure there is

no legal question that the Commissions have a consistent purpose in overseeing the conduct of

judges. Finally, the expert cautioned that any Commission designed to oversee the judiciary

must be structured so as to avoid executive and legislative interference, and assure any such

judicial conduct commissions the maximum of independence.

22. Appointment of Judicial and Legal Service Officers, etc… (Section

141)

In the comment received for this Section, an expert recommended that the phrase “approval of

the President” currently in the Proviso to Subsection 141(1) but changed to “in consultation with

the President.”

23. Appointment of Court Officers (Section 142)


24. Fees of Court, etc… (Section 143)

Two experts supported adopting the 2008 Constitution Report’s proposal which changes the

current use of “fines, fees or other moneys” and replaces it with “fines.”34

25. Official Document (Section 144)


26. Rules of Court Committee (Section 145)


H. CHAPTER VIII – OMBUDSMAN

1. Parliament to Establish Office of Ombudsman (Section 146)

33

See Report of the Commission to Review the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone, pp. 64-65 (2008). 34




An expert proposed modifying the language of Subsection 146(1) to specify how the

Ombudsman is appointed, with the following proposed language:

The Ombudsman shall be appointed by the

President, after consultation with the Public Service

Commission and subject to the approval of

Parliament.

In addition to recommending that the Ombudsman be required to take an oath of office, declare

qualifications and agree to compliance with applicable regulations, one of the experts also

recommended that Subsection 142(2) provide an avenue for public and non-governmental

organizations and aggrieved citizens to ensure action can be taken to promote, protect and

implement of second generation of human rights, including those assured in Articles 2, 4, 5, 7, 8,

9, 11, 12, 13, 15 of the ICCPR. To this end, the expert proposed that the following new

subparagraphs be added to Subsection 146(2):

(d)The office of the Ombudsman should comprise

an Ombudsman and a Deputy, one of which must be

female.

(e)The office should receive complaints from victims

concerning the discriminatory promotion,

protection and/ or implementation of secondary

rights of an economic, social and cultural nature or

government policies which are inconsistent with the

Constitution.

(f) The Ombudsman shall receive complaints from

affected members of the public, non-governmental

organizations or group of persons.

(g) The Ombudsman shall conduct hearings and

where there is merit, prepare a report and take up

the matter with the concerned government

institution.

(h) Copies of the report shall be served on the

competent Parliamentary Commission, the Office of

the President and the government department

concerned.

I. CHAPTER IX – COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY

1. Appointment of Commissions of Inquiry (Section 147)

To assure the integrity of any commission created under this Section, an expert recommended

that commissioners always be required to take an oath of office and declare their qualifications

and agreement to comply with applicable regulations.

Another expert proposed the following amendments to the specified subsections:

(1) Delete “appoint” and replace with “set up”



(2) Delete ‘A’, and replace with “Subject to the

approval of Parliament, a …”

(3) Add new sub. (2)(a), as follows: “The

Commissioner or Commissioners shall be

appointed by the President, subject to the

approval of Parliament.”

2. Powers, Rights and Privileges of Commissions of Inquiry (Section

148)


3. Report of Inquiry (Section 149)


4. Rules Regulating Commissions of Inquiry (Section 150)


J. CHAPTER X – THE PUBLIC SERVICE

1. Establishment of the Public Service Commission (Section 151)

As to Subsections 151(5)(a) and (b), and expert recommended adoption of the proposal in the

2008 Constitution Report, which suggested the following amendments (italics) to those

Subsections:

The office of a member of the Civil Service

Commission, unless he sooner resigns or dies, shall

become vacant –

a) at the expiration of four years, renewable only

once, and

b) the Chairman, at the expiration of five years,

renewable only once.

Another expert recommended adding a requirement that Parliament be notified when a

commissioner is removed under Subsection 151(6), given that Parliament is involved in the

initial appointment of commissioners, such an amendment would bring this Subsection in line

with other provisions in Section 151. He proposed the following additional language (italics):

Upon notifying Parliament, a member of the

commission may be removed by the President…



2. Appointments, etc… of Public Officers (Section 152)


3. Appointment of the Principal Representative of Sierra Leone (Section

153)


4. Appointment of Permanent Secretaries and Certain Other Officers

(Section 154)


PART II – POLICE FORCE

5. Establishment of the Sierra Leone Police Force (Section 155)


6. Establishment of the Police Council (Section 156)


7. Appointments in the Police Force (Section 157)


8. Functions of the Police Council (Section 158)


PART III – RESIGNATIONS, RE-APPOINTMENTS AND PROTECTION OF PENSION

RIGHTS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS HOLDING ESTABLISHED OFFICES

9. Resignation and Effect of New Appointment of a Person Holding

Established Office (Section 159)


10. Reappointments, etc… (Section 160)


11. Protection of Pension Rights (Section 161)

An expert noted that the word “personal” in Subsection 161(7) should be changed to “person.”



PART IV – POWER AND PROCEDURES OF COMMISSIONS AND COUNCILS, AND

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

12. Power of Commissions in Relation to the Grant of Pension (Section

162)


13. Power and Procedure of Commissions (Section 163)


14. Protection of Commissions from Legal Proceedings (Section 164)

To ensure the integrity of judicial proceedings, an expert recommended adoption of the

following amendment to the second proviso in Subsection 164(c):

Unless the proceedings for any reason what so ever

are tendered in judicial proceedings in a court of

law duly constituted.

K. CHAPTER XI – THE ARMED FORCES

1. Establishment of the Armed Forces (Section 165)

As to 165(1), an expert recommended adding the following sentence, to make this Section

consistent with Section 172(3)(b), which provides that any reference to the functions of the

President in the Constitution includes the function of Commander-in-Chief:

The President of Sierra Leone is the Commander–

in–Chief of the Armed Forces of Sierra Leone.

Regarding Subsection 165(2), one expert recommended deleting the phrase “to participate in its

development,” from that subsection’s description of the duties of the Armed Forces.

As to Subsection 165(3), an expert suggested adding the following caveat to the prohibition of

certain executive and legislative officials serving in the Armed Forces:

Save the President in the exercise of his

constitutional duties as the Commander–in–Chief of

the Armed Forces of Sierra Leone, no member of

the Armed Forces shall hold office as President,

Vice President…

2. Prohibition of Private Armed Forces (Section 166)


3. Establishment of Defense Council (Section 167)



4. Appointments in the Armed Forces (Section 168)

As to Subsection 168(1), and expert proposed adding “subject to the approval of Parliament.”

after “Forces.”

5. Functions of the Defence Council (Section 169)

Regarding Subsection 169(2), an expert suggested replacing “may” with “shall” so that the

Defence Council is required to make regulations governing its functions.

L. CHAPTER XII – THE LAWS OF SIERRA LEONE

1. The Laws of Sierra Leone (Section 170)

An expert commented that this Section is not necessary or applicable if the Supremacy Clause

recommended earlier in the Constitution is adopted.

Another expert suggested Subsection 170(1) should include a subparagraph (f), containing the

following language, commenting that this additional language would complete the laws of Sierra

Leone as recommended in the draft Constitution (2008 Report):

(f) native laws and customs that are not repugnant,

contrary to equity, good conscience or inconsistent

the laws specified in this section.

M. CHAPTER XVII – MISCELLANEOUS

1. Interpretation (Section 171)

An expert recommended deleting from Subsection 171(2)(a) the reference to “and corporations,”

with respect to the meaning of “persons” under the Constitution.

2. Legislation (Section 172)


3. Consequential Provisions (Section 173)


N. CHAPTER XIV – TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS

1. Existing Constitution — Act No. 12 of 1978 (Section 174)


2. Effect of Transitional Provisions (Section 175)




3. Existing Law (Section 176)


4. Application of Existing Law (Section 177)


5. Preservation of Existing Offices (Section 178)


6. Existing Parliament (Section 179)


7. Delegated Powers (Section 180)


8. Continuation of Matters (Section 181)


9. Legal Proceedings (Section 183)


10. Appeals (Section 184)


11. Jurisdiction of the Courts (Section 185)


12. Finance (Section 186)


13. Financial Authorisation (Section 187)


14. Official Seals, etc… (Section 188)




15. Continuation of the Police Force (Section 189)


16. Continuation of the Military Forces (Section 190)


17. Repeal of Act No. 12 of 1978 and Savings (Section 191)


18. Reprint (Section 192)


19. Commencement (Section 193)




ANNEX A: BIOGRAPHIES OF LEGAL EXPERTS

Robert H. Alsdorf

Robert H. Alsdorf is the principal of Alsdorf Dispute Resolution. Since 2008, he has engaged in

arbitration and mediation involving issues of admiralty, antitrust, non-competition agreements,

national and international professional partnerships and business organizations, professional

malpractice, intellectual property including international software disputes and training methods,

environmental disputes, hazardous waste clean-up, insurance and reinsurance, hospitality

industry, product liability, real estate and development, valued up to nine figures, and has also

served as Special Master for pretrial proceedings. From 1990 to 2005 he served as a Trial Judge

in the Superior Court for the State of Washington, the state trial court of general civil and

criminal jurisdiction. As a trial judge he received recognition: Outstanding Judge Award, King

County Bar Association, 2002; Judge of the Year, Washington State Trial Lawyers Association,

2001; Judge of the Year, American Board of Trial Advocates, Washington Chapter, 2000;

Vanguard Award, Washington Women Lawyers, 2000. Since retiring from the bench, he has

received recognition as an attorney-at-law: he was named to “Best Lawyers in America” by

Woodward/White for Alternative Dispute Resolution; voted one of Washington’s “Super

Lawyers” and listed in “Top 100 Attorneys” and “Top 10 Alternative Dispute Resolution

Attorneys” by Washington Law & Politics; “AV Preeminent” Martindale-Hubbell Ranking. A

graduate of Yale Law School, he is a member of the bar of the United States Supreme Court and

numerous lower courts, and since the mid-1980’s has engaged in judicial education, legal

education, and rule of law projects in many different jurisdictions in the United States, Latin

America, Asia, Africa, and the former Soviet Union.

Scott Carlson I am an international rule of law attorney with over twenty years of experience. Please allow me

to elaborate upon some of my specific experience and knowledge relevant to this position.

Throughout my legal career, comparative constitutional work has been a distinct passion and

pursuit. During 1997-8, I planned, initiated, directed, and coordinated a project for the

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on participatory constitution-making

following internal armed conflict in the Republic of Albania. The project engaged the population

in the rebuilding of the legal state and resolution of issues that led to the breakdown of civil

order. The Albania process has been recognized by the United Nations Office of the High

Commissioner for Human Rights (UNOHCHR) as a good governance best practice. In the years

since, I have continued to work on constitutional advice and support issues. As an advisor with

the U.S. Institute of Peace’s Project on Constitution-Making, Peace-building, and National

Reconciliation, I worked on constitutional processes in Democratic Republic of Congo and Iraq,

as well as authoring a chapter in their book concerning the same. While serving as Fellow at the

U.S. Supreme Court, I was called upon to analyze separation of powers issues that arose under

select legislative initiatives. Presently, I serve as a constitutional expert for the International

Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) via ConstitutionNet, and I am an active

member with access to their full set of constitutional resources.



Kurt De Freitas

An internationally experienced legal advisor with a superb track record of public law including:

anti-money laundering regulation, international loan deals, governmental contracts, negotiating

and drafting agreements, as well as human rights/constitutional issues, prosecutions, legislative

drafting and much more. He is an accomplished professional having held posts as the Attorney

General of Anguilla, St Helena, Ascension Island and Tristan da Cunha as well as the Turks and

Caicos Islands. He also served as Solicitor General of the Cayman Islands. He has acted as

Governor on many occasions in several British Overseas Territories and also sat as acting judge

of the Supreme Court. He is a secure and dependable advisor with considerable skills in advising

governments and governmental agencies on a comprehensive range of legal, business

management and policy development matters. He has worked closely with the UK government

on matters of good governance and international affairs in the British Overseas Territories; An

expert on issues facing developing economies, he has unrivalled experience in navigating

governmental processes, having served Cabinet Member and Member of Parliament in three

countries during his tenure as Attorney General.

Barry Fisher

Mr. Fisher served on the multinational negotiation teams and counsel in the German and

Austrian Holocaust settlements, as well as class counsel on the Swiss Banks Holocaust cases. He

is a signatory to the resulting treaty with Germany and Austria. He serves as counsel on behalf

of Chinese, Korean and other Asian victims of the sexual slavery (“comfort women”) and slave

labor systems of wartime Japan. Counsel to Roma(“Gypsies”) and many racial, ethnic, religious

and other minorities, including Kurds he has spoken for at the European Parliament. Mr. Fisher

assisted the drafting of constitutions and legislation for Romania, Moldova, Albania, Bosnia, and

Belarus, and has consulted on legal matters in many countries, including Russia, Mexico, Spain,

Argentina, Canada, Germany, and England. Mr. Fisher is Recipient, NogunRi Peace Prize(Seoul

ROK 2008); Recipient Amicus Poloniae Award (Gov. of Poland 1997). Speaker at law

conferences throughout the world and frequent author, including Notes From The WWII Redress

Trenches: The Disparate Treatment of Victims East and West(32 Loy.L.A.

Int.&Comp.L.Rev.93(2010); Author, Comfort Women and the Courts: Coordinating Legal

Strategies, in Erzwungene Prostitution in Kriegs- und Friedenszeiten: Sexuelle Gewalt gegen

Frauen und Mädchen(Barbara Drinck & Chung-Noh Gross eds., Kleine Verlag, Bielefeld

(Germany), 2007)(Wissenschaftlicher Reihe, Band 160).

Kwangsup Kim

Kwangsup Kim is a PhD fellow at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law’s Center for

Constitutional Democracy (CCD). Now he is studying at Australia National University

sponsored by the Pan Asia Institute funding. Also, he is a research director for the Asian team at

the CCD. By request of the UNWTO ST-EP Foundation, he is conducting a research on the

educational right for girls in sub-Saharan. He worked as a Senior Counselor for the Korean

National Assembly after retiring from the Korean Navy Officer in 2000. In January 2011, he

won the Grand Prize from the Speaker of the National Assembly. He has worked in the FKCC

(Future Korea Constitution Committee) preparing constitutional law of unification, and in the

UN-MDG FORUM, a group which advocates food security and works to eradicate poverty. Over

time he has also gained political campaign experience, most notably during the Korean

presidential election of 2007 where he participated in making a presidential election pledge as a



member of policy room. Since 2007 he has been an academic director and vice chairperson of

the Committee of Women’s Rights at the Human Rights and Welfare Institution of Korea. He

also became a member of the Board of Directors at The Correction Welfare Society of Korea in

2012.

Suzanne Lachelier

Ms. Lachelier is a criminal defense attorney, having served as a federal public defender at both

the trial and appellate levels. She is also a Commander in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps

of the U.S. Navy Reserves. She served on active duty for four years, handling court-martial

trials. Prior to practicing criminal law, Ms. Lachelier worked as counsel to the House

Subcommittee on Energy and Power, under the Energy and Commerce Committee, where she

helped draft and implement legislation. As a reserve JAG, she served for five years as defense

counsel in the military commission at Guantanamo, representing several detainees, including two

charged as principals in the events of 9/11. She was the chief author of countless motions

seeking to incorporate international humanitarian law, human rights treaties and customary

international law principles in military commissions practice. She also negotiated a legislative

amendment in the U.S. Congress that resulted in the release of one of her detainee clients to his

home country of Sudan. Ms. Lachelier also has taught humanitarian and human rights law to

military lawyers and soldiers in the Democratic Republic of Congo. She is fluent in French, has a

Bachelor of Union College, Schenectady, NY, and a J.D. from Boston University School of Law,

Boston, MA.

Jeffrey Matsuura

Jeffrey Matsuura is a lawyer in the Washington, D.C. area specializing in the legal, regulatory,

and public policy issues associated with development, distribution, and use of technology,

particularly communications, digital media, and information technologies. He has more than

thirty years of experience advising commercial companies (including MCI Communications

Corporation, Communications Satellite Corporation, and The Discovery Channel), non-profit

organizations, and governments in many nations including China, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine,

Canada, and New Zealand). Mr. Matsuura has taught law and technology topics in the United

States and in other countries, and he previously served as assistant professor of law and Director

of the Program in Law and Technology at the University of Dayton. He is currently an

International Research Affiliate of the Faculty of Law at the University of Otago in Dunedin,

New Zealand. He is also a member of the visiting faculty at Taras Shevchenko National

University in Kiev, Ukraine. Mr. Matsuura is a former J. William Fulbright Scholar. He is the

author or co-author of seven published books on law and technology topics, including the legal

treatises, LAW OF THE INTERNET and GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LAW.

David Morgan

David Gwynn Morgan has had more than 40 years’ experience in the fields of constitutional law;

general law reform; and drafting. He has worked in a number of jurisdictions, including several

African states. He is a Distinguished Professor at University College Cork, Ireland, where he

spent the majority of his career, including acting as Head of Department and Dean of Law for a

number of years. At present, he is a Distinguished Professor at the Kuwait International Law

School. Each year, he acts as Chairperson of the Judicial Conferences on ‘Constitutional



Government’, at Trinity College, Dublin, attended by 20 African Judges. He has published a

number of books, which were ‘firsts in the field’ in Irish public law.

Tom Santoro

Mr. Santoro opened, developed, and lead the Nairobi office of the Public International Law and

Policy Group (PILPG), focusing on strengthening domestic accountability mechanisms in Kenya

including the judiciary, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, and public interest

litigators. He provides trainings, legal consultation, and strategic support for local attorneys,

constitutional advocates, government officials, and civil society organizations. Mr. Santoro has

also supported programs training local level Syrian leaders in mediation strategy, ceasefire

negotiation simulations, and strategic litigation initiatives in Kosovo. Prior to PILPG, he worked

as a private sector attorney specializing in complex litigation and investigations at the

international law firm Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy. His clients included major financial

institutions facing large-scale, international criminal investigations and civil liability. Mr.

Santoro has been a guest lecturer at the Strathmore University Law School and at United States

International University, and also lived and worked in China in television and media.

Amy Senier

Amy Senier is a human rights attorney with over ten years of experience in international and

domestic non-governmental, government, private, and academic settings. Most recently, she was

the Supervising Attorney and Teaching Fellow in the International Women’s Human Rights

Clinic (IWHRC) at Georgetown University Law Center where she supervised law students

working on test case litigation, human rights investigations, and legislative reform—all of which

aimed to prevent and redress discrimination against women in Africa. Prior to the IWHRC, Amy

practiced international dispute resolution and complex commercial litigation at Foley Hoag,

LLP. There, she represented sovereign states in disputes arising from ethnic cleansing and

transboundary environmental harm and individuals seeking protection from domestic violence,

persecution, and torture. In 2012, Amy was honored for her pro bono work by both the Lawyers’

Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice as well as the Political Asylum/Immigration

Representation (PAIR) Project. Amy has interned and consulted for a number of international

and domestic human rights and civil rights entities including: the International Criminal Court,

the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

First Circuit, the Constitutional Litigation Unit of the Legal Resources Centre (Johannesburg),

the Brennan Center for Justice, and Physicians for Human Rights. Amy holds a J.D. from

Northeastern University School of Law and a M.A.L.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and

Diplomacy.

Thomas W. Simon

Thomas W. Simon (JD, PhD), professor of international and comparative law at the Johns

Hopkins University’s Hopkins-Nanjing Center in China, has written over sixty scholarly articles

and published many books, including The Laws of Genocide, Law & Philosophy, and Ethnic

Identity and Minority Protection as well as forthcoming books on Comparing Injustices and

Inside China’s Legal System. He has submitted numerous reports for the Central and Eastern

European Law Initiative of the American Bar Association and helped in the drafting stages of the

constitutions of Albania and the Slovak Republic. He served as a consultant for the Working

Group on Minorities for the United Nations. He has taught law at the University of Ljubljana



(Slovenia), the University of Malaya, and the American University of Sharjah (UAE) and

received a Liberal Arts Fellowship at Harvard Law School.

Charles Taku Chief Charles A. Taku is an International lawyer with thirty years’ of trial and appellate

experience. He specializes in International Criminal, Humanitarian and Human Rights Law and

Practice. For the past fifteen years, as lead counsel, Chief Taku has represented clients at the

UNICTR, The Special Court for Sierra Leone, the ICC, and the United Nations Human Rights

Committee in Geneva and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights in Arusha Tanzania.

With Co-counsel Beth Lyons, Chief Taku successfully obtained an acquittal of their client on

appeal in the so-called Military II case at the ICTR. Chief Taku is publisher of four books and

several scholarly articles. He has attended and made compelling contributions at several

conferences on International Law in many parts of the world.

legal analysis of the sierra leone 1991 constitution march 11 2015

Documents