Sierra Leone: Constitutional Review Goes Up in Smoke – And the People Lose Again

AFTER three years of arduous work collecting, deliberating and collating views across the country for a new constitution, it looks like Sierra Leone may end up not having one – yet again.

In its official response to the recommendations of the Constitutional Review Committee (CRC), the government issued a white paper in November which made short work of the 680page, recommendation-laden report of the 80-person committee.

According to the white paper, the committee was mandated to ascertain "from the people of Sierra Leone, their views on the operation of the 1991 Constitution…, in particular the strengths and weaknesses… and articulate the concerns of the people …. on amendments that may be required for a comprehensive review of the 1991 constitution."

The committee claimed to have done exactly that when it submitted a final report to the President in 2016. It reportedly received several thousand suggestions from the public through submission forms, as well as dozens of position papers from institutions and individuals within and outside the country.

However, the content of the white paper suggested that either the government did not really think that the committee truly represented the views of the people or it simply did not like the views expressed by the people.

Of 134 recommendations set out in the white paper, the government rejected a whopping 102. The main justification was that the provisions in the current constitution are adequate or that existing statutes already addressed the issue.

As far back as 1999, when the warring factions in the country's civil conflict were negotiating for peace, there were calls for a review of the constitution. Ar- ticle 10 of the resulting Lome Peace Accord called for a review to ensure it "represents the needs and aspirations" of the people.

The country's post-war Truth and Reconciliation Commission, noting that the current constitution was not "the product of a wide, participatory process", felt it was desirable to reformulate the document, particularly its bill of rights, to take into account the full range of the country's international human rights obligations. The first attempt at constitutional review started in 2007 but fell short of completion. The review commission produced a report in 2008 recommending certain amendments to the 1991 constitution. Unfortunately, it simply gathered dust on a government shelf.

After much fanfare, the new 80-person constitutional review committee was launched by the President in July 2013. The President reportedly called on all to “fully participate and take ownership of the entire review process.” Against this backdrop, it is fair to say that the government’s response to the recommendations of the review committee and the subsequent legislative action betray the principles on which the process was built. It also devalues the struggle of the people to build a better post-war society based on rules that reflect their circumstances. It is important to point out that many of the recommendations from the committee that met the approval of government were either cosmetic in nature or limiting of recognised basic rights. For example the government accepted a recommendation to include the words “human dignity” and “equality” in the chapter of the constitution known as the “fundamental principles of state policy” but rejected the recommendation to make these principles “justiciable.”