Sierra Leone Economy – Dominated by Non-Sierra Leoneans

By

-

July 27, 2022

SLL Audio News

Sierra Leone Economy - Dominated by Non-Sierra Leoneans

00:00 / 3:25

First published on Tuesday, October 29, 2002 – Sierra Leone Live

Ombudsman Francis Gabbidon has said that Sierra Leone will never catch up to compete effectively with other African countries while its economy continues to be dominated by non-Sierra Leoneans.

There is no way we can develop this way. The Gambian economy is dominated by Gambians, and the same for Ghana, Senegal, Nigeria and Guinea.

“I think this is the time to take hold of this country economically. Otherwise, we’ll continue to be poor and the country can never develop,” Gabbidon said.

The Ombudsman said despite having political control of the country but those that have dominance over the economy will have the power to influence the exchange rate, dictate the role and “virtually paralyse the country.”

“We love foreigners but we must be in control. Whether you like it or not, the one that controls the economy has so much power he used to influence the exchange rate, goods entering the country, dictate the roles and virtually paralysed the country,” he said.

Gabbidon said local people with good initiative should be encouraged to develop their potential and contribute to the development of their own country. The Ombudsman also expressed concern over the dominance of foreigners in all workplaces across the country.

He said some international organizations in the country-recruited staff from outside, while Sierra Leonean graduates who are equal to the task, are left without jobs. He said most of these foreign workers are only asked to pay 200,000 Leones as a work permit, which he describes as ridiculous. “As a matter of policy, I will have to call on Labour and take it to the minister to look at the whole question of immigration into the country.

“That’s why Ghana and The Gambia are asking for $5000 for foreign workers because you cannot just bring people there to work. But here people came from all parts of the world and only pay 200,000 Leones.

“It’s ridiculous and a joke, instead don’t ask them to pay,” he said.

Gabbidon said all foreigners, before taking up a job here should be asked to pay not less than 5 million Leones as it’s a worldwide phenomenon”.

He expressed dismay over the alarming number of foreigners in the country and therefore called on the immigration authorities to begin putting up some restrictions on people entering the country. Gabbidon said certain structures must be put in place to improve the private sector so that more workforce could be absorbed, production and export will be affected thereby enabling us to earn good foreign exchange, in return have a good balance of payment.

“These are the basic things. Our economy does not improve because we are so import oriented. All the time we import and spend too much in foreign exchange,”

Gabbidon observed.

All People’s Congress (APC)

By

SLL

-

July 27, 2022

SLL Audio News

All People’s Congress (APC)

00:00 / 2:42

First published, October 27, 2002 – BBC

LEAD-IN: Sierra Leone’s biggest opposition party in parliament, the All People’s Congress (APC), is in trouble. The party lost both presidential and parliamentary elections in May this year to President Kabbah’s SLPP, gaining barely 27 out of 120 seats in parliament. Now some expelled members of the APC have taken the party to court, challenging the leadership of Ernest Koroma, who was the presidential candidate. Lansana Fofana reports from Freetown.

FOFANA: Sierra Leone’s highest court of law, the Supreme Court, now has before it a matter involving four senior officials of the All People’s Congress or APC, including the party’s presidential contender, Ernest Koroma. The action was taken by some party officials who have now all been expelled, just inviting further chaos in the biggest opposition party in parliament. A statement released to the press by the dissident faction of the party said they are challenging Mr Koroma’s claim to the party leadership and another official, Chukuma Johnson, as chairman, as well as the alleged move to change the party’s constitution. Both men are now members of parliament, but the plaintiffs say they acted in ways contrary to the party’s original constitution. The press release added that Mr Koroma and some of his supporters drafted a new constitution giving themselves huge powers without referring to the general membership at a delegates conference. Whatever the outcome of the case in the Supreme Court, the factional bickering within the APC spells a bad political omen for the country’s biggest opposition in parliament. And coming barely five months after presidential and general elections were conducted, many observers believe the APC is preparing for its own disintegration. The party was again in court before the May 14 election over leadership squabbles. And for a party which ruled the country for 24 uninterrupted years and has so much to do to repair its battered image of alleged corruption and bad governance, it is time it put its house in order before the next elections in 2007.

Leadership Development Pipelines In Sierra Leone? You Have To Be Kidding!

By

Mahmud Tim Kargbo

-

July 25, 2022

SLL Audio News

Leadership Development Pipelines In Sierra Leone? You Have To Be Kidding!

00:00 / 6:08

By Mahmud Tim Kargbo

The image is powerful: a giant pipe with millions of leaders spewing out the end. Unlimited leadership talent for decades ahead!

Leadership pipeline is a popular term in management circles today. Consultants and leadership thought leaders have jumped on the bandwagon to ensure they speak on this cutting-edge issue. In fact, Google lists 7,780,000 on the topic of leadership pipelines.
There is no question that organisational leaders are concerned, and rightfully so, about the current state of talent. The scarcity of talent is well documented. As organisations in Sierra Leone observe the decreasing talent pool, they realise this talent gap equally applies to central government leadership as it continues to fumble with its State obligations.

What is a leadership pipeline? Is it a new innovative way to develop leadership talent around next-century leadership skills? No! It is simply a more sophisticated title for a slightly more systematic approach to the same old and outdated leadership development process that has failed over the past decade in Sierra Leone. (Of course, trainers and consultants have done pretty well! Governments and public officials in Sierra Leone, not so much.)

Leadership Development is Not A Pipeline! The image conjured up by the term “New Direction ” is disturbing and proves our people’s dishonesty in governance and their writers. It implies “Old misdirection over New Direction.” It reinforces the notion that leadership development is an assembly line. It is built on the sad and faulty notion that anyone can be a leader. (Think about how that notion developed. Hoards of people are scheduled for an organisation’s leadership development programme in a frantic attempt to find a participant in these faulty programmes find out that the organisation and people that put them through the training still assess them as deficient in leadership skills. They realise they will never be entrusted with a leadership position in that organisation. All that investment of time and money has to be rationalised, and morale cannot be damaged, so the organisation tells people that “we are all government” and everyone can lead in the position they currently hold. Now, even more, people can participate in the leadership pipeline. No wonder trust is at an all-time low in Sierra Leone!)

If leadership development is not a pipeline, what is it? Two months back, I was facilitating a not-for-profit board retreat. When I went to breakfast at the hotel, there was a heated dish of half-moon cheese omelettes, probably twenty to twenty-five in dish. When I looked at them, I thought about the made-to-order omelettes created just as I specified that are available at some hotels. Then it dawned on me that this was a picture of what is wrong with leadership development in Sierra Leone.

Current leadership development efforts take a microwave approach to development. Put people through a quick week of training, expose them to high doses of the latest academic theory and buzzwords, and serve them up as instant warmed-up leaders. The problem is that leaders do not develop depth from intense exposure to leadership topics, books, posts or even videos. That kind of training does not allow the concepts to “blend into and shape a person’s character. Leadership development is not a required list of topics one can check off on the way to instant leadership. Leadership development is not receiving a certificate with the President’s bootlicker mimeographed signature at the end of a training programme.

True Leadership development is like a crockpot. First, it takes time to produce the product. Second, it takes coming in contact and in-depth exposure with a group of varied ingredients that blend together and influence each other so that a unique combination is created. (Think about one example – leaders do not communicate in isolation. They communicate to inspire, motivate, correct or solve problems. Teaching communication in a three-hour block is not even close to the reality the leader faces on the job). Third, It takes the heat of real situations to drive the learning home. This heat allows exposure to other ingredients to flavour the leader and becomes a genuine (dare I say authentic?) part of him or her. This develops the leader’s own unique style and approach. Fourth, It takes a master chef who oversees bringing all these ingredients together to create the finished product. Finally, it takes seasoning from that master chef who stops periodically, gauges how seasoned the “product” is becoming, and adjusts that seasoning as needed.

Leaders are not produced like double cheeseburgers in a MacDonald’s. They may be warmed-up leaders when the microwave timer goes off, but they are not genuine leaders. Rather leaders must be uniquely developed, which takes time at the side of a seasoned leader; it takes the opportunity to struggle, and it takes time to interact with multiple different variables and ingredients.

Unless we discard the faulty notion that future leaders can be mass-produced and that quantity of leaders coming out of a pipeline is better than the deep development of quality leaders, we will continue to succeed in developing people who are skilled at critiquing those in positions of authority over them (with the corresponding decrease in trust and respect that comes with the criticism). We will also continue to experience a scarcity of what companies and individuals are looking for; one-of-a-kind, genuine, authentic leaders.

A Village Struggling with its Lawless Laws

Nation

By

Jaime Yaya Barry

-

July 25, 2022

SLL Audio News

A Village Struggling with its Lawless Laws

00:00 / 5:15

By Jaime Yaya Barry

The village of Thampèreh has, over the years, had a very toxic relationship with its laws. Even though the village has a constitution or guiding principles for everyone to follow, the principles are sketched in the most confusing ways that only those who have the power to implement them tend to benefit from them. And since their establishment, many wonder if the laws were designed to give villagers power or protect those in power.

Thampèreh’s constitution guarantees many civil liberties. It gives villagers the right to protest, free speech, free movement, and the right to peaceful assembly. It also ensures that every citizen, regardless of the crime, has the right to a fair and unbiased trial. But as basic as these rights may sound, they appear among the most complex constitutional issues in the village. The complexity became an instrument used by state actors to perpetuate lawlessness on citizens in the name of law and order.

But “law and order” can only work when the law remains the basis for implementing the order, and where one fails, it provides a recipe for lawlessness from both state actors and citizens.

For the right to protest, villagers are mandated to inform the Inspector General of Police (the head of Thampèreh’s N.A. Gbada). The IG’s mandate under this law is to provide adequate security for protesters to hold successful protests without posing a threat to lives and properties. His role is not to decide whether citizens have a cause or valid reason to protest or not. He is to determine whether he has enough personnel to accompany protesters and, where he lacks such personnel, whether his approval will not threaten the village’s security. And this has been the basis for denying hundreds of requests to hold peaceful protests in the village.

Established in the year of the Lord, 1894, Thampèreh’s police force is one of the oldest police forces in the Green Kingdom yet remains among the most unprofessional and ill-trained police forces of our time. And some police officers may want to act professionally. But because the police’s powers and ability to enact justice come from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the head of the police can be hired and fired by the President at any time, “orders from above” will continue to overshadow their professionality. And to ignore those orders from above is to end up at Rotifunk.

That is why, despite currently having over twelve thousand (12,000) officers, the village’s Inspector General of police continues to deny citizens their fundamental right to protest, citing inadequate personnel and limited resources to handle large crowds of protesters.

Thampèreh’s police force has different riot control mechanisms, including a good number of officers using riot gear, water cannons, and teargas. But, for the most part, the N.A. Gbada’s only response to protests and riots is using live bullets. Even when protests often remain peaceful, they have always responded with heavy-handedness resulting in deaths and injuries, and on different occasions, arresting and locking up protesters.

And in recent times, the police have killed dozens of citizens and arrested several others, citing the failure to obtain permission before protesting. But not once have the police respected its side of the mandate to grant permission to a single group of protestors and accord them the needed security support to express their fundamental right as stated in the village’s constitution.

In several instances, citizens’ rights to free speech, free movement, and peaceful assembly have all been suppressed as many were arrested, denied bail, and detained beyond the mandated timeframe while subjecting them to inhumane treatment during detention before appearing in court. Political affiliation continues to influence the village’s justice system to the extent that a fair and unbiased trial is rarely guaranteed.

Recently, the police issued a press release as part of efforts to “ensure and guarantee better understanding and engagements with the police.”

But with the laws being transformed into instruments of lawlessness and perpetrated on citizens by state actors, the trust is broken. It is difficult for citizens to see such statements from the police as a move to guarantee better understanding and engagement between the police and citizens.

And as the village continues to struggle with its lawless laws, citizens will likely turn to lawlessness instead of the law. Because though both have never worked for them, one at least guarantees that they get their messages across, even if it comes with a considerable risky price to pay.

#EndBenghazi #endpolicebrutality

Why We Excuse The Shameless Politicians

By

Mahmud Tim Kargbo

-

July 19, 2022

SLL Audio News

Why We Excuse The Shameless Politicians

00:00 / 6:05

By Mahmud Tim Kargbo

Shaming is an arrogant word. It is effort masquerading as a feat. The fact is that the consequence of shaming is not always shame. To be shamed you have to first give the world the right to shame you, which some do not grant because they wish to persist with what they believe is right. Others, many Sierra Leonean politicians especially, have the gift of shamelessness, the reason why they are successful politicians in the first place. Long before Trump, they were Trump!

Credible Sierra Leone journalists know the feeble relationship between shaming and shame very well because they are, among other things, in the business of shaming. Journalism is also a complaint to the people about rogue public figures, chiefly politicians. In this aspect, too, the profession appears to have very little impact. For decades, journalism has exposed political crime, corruption and other forms of immorality. For decades, the same politicians or their types, have thrived. Why is it that in a functional electoral democracy, the average voter, who has moral expectations from society, family and bureaucracy, does not reject flawed politicians?

As another election season begins there might be more video clips of sex scandals and many revelations of corruption. But the shaming would have little effect at the polls. As to why this is so, the middle class often whisper in private that the average Sierra Leonean voter is a fool. People who do not even whisper honestly would say that the poor elect the rogues because there are no better options in the fray. But there could be a deeper reason why our politicians survive revelations and shame, and why there is no such thing in Sierra Leone politics as a career-ending scandal.

The elite presumption that a typical voter wants his politician to be a representation of the common man is fundamentally wrong. He may even say things to that effect parroting respectable views, but he appears to condone, and even admire, the politician who is uncommon. In an unequal nation, an equal man is probably an unremarkable man. For long, the voter has granted a status to politicians that is similar to a concession he has made for actors — that they are a special class of human beings who need not be like regular people, or even ideal people, who are generally useless. As a result, the voter’s real reasons for rejecting a politician are seldom moral.

The mass perception of a politician as a human anomaly is at the heart of many qualities of Sierra Leonean politics that the sophisticated find confusing. This is the reason why in one of the most hostile places on earth for women’s empowerment, some of the most powerful politicians have been women; why in a land where marriage is a symbol of respectability, especially for women, few single women have risen to immense power; why polygamous men have nothing much to fear; why in the 2018 general elections the contest was, among other issues, between two old politicians with one parading as an IMF/World Bank political economics technocrat?

In Freetown, where I was born and raised, the media never spoke about the nature of the relationship between Julius Maada Bio and his long-time friend and employee Samura Mathew Wilson Kamara, but the voters — the taxi drivers and maids and bus conductors — openly admired Julius Maada Bio for his unusual social status. The media, at least then, never used to mention the fact that both he and his rival played a huge role in destroying our economy, but their destructive status in our country’s economy never bothered their followers even though they themselves did subscribe to popular notions of morality. In the near future, overt inflation and lack of fiscal discipline, too, fare well in Sierra Leone politics.

The acceptance of the anomalous politician is also why politicians routinely land in an impoverished village in a beautiful car, exhibit inexplicable wealth but still manage to find success; and why criminals, too, do well.

Many right-minded nationals said several times, even after their national fame, that they would lose their deposit if they contests an election. Their reason is that the political system is run by money and rogue muscle power. But, if their analysis is true how did Maada Bio’s SLPP fare so well twice in Sierra Leone? The more convincing reason why many right-minded nationals would lose an election is that the typical voter does not perceive them as street-smart men who can beat the system. Samura Kamara, on the other hand, despite his high moral pedestal, has successfully portrayed himself as a shrewd man, which he is.

Apart from small material benefits, the voter also expects his politicians to be strong enough to protect him from state looting and political violence. Such a capacity, again, is widely perceived as something that the street-smart possess more than the righteous because he’s willing to lie on oath. The upper classes, who are not vulnerable to communal violence, would claim that the Right-wing is a lesser evil than the corrupt. Those who are easier to hack into pieces would have the contrary view. In either case, there is too much at stake for the average Sierra Leonean voter to reject a politician just because he has been shamed on moral grounds.

Country’s Leaders Are Hop to Commute Scoundrels

By

Mahmud Tim Kargbo

-

July 19, 2022

SLL Audio News

Country's Leaders Are Hop to Commute Scoundrels

00:00 / 5:45

By Mahmud Tim Kargbo

The Sierra Leonean republic is saddled with a madness that, if not curbed with an iron hand and by loyal institutions, can rapidly drag democracy into anarchy.

An unconstitutional madness seems to have overtaken large sections of citizens.

Here is what they say:

That the laws of the land must apply equally to those who are in charge of the government, its supporters and its agencies; forgetting that elections are not won to unleash self-indictments;

That justice must not only be done but be seen to be done; as if law officers must be equipped with special binoculars for the purpose;

That judges who have been long adjudicating particular cases must not be transferred mid-stream; as if any judge has a right to administer full and impartial justice;

That investigations must not be tainted by the eager involvement of ruling party elements; as if those who rule do not have the people’s mandate to do as they like;

That the media must be allowed to report and analyse news without fear or favour; as if an independent media is not a threat to national security;

That facts must not be allowed to be compromised by patriotic interventions; as if all facts should not be conducive to the mandate won by the ruling party;

That all political parties have an equal right to engage in politics; as if politics has any role in a democracy, damaging the course of apolitical governance;

That it is the democratic responsibility of political parties to make contact with the masses, especially when atrocities happen; as if, once defeated in elections, political parties can continue to pretend to represent any people at all;

That the most notable instance of “political tourism” in recent years was that of neocolonial institution lawmakers effecting their rogue conditions in Sierra Leone while our own parliamentarians were held back struggling for pittance; as if the world, rather than our own people, did not need to be told how everything there was hunky dory;

That the investigative agencies of the republic must be left free to go where the facts lead; as if such agencies can be trusted to be fair without governmental instructions;

That cutting ribbons and laying foundation stones as elections draw near do not constitute development; as if, like justice, development should not be seen to be promised to be done;

That soaring inflation is not tantamount to the prosperous economy the politicians promised to our people’s real welfare; as if the Sierra Leonean republic can look down upon hot sums of money that enhance the prestige of the economic system among the G7;

That unconscionable income disparity should not be allowed to happen, as per the constitution; as if such disparities do not result from people’s karma rather than from government policy;

That opposition MPs should not be enticed away from the parties on whose platform they may have won an election; as if the republic does not need a strong, one-party dispensation in order to achieve freedom from taxing debates and needless controversies;

That the education system should be geared to inculcate critical thinking rather than conformism; as if such a politically polluted country does not need a single-minded populace that can be trusted to do as they are told;

That alleged wrong-doers must not be liquidated without due process; as if the scant resources of the republic can afford to conduct trials forever or allocate funds for an endless appointment of judges;

That men, especially those in power, must not pass on their moral/ethical onus to others, particularly to women; as if moral/ethical onus is any part of good governance;

That the state must let people follow what faith they like without being drawn into religious contentions during elections; as if all religions can be said to be a patch on wicked politicians’ actions;

That a democratic system does not comprise merely elections or electoral victories but permanent regard for constitutional practices; as if constitutions are not best interpreted by the government only;

That people’s right to peaceful protest on behalf of issues that affect them must remain sacrosanct; as if public protests have ever contributed to good national causes, except when they strengthen the Executive of the day;

That money spent on building grand statues/vistas, and unjustifiable demolition of old structures to build new ones for glory should be spent on schemes that bring succour to the impoverished, and on filling potholes; as if national glory is not a time-honoured goal of patriotic policy, all the way from the Roman empire, the reason why we still remember the Caesars and the Caligulas and the Neros;

That public utterances, especially by those in power must be such as cause trust and healing in the populace; as if spades must not be called spades, especially to demoralise and weaken political nuisances inimical to social and cultural beliefs held by the true nationalists.

The Sierra Leonean republic is thus saddled with a madness that, if not curbed with an iron hand and perpetual motor mouth, and by loyal institutions ever on call, can rapidly drag democracy into anarchy.

Huge Theft At Fawaz Group of Companies

Nation

By

Mahmud Tim Kargbo

-

July 17, 2022

SLL Audio News

Huge Theft At Fawaz Group of Companies

00:00 / 2:46

By Mahmud Tim Kargbo

The Criminal Investigation Department of the Sierra Leone Police Force and the International Criminal Police Organisation (INTERPOL) have issued an international warrant of arrest against three Lebanese brothers that allegedly stole at least $8,000,000 (Eight Million United States dollars) from the Fawaz Group of Companies.

Sources of the investigation confirmed that the three Lebanese men (Rabih Faysal Hamdoun, Walid Faisal Hamdoun and Musa Hamdoun) who used to work for the Fawaz Group of Companies are currently in Lebanon. The three came together and allegedly stole at least Eight Million United States dollars from the said Group of Companies.

“It’s kind of a weird situation,” said one investigating officer. “At this point, the actual amount of theft is at least $8,000,000. For now, we definitely don’t understand the actual amount they’ve embezzled because each day we continue to discover new criminal actions allegedly done by the three. They used different ways to effect their criminal action against the Fawaz Group of Companies, but that’s a detail we are trying to uncover.”

Police have a list of suspects, and believe the three mentioned brothers were involved in the theft, but cannot reveal more at this stage of the investigation.“You don’t see this happen too often,” said another investigating officer, adding that “anything is possible”.

Investigations reveal Rabih Faysal Hamdoun who is the head of the three Lebanese suspects is a prolific criminal, and his most recent offences, which included theft of electrical equipment from a company he worked for before Fawaz Group of Companies, cost the business owner almost $900,000 in misappropriation of funds. In the case of the theft against the Fawaz Group of Companies, he allegedly moved some of the money electronically between commercial banks and foreign exchange bureaus to their relatives in the United States of America and Lebanon.

The chief investigating officer said to me “theft from large organisations like the Fawaz Group of Companies is not a victimless crime. Businesses have been hit hard during the Covid-19 pandemic and the current ongoing Ukraine-Russia war, and criminal activity such as this could be a breaking point for many”.

A letter to The Speaker Of Parliament of Sierra Leone

By

SLL

-

July 12, 2022

Speaker of the house of parliament of Sierra Leone

31c Leicester,
Western Urban,
Freetown.

11^th July 2022.

To The Speaker Of Parliament
Parliament Of Sierra Leone
Towerhill Freetown.

Dear Hon. Speaker Of Parliament,

Re: Request To Expunge Two Sections Provided For The Propositional Representation System (PR System) And The Compulsory National Identification Number As Requirement To Voters In The 2023 Elections In The Current Public Elections Bill 2022 Tabled In Parliament.

Mr Speaker Sir, I bring you season greetings and say Eid Mubarak to you and your family from my board house at Leicester where I have watched many bills in Parliament roll on without the people of this country having the foggiest ideas about the importance, nor the advantages or disadvantages of these bills. Today, I have decided to take up my pen to officially write you as the administrative head of our second arm of government which happens to be The Parliament of Sierra Leone. I want to bring to your attention key reasons why I am urging you as the leader of our legislative house to expunge the two sections in the current Public Elections Bill 2022 that provided for the Proportional Representation System, and National Identification Number as requirements for citizens to Vote in the coming elections.

Mr Speaker Sir, please allow me to draw your attention specifically to our constitution which is the grundnorm of our legal system in Sierra Leone. To start with, let me go directly to the very section that reintroduces the PR system again in our constitution. My Honorable Speaker sir, section 38 (a) was never part of the Constitution of Sierra Leone Act #6 of 1991 until in 2002 when the Former; His Excellency Ahmed Tejan Kabbah (Of Blessed Memory) brought it into our law books through an amendment of our constitution. But what is the intriguing argument about this very section making provision for a PR system? Section 38 (a), if we are to read from its initial drafting, was an insertion to the original Section 38 (1) of our constitution. It was never a section standing on its own but was rather an entrenched clause inserted to fit in for the purpose of elections at a time our country was just coming from war. Let me at this juncture insert section 38 (a) from its original drafters.

By the insertion immediately after section 38 thereof of the following:—

Election by district block representation system

38A.

Section 38 a (1)

Where, under any law for the time being in force, a date for a general election of Members of Parliament has been appointed but constituencies have not been established in accordance with subsection (3) of section 38 for the purposes of such election, the President may, after consultation with the Electoral Commission, direct that such election shall be conducted on the basis of the existing districts in a manner to be known as the district block representation system instead of constituencies.

Mr Speaker Sir, the said section 38 (a1) sole purpose was for a situation where there are no Constituencies at the time running up to elections. The section itself was not amended to stand on its own and was also not a mandatory provision in our constitution as the ruling government and their MPs may want us to believe. The said section from the words “…the president may” and not “the president shall” simply means, that it is not a matter of the only way out, but can be an option if the circumstances arise. Mr Speaker Sir, if you take into consideration the date such law was made and added to our constitution, you will realize the said law was the best fit at that time, but not in our current situation where there are already existing Constituencies. And I will bet my life on this that had it been the country by then been shared into constituents, the late former president would have never introduced or brought into our constitution such draconian law. Section 38 (a) and all its subsections are in contravention with the rest of other provisions in our constitution that guarantee sustainable democracy and good governance.

Mr Speaker Sir, let’s push a bit further on the following subsections of the same section 38a. Section 38 a subsection 3) continued as follows:

Section 38a (3)

Members of Parliament for the seats won by a political party in a district shall be determined by the Electoral Commission from a list of the candidates of that political party for the district submitted to the Electoral Commission before the date of the election and showing the order of preference of the candidates.

According to this very subsection, there is no way one could argue that the said paragraph has any democratic tendency in itself. Section 38 (a3) in its entirety clearly disenfranchised the people of this country and put political parties over the rights of citizens. How will you reconcile this very Section 38 (a3) to Section 5 (subsection 2) of paragraphs (A, B, and C) which state as follows:

Section 5. (2 A, B, C) It is accordingly declared that—

Section 5 (2a) Sovereignty belongs to the people of Sierra Leone from whom Government through this Constitution derives all it powers, authority and legitimacy;

Section 5 (2b) The security, peace and welfare of the people of Sierra Leone shall be the primary purpose and responsibility of Government, and to this end it shall be the duty of the Armed Forces, the Police, Public Officers and all Security agents to protect and safeguard the people of Sierra Leone; and

Section 5 (c) The participation of the people in the governance of the State shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

Mr Speaker, the title itself given to section 5 (Government and the People) is self-explanatory that a Proportional Representation System can only be seen as a bad law incorporated in our constitution. Mr Speaker Sir, kindly note the words “…derives all its powers, authority and legitimacy” If Section 5(2a) of our constitution did not say sovereignty belongs to a political party for government to derive all its powers, authority and legitimacy, why then are we taking this constitutional right to give to political parties against the wishes of the people? Could this be seen as democratic? If the people of this country, according to our constitution, are the custodian of power, authority and legitimacy to choose who they want such power, authority and legitimacy to be given to, let me hasten to say subsection 3 of section 38 (a) for the purpose of democracy and good governance is contradictory to what section 5(2a) is saying and it is void ab initio. Mr Speaker, the words again in subsection 2b are empirical of the fact that those of you in authority that the people have given such authority legitimately must at all-time ensure the security, peace and welfare of us the people of this country. If this is so, to allow anything that will bring unrest to this country or that threatens the peace and stability of this country, those of you in authority will be held, accountable sir. The last and final point that I may kindly draw your attention to again Mr Speaker is the words in Section 5 (c). We as citizens of this country must at all times be allowed to participate in any government activities that are germane to the sustainability of this country. You cannot allow a system that will prevent the people from participating in the life of this country. Kindly note that in this very sub-section of paragraph (c) the word “SHALL” as far as legal interpretation is concerned means mandatory. So, if you are taking a mandatory right from the people to give to a political party, it is my place to remind you, sir, that you are creating a platform for disenfranchisement.

Mr Speaker Sir, from the references made above about the provisions of Section 5 and its following paragraphs, don’t you think this is the best time to expunge such draconian law that disenfranchised the people of this country. Except if we are looking for a repeat of what happens to all of us since 1991, I thrust the people of this country will stand up tall against anything evil that threatens the liveliness of us all. If there is any way democracy allows for an order of preference, as we see for a PR system, why even think of holding elections? Why not select all those affluence people in our communities and districts and tell them to lead us if only leading people has become the idea of the order of preference? Mr Speaker Sir, I don’t want to labour on the dangers of this very section 38a that brought about a system bent on destroying the Democratic ideals of a state. Section 38(a3) itself is “Res ipsa loquitur” on how contradictory it is and a gross violation of people’s power and democratic good governance.

Mr Speaker Sir, I may also want to draw your attention to the constitution of Sierra Leone Act #6 of 1991 again with specific reference to section 77 (K, L, M, N). This very section and the paragraphs mentioned focus on the relationship between a member of Parliament and his political party. To start with, the PR system does not allow for an Independent Candidate to run for any elections. A reintroduction of the PR system already alters the provision made under Section 77(M) provided for independent candidates. Mr Speaker, you would agree with me arguably that in the PR system, considering the provisions of section 77(k, l, m, n) we would lose not only democracy in the well of Parliament, but those members of Parliament will rather work in the interest of their parties that make way for them to Parliament than the people they are supposed to be representing. Mr Speaker Sir, it is not rocket science for us in Sierra Leone that the idea of a political party choosing their leaders instead of the people is clear molestation of the idea of people’s representation. Accountability is totally lost in such a system and the voice of the people will be ignored by those in power. Are we introducing a system that will give few people leading a political party the powers to make choices for others thereby disenfranchising the ordinary citizens of this country and encouraging bribery for those positions? It is an open secret that if we allow political parties to choose those that will be representing the people in Parliament, we are then giving an undue influence to more corruption and state muzzling in Sierra Leone.

Mr Speaker, must I also urge your mind that most of the argument that even members of Parliament supporting the idea of a PR system are putting up is as feeble as most of them have been seeing it. To claim that the reintroduction of a PR system will address the cause of election violence is a clear manifestation of how dishonest some of the representatives we have been sending to Parliament are. One thing that is clear for all of the world is that there is nowhere in the world where elections are not fraught with violence. To say the PR system will address the violence we have been witnessing in previous elections is ridiculously ridiculous. If for bye-elections we have witnessed serious violence, what about when a party now has the responsibility to win a whole district so they can have all the seats in that district? Will this not call for war as every party may want to win all the districts and have all the seats in Parliament? Violence during elections will not stop because we change our electoral laws, it will only stop when we change the message taken to our people in the campaign. If we see politics as a way of bringing national cohesion, then we must be less worried about good electoral laws, which the PR is far from being. We must be worried about good electoral messages that will educate the people on how to vote, why to vote and what they will expect if they voted for parties A, B, or C. We can change the rest of our electoral laws and even the manner of voting, but if we fail to change our campaign messages to our people there will forever be violence.

Mr Speaker, at this juncture, I now turn to the area of compulsory National Identification Number (NIN) intending to be a requirement as per the new Public Elections Bill for citizens to be eligible to vote in the next elections. Mr Speaker Sir, the right for citizens to vote and be voted for is a non-negotiable right enshrined in section 31 of our Constitution of Sierra Leone Act #6 of 1991. The said section also qualifies that which is provided for in section 13 (I) the responsibilities of a citizen. Mr Speaker Sir, what is required of a citizen to be eligible to vote in national elections in Sierra Leone is for such citizen to have reached the age of adulthood and of sound mind. I still could not find where our constitution required the ordinary man who wants to exercise his constitutional right that they need to prove their identity when that is the very work of the Electoral Commission of Sierra Leone during the registration process. For clarity sake on this let me now reference our constitution in the biblical phrase. The constitution of Sierra Leone Act #6 of 1991 in sections 31 and 13(I) respectively provided for the following:

Registration of voters.

Section 31.

Every citizen of Sierra Leone being eighteen years of age and above and of sound mind shall have the right to Vote, and accordingly shall be entitled to be registered as a voter for the purposes of public elections and referenda.

Duties of the citizen.

Section 13 (I)Every citizen shall—

participate in and defend all democratic processes and practices;

If there is no such restriction in our constitution for the ordinary man to vote, then why have it on a bill that must conform with the constitution of Sierra Leone. If we actually had wanted all these changes, the first thing we should have done is to amend the national constitution first because Section 171(15) of the constitution of Sierra Leone, provides as follows:

Section 171 subsection (15)

This Constitution shall be the supreme law of Sierra Leone and any other law found to be inconsistent with any provision of this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void and of no effect.

Conclusively, it is arguably true that the said Public Elections Bill 2022 contravenes the very national constitution which serves as the supreme law of our country, and if we are to go by the provisions of Section 171(15), the bill itself is void ab initio. Mr Speaker Sir, I also want to remind you that there is an ECOWAS Protocol that guides the process of changing electoral laws in any ECOWAS state to prevent or pervert anything that is germane to conflict or unrest. Mr Speaker, permit me to say, the idea of reintroducing a PR system at this material time will cause more harm than good. In a country with over 75% of illiteracy rate, what time do we have now to do civic education to this seven million population on a system called Proportional Representation? As a patriot and caring citizen who has always been utilizing my section 13 rights in our grundnorm, I will hasten to say, those of you who are in authority must always ensure to administer your stewardship with the foremost thought of country first. A PR system will lead this country into another autocratic rule of the one-party state as seen in the early 70s to late 80s. Let the people’s voices be heard!!!

Respectfully Yours,

Malik Shabbaz
+23276909735

Cc:
The Leader, All People’s Congress Party (APC) In Parliament
The Leader, Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) In Parliament
The Leader, Coalition For Change (C4C) In Parliament
The Leader, National Grand Coalition (NGC) In Parliament
The Chairman, All People’s Congress Party (APC)
The Chairman, Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP)
The Chairman, National Grand Coalition (NGC)
The Leader, Consortium Of Progressive Political Parties (COPPP)
The Chief Justice, Judiciary Of Sierra Leone
The Attorney General And Minister Of Justice
The Commissioner, Electoral Commission of Sierra Leone
The Human Right Commission In Sierra Leone
The US Ambassador To Sierra Leone
The EU Ambassador To Sierra Leone
The German High Commissioner In Sierra Leone
The United Nations Resident Coordinator To Sierra Leone
The British High Commissioner In Sierra Leone
The Nigerian High Commission In Sierra Leone
The Gambian High Commission In Sierra Leone
The ECOWAS Parliament
The African Union.

Cost of Living Drives Up Hunger and Poverty, IMF Must Abandon Demand for Austerity

By

Mahmud Tim Kargbo

-

July 12, 2022

Sierra Leone Live Podcast

Cost of Living Drives Up Hunger and Poverty, IMF Must Abandon Demand for Austerity

00:00 / 7:31

By Mahmud Tim Kargbo

Eighty-Seven (87) per cent of the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) COVID-19 loans are requiring Sierra Leone and other developing countries that have been denied equal access to vaccines and are facing some of the world’s worst humanitarian crises to adopt tough, new austerity measures that further exacerbate poverty and inequality.

New analysis by Oxfam finds that 13 out of the 15 IMF loan programmes negotiated during the second year of the pandemic require new austerity measures such as taxes on food and fuel or spending cuts that could put vital public services in Sierra Leone and other developing countries at risk. The IMF is also encouraging six additional countries to adopt similar measures.

In 2020, the IMF claimed to deploy billions in emergency loans to help Sierra Leone and other developing countries cope with COVID-19, often with few conditions or none at all. Recently, IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva urged Europe not to endanger its economic recovery with “the suffocating force of austerity”. Yet, over the past year, the IMF has gone back to imposing austerity measures on Sierra Leone and other lower-income countries.

This epitomises the IMF’s double standard: it is warning rich countries against austerity while forcing Sierra Leone and other poorer ones into it. The pandemic is not over for most of the world. Rising energy bills and food prices are hurting Sierra Leone and other poor countries most. Sierra Leone and other developing countries need help boosting access to basic services and social protection, not harsh conditions that kick people in developing countries when they are already down.

Kenya and the IMF agreed to a $2.3 billion loan programme in 2021, which includes a three-year public sector pay freeze and increased taxes on cooking gas and food. More than 3 million Kenyans are facing acute hunger as the driest conditions in decades spread a devastating drought across the country. Nearly half of all households in Kenya are having to borrow food or buy it on credit.

9 countries including, Sierra Leone Cameroon and Senegal are being required to introduce or increase the collection of value-added taxes (VAT), which often apply to everyday products like fuel, food and clothing, and fall disproportionately on people living in poverty.

Sudan, where nearly half of the population is living in poverty, has been required to scrap fuel subsidies which will hit the poorest hardest. The country was already reeling from international aid cuts, economic turmoil and rising prices for everyday basics such as food and medicine before the war in Ukraine started. Over 14 million people need humanitarian assistance (almost one in every three people) and 9.8 million are food insecure in Sudan, which imports 87 per cent of its wheat from Russia and Ukraine.

10 countries including Kenya and Namibia are likely to freeze or cut public sector wages and jobs, which could mean lower quality of education and fewer nurses and doctors in countries already short of healthcare staff. Namibia had fewer than six doctors per 10,000 people when COVID-19 struck.

A new analysis by Oxfam and Development Finance International (DFI) also published and revealed that 43 out of 55 African Union member states face public expenditure cuts totalling $183 billion over the next five years. Now, with the implementation of these cuts, their chances of achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals will likely disappear. In 2021, an Oxfam review of IMF COVID-19 loans showed that the Fund encouraged 33 African countries including Sierra Leone to pursue austerity policies in the aftermath of the health crisis. The pandemic has not ended but these policies are already taking shape across Africa.

The analysis also shows that Sierra Leone and other African governments’ failure to tackle inequality ― through support for public healthcare and education, workers’ rights and a fair tax system ― left them woefully ill-equipped to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic. The IMF has contributed to these failures by consistently pushing a policy agenda that seeks to balance national budgets through cuts to public services, increases in taxes paid by the poorest, and moves to undermine labour rights and protections. As a result, when COVID-19 struck, 52 per cent of Africans lacked access to healthcare and 83 per cent had no safety nets to fall back on if they lost their job or became sick.

The IMF must suspend austerity conditions on existing loans and increase access to emergency financing. It should encourage Sierra Leone and other African countries to increase taxes on the wealthiest and corporations to replenish depleted coffers and shrink widening inequality. That would actually be good advice.

Oxfam estimates that over a quarter of a billion more people could crash into extreme levels of poverty in 2022 because of COVID-19, rising global inequality and the shock of food price rises supercharged by the war in Ukraine. For more information, download Oxfam’s brief “First Crisis, Then Catastrophe”.

The IMF negotiated 22 COVID-19 loans with 23 countries between 15 March 2021 and 15 March 2022. 15 are loan programmes that came with a full suite of conditionality or policy requirements, six are conditionality-free emergency financing and one is a Flexible Credit Line that does not usually include conditionalities. The IMF’s US$1.4 billion (SDR 1,005.9 million) disbursement to Ukraine was not included in Oxfam’s analysis, as it intended to help meet urgent financing needs and mitigate the economic impact of the war.

In December 2021, IMF managing director Kristalina Georgieva told Euronews that the European Union should not put economic recovery in danger with “the suffocating force of austerity”. The IMF’s own research shows austerity worsens poverty and inequality.

As many as 28 million people across East Africa are at risk of extreme hunger. West Africa is facing its worst food crisis in ten years, with over 27 million people suffering from hunger.

The IMF estimates that the ongoing economic crisis, exacerbated by COVID-19 and the ongoing war in Ukraine, will likely have significant negative effects on living conditions and poverty.

Changing the laws will not change you. Change yourself before changing the laws.

By

Jaime Yaya Barry

-

July 12, 2022

Sierra Leone Live Podcast

Changing the laws will not change you. Change yourself before changing the laws.

00:00 / 4:59

By Jaime Yaya Barry

Imagine spending so much time and resources on changing electoral laws to help you remain in power, and immediately you lose the elections right after changing the rules. Then the very laws you wanted to use against others eventually start working against you. The same laws now make it harder for you to contest and win future elections. What you changed that gave you the powers as President to dismiss electoral commissioners for “professional misconduct” because you are unsatisfied with their performance during elections are now used against your party.

I don’t know much about the constitutional requirements for Proportional Representation, but my understanding is that it was to be applied (in our case) in situations where there are no constituencies and the country, at the time, had very hard-to-reach communities. But apart from that requirement, many of the arguments so far in support of this system appear very unconvincing.

The idea that the PR system will unify us as a nation and minimizes the chances of election violence doesn’t seem to add up. Some even cited how well it worked during Pa Kaba’s time as President but forgot (or failed) to note that the system worked during his presidency mainly because of who Pa Kaba was as a leader. Even as inclusive as it may sound, the system will hardly work under an administration or president bent on dividing the nation. This system will not work under a divisive leader who doesn’t believe in national cohesion. Instead of forcing the leader to act right, the leader will manipulate this PR system to divide the nation further as long as it works in his interest.

Before changing the laws, we must first change our attitude towards the existing laws. We cannot argue about national cohesion or bringing the nation together by setting up election laws that disconnect citizens from their government and accountability and give that power to political parties and their leaders. And as a sitting government, it is impossible to convince citizens that you are changing the electoral laws to help bring citizens together or allow more representation when you have taken more divisive actions in the last four years than uniting the nation. You cannot say you want to achieve national cohesion when your actions are the exact opposite of unity and oneness.

How many conferences have we had over the years to discuss national cohesion? What happened to the various recommendations from those conferences? What happened to the recommendations from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission? It is not that we do not already have pathways to regional representation and national cohesion; the problem is having leaders who are willing and committed to implementing them.

Also, the PR system will further widen the gap in a country where the disconnect between voters and politicians continues to grow daily. Even though citizens will vote for their various representatives, the political parties will decide who gets to make it to parliament on their priority list. Most people will vote for a party because they saw one of their candidates on the list, but the party still decides who makes it to parliament. This is problematic because, instead of pledging to the people, it makes would-be members of parliaments pledge loyalty to their respective political parties. It makes it difficult for MPs to be accountable to the people. There will be fewer Members of Parliament like honourable Tawa Conteh, who defied party politics and called out on his party and other members of parliament on allegations of corruption. MPs like him, even when they are from the ruling party, will be kicked out of the party and replaced with party extremists who will support anything the party leader says. Or, if they can’t kick them out because of their popularity, the party places them at the bottom of the list of priority candidates. It then prioritizes the extremists or those loyal to the party’s leader.

Like Lena Thompson said during the SierraEye debate:

“We want to substitute Proportional Representation as the prescription to solve our failure to examine our collective national vision and our identity as a nation-state. … Without adhering to the principles of democratic governance, whatever system of PR is introduced, will not change our governance system…. Introducing PR is recycling the tensions (during elections) by moving the tensions from one space to another space.”