Author
By Josephus J. Ellie
On 30July 2013, President Ernest Bai Koroma officially launched the Constitutional Review Committee. The 80-member team's core responsibility is to review Act No 6 of 1991 of Sierra Leone and, within 24 months, produce a draft constitution that will be put to a referendum. It is headed by the former Speaker of Parliament and current Ombudsman, Justice Edmond Cowan. So, if the process goes as planned Sierra Leone will have a new national constitution before the next general elections.
I would personally not have favoured a review of our constitution at this moment in the country’s history. The reason is simple: it is not a priority for the manifold of development challenges the country is faced with. Sierra Leone still remains among the poorest countries in the world, with 52.9% of the population living below the poverty line (World Bank). It is still a low income country with an annual GDP of $3.796 billion and Per Capita Income of $ 360 (World Bank). Adult Literacy level is only 41%, and 70% of the country’s youth are either unemployed or underemployed (UNDP).
According to the Global Hunger Index 2013, the level of hunger in the country is ‘Alarming’, meaning it is still far from being able to feed its population. Corruption, poor infrastructure and weak financial management, etc. are a heavy toll on our economy. Yes, what underpins our democracy and survival as a nation is our constitution. But what is the essence of a constitution to the many Sierra Leoneans who are living below $ 1.25 a day, or to the parents who cannot send their children to school? Of what relevance will a reviewed constitution be to a graduate who cannot find a job after several years since university, or to the poor man who cannot get the justice that he deserves from our justice system? The questions will go on and on.
In fact, what is the meaningfulness of a constitutional review process when the documents is being amended piecemeal by parliament as if the country's continued existence as a nation was pinned on that? The recent amendment by parliament to Section 79/1 of the 1991 constitution is a classic case in point. The answers to my questions, therefore, are basically ours as a people to provide.
The National Tourist Board, for example, is currently implementing the Enhanced Integrated Framework Tier 2 - Sustainable Tourism Development and Promotion Project in Sierra Leone. It is just a $ 3 million project that will support capacity-building in the sector, market the country’s tourism and improve 5 ecotourism sites, thereby creating jobs and income for local businesses, all of which will contribute to the development of the country. About $ 4.1 million has been budgeted for the constitutional review process. That amount would have been directed to such micro-projects that would help transform the lives of the ordinary Sierra Leonean. “Democracy is never found on empty bellies”, says Tanzania's founding father Julius Nyerere.
Be that as it may, the process has begun, and a "new" constitution will in any case be voted on in due course. But what lessons have we learnt from the history of constitutional development in Sierra Leone that can be incorporated into this process, or at least inform the review of this very important national document, especially now that there are suggestions from every facet of the Sierra Leonean population as to what changes could be made to the existing constitution? And these inputs are influenced by different values and biases.
From 1863 to 1991, Sierra Leone had a long, complex and interesting experience in constitutional development. Each of these constitutions has had its impacts on the country in varying forms. Lets us look at two important issues here for example: the 1947 constitutional proposal and the 1978 ‘One-Party’ constitution.
The 1947 constitutional proposal by the then governor Stevenson laid the foundation for the political fragmentation and the dirty party politics that has overwhelmed Sierra Leone today. As clearly stated in the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report, the 1947 proposed constitution “…amalgamated the colony and the protectorate into a single political entity, but divided their elite representation into opposing factions, each dedicated to protecting the interests of its own people”.
Beginning in the 1850s, and until the first decade of the 20th century, the Creoles were by far the most politically articulate segment of the Sierra Leone population, but this controversial proposal astronomically increased the protectorate representation in the legislative assembly far above their Creole counterparts. The Creoles therefore strongly opposed the proposal to the extent there were scathing exchanges between H. C Bankole-Bright, the Creole hard-liner and Dr. Milton Margai. Soon, the National Council of Sierra Leone (NCSL) was formed as an opposition to the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP).
Between 1951 and 1962, the United People’s Party (UPP), and People’s National Party (PNP) and the All People’s Congress (APC) were also formed to represent different political interests in the country with little or no national outlook. The rest is history. So, even though the proposed 1947 constitution was not passed, its impacts on present day Sierra Leone are grave. It hatched party politics, which has become the greatest obstacle to national cohesion and identity. It polarised the country into regions, tribes and ethnic cleavages that are of no national interest; the cancer that is fast eating Sierra Leone today.
The 1978 constitution made Sierra Leone a one-party state, with the APC, led by then President Siaka Stevens, as the only legitimate political party in the country, albeit through a heavily rigged referendum. As Lansana Gberie puts it in his book A Dirty War in West Africa: the RUF and the Destruction of Sierra Leone: “Cyril Foray, who was Stevens first Foreign Minister, later described the entire process of introducing a one-party state as a ‘legal violence’“. The one-party constitution even made the country more factional, and eroded the institutions that could have provided alternatives to the endemic ‘one-partyism’. The concomitant vices of the one-party constitution culminated into the 11 years of civil war which wreaked untold havoc on the country.
According to Justice Cowan, the committee is not rewriting the 1991 constitution, their main task being to reduce its ambiguity for legal interpretation and amend clauses, etc. At the end, we would not actually have a new constitution, but an amended 1991 constitution. Therefore, as we anticipate a reviewed constitution for Sierra Leone, let us remember that whatever we do today, will affect generations yet unborn. Our focus should be to maintain the true spirit behind the 1991 constitution, and how the entire constitutional review process will be transparent. We need a constitution that will foster national unity and cohesion; one that anchors our identity as Sierra Leoneans, and not as Mendes, Fullahs, Temnes, Limbas, or as APC, or SLPP or PMDC. The new constitution should usher Sierra Leone into a new era of unfettered justice for all, judicial independence, respect for rule of law and respect for the people of Sierra Leone. It should be an embodiment of fundamental human rights; rights that are considered basic for the realization of an individual’s full human nature ( including education, food, water supply, security, freedom, peace, electricity, good roads, good management of our natural resources, etc). The next constitution of Sierra Leone should subordinate all political, tribal, regional interests to national interests. It should support state institutions at national, regional and district levels to facilitate sustainable development in the country.
Above all, the Constitutional Review Committee should in reality be totally independent and undiluted. Free from interference from the current government or any segment of it, and not marred or tainted by speculations or rumours of diabolical plans to produce a document that will plunge the country into another political quagmire. Also, considering the recent amendment of Section 79 of the 1991 constitution, it is thus feared that dubious parliamentary action could impact the entire process. Whatever document that is produced by Justice Cowan and team will have to undergo a series of executive and legislative procedures which, if not guarded, will be manipulated. This must not be allowed!
The author is a Sierra Leonean pursuing an Msc degree in Regional Development Planning and Management at the University of Dortmund, Germany.
(C) Politico 14/01/14
