Charles Margai insists “no regrets” for Kamajor threat

Opposition leader, Charles Francis Margai, has told Politico that he sees nothing wrong in his statement which the police consider inflammatory and subversive and for which he was arrested and detained for three days and is being investigated. “I have no regrets. My statement was predicated on facts which I narrated. But for reasons best known to the police they chose just that extract of it and to make a mountain out of something which to my mind was very insignificant,” he said. The leader of the People’s Movement for Democratic Change was speaking after his three nights in detention after his arrest by police on Friday 10 May 2013 on allegations of making statements that were deemed subversive. It followed a heated and long drawn-out dispute with the First Lady Sia Nyama Koroma over a piece of land they both lay claims to. He was released on bail but still without charge. He spoke to Politico. Politico: Mr. Charles Francis Margai, what do you make of your arrest now that you have been released? Charles Margai: Thank you very much. It was sad, really sad. I just could not believe what occurred having regard to the fact that my party and I played a role in making President Koroma who he is. But be that as it may, it did not come as a surprise. I believe one of the reasons that brought about the arrest, was perhaps to muzzle me and to drive fear into me when I said I was going to cause a warrant to be issued for the arrest of Sia Koroma [the First Lady] and her cohorts for her role in demolishing my fence and carting away all of my building materials etc etc. I believe that was the principal reason. Politico: But the Police say you made certain statements at a press conference which they consider to be subversive. For example, you said that you had thousands of members of the disbanded Kamajor civil defence militia at your beck and call that you were going to call to Freetown to protect you and your property. Wasn't that a bit beyond the pale? Charles Margai: No, I don't think so. I mean they were coming if at all it was necessary which I said I hope it would not be necessary. It was to come and defend my property, should the need arise and which the law gives me the right to do as long as I defend my property within reasonability, using reasonable force. Politico: Reasonable force by bringing in members of a disbanded armed group that fought in the country's civil war? Charles Margai: Let us not forget that His Excellency the President in 2007 made a statement which is much more, in fact, explosive to the effect he said that he had over a million people and that if the election results did not go his way he would make the country ungovernable. Politico: He was probably referring to his supporters and you were not necessarily referring to your supporters. You are referring to members of a disbanded armed group. Charles Margai: No, it is not a question of supporters or armed group. These men are not under arms. But it is the conclusion wherein he said he would make the nation ungovernable - that is the crux of the matter. Not the number of men. You can use a few men to make the state ungovernable. So the question of him having over one million is immaterial, it is the essence of him making the state ungovernable. Politico: So with the benefit of hindsight, having made that statement, do you still not regard that threat to bring in those people as a bit irresponsible? Charles Margai:… I do not see anything wrong with that statement; I have no regrets; the statement was predicated on facts which I narrated. But for reasons best known to the police they chose just that extract of it and to make a mountain out of something which to my mind was very insignificant. Politico: You also appear to be saying in that recording at the press conference that you would like to see the back of the president. What exactly do you mean? Charles Margai: Obviously we started together. I gave him support but then he has digressed from the route we charted to bring happiness, prosperity to the people of this nation. I would not pretend to say that I would want to see him continue. But be that as it may, you know there is a petition in court; if the judges were to do what is expected of them…that if they decide in favour of SLPP, that of course is the back of the president. Over and above that I believe that one serious mistake the president has done which again could make us see his back is the role he has given Dr Sylvia Blyden. Sylvia is definitely going to undo this president as she has already begun Politico: How is that? Charles Margai: Well the statements she’s been making. For example she went to me at CID [Criminal Investigations Department]asking me if I could retract what I had said so that this matter could be resolved amicably. And because there was a prospect of detaining me for upwards of ten days. I merely laughed because she was just displaying her ignorance. Politico: Is it not true that some members of your family made a representation to the president whils he was in Makeni pleading for your release and for the matter to be buried? Charles Margai: I believe Justice Margai did that as a very senior member of the family. Don’t forget that President Koroma stood trial before the elections [in 2007] in Justice Margai’s court, then as principal magistrate. President and I know exactly the role I played and the fairness that was exuded by Justice Margai otherwise he definitely would not have contested the presidency if Justice Margai had listened to instructions given by his bosses. Politico: Are you saying that Justice Margai’s representation to the President was not with your acquiescence? Charles Margai: Well he did not communicate with me and he could not have communicated. But of course I believe that that was the right thing to do. As a senior member of my family, in my absence he had every right to go and talk with the president to know exactly what happened. Although the president I understand said he did not know I was incarcerated which I find very, very difficult to understand because I was minister of internal affairs in charge of the police and the president is briefed on an hourly basis by the Inspector General of Police, the minister of internal affairs, the defence minister, the chief of defence staff, the fire force people, prisons, etc etc. So to say that he was not briefed and that I was apprehended without his knowledge, well I don’t know. It’s a matter of belief. Politico: So what happens now, the fact that you were released by the police without charge, do you consider that strange? Charles Margai: Well it is not strange. You see, if you have taken a step which later you realised was a false step then there are so many ways of addressing the issue. I don’t know what they have in mind but certainly I am not going to give up this battle to ensure that I get back my land, especially in the light of the statement made by the erstwhile minister of lands, Dr. Bobson Sesay. We now know that the land is not state land because this was what the first lady was banking on.  And even if it were a state land what right had she to interfere with it by way of an attempt to retrieve it. Politico: But in a statement released by the ministry of lands, the plot of land in question, in fact, belonged to the state until it was acquired or leased to the First Lady Charles Margai: There is no evidence of that land having been leased to the First Lady. I have produced all supporting documents from the conveyance that was conveyed to my client. Before me, Serry Kamal was acting as solicitor. And before Serry Kamal, Wrights & Co. I only came in after everything had been conveyed and registered. To say that the land is a state land is definitely a misrepresentation. Politico: So you are not giving up on the land? Charles Margai: Obviously not. Politico: And what's your next step? Charles Margai: Well, let me keep that close my chest as the winning card Politico: Mr Margai thank you very much. Charles Margai: You’re welcome