A state of emergency pronounced March the Precious year expires in March, 24 this year. The expiry may compel the Attorney-General has go back to parliament to seek approval for renewal.
But, it is unclear whether it would be a smooth ride for government. The proclamation for the emergency came after Sierra Leone recorded the index case of Corona Virus Disease. The emergency led to the closure of land and sea borders, and the country’s only international airport was also shut down.
The move was to restrict the movements of persons across borders to suppress the chain of transmission of the virus. As the end game is at hand, Sierra Leoneans hope to breathe a sigh of relief from curfews and lockdowns.
But, the hope for freedom has to be given a careful thought as the State of Emergency would cease to exist only if opposition parties successfully opposed it in parliament. In the realisation of the objective, the main opposition All People’s Congress (APC) is looked upon to present the strongest resistance.
During the debate for the endorsement of the state of emergency, the main opposition initially argued in opposition. It feared that they would be hounded if the emergency is passed into law. But their fears were allayed by parliamentarians of the Ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP).
SLPP assured opposition parties that the State of Emergency would be used only in the fight against the virus. This means, no opposition party official would be harassed or intimidated in the implementation of the state of emergency. Subsequent events however showed that government did not live up to their promises.
A senior member of APC has told this press that intimidation, arrest and detention of opposition officials was commonplace. He emphasised that the APC has been a key target since the inception of the emergency period.
Key APC officials, he went on, who were ministers and heads of agencies were arrested and detained indefinitely, most times, on made-up allegations. In spite of constitutional provisions and relevant laws governing arrest procedures, the arrests and detentions, he said, were never made in compliance with those laws.
Most of those arrested were detained indefinitely, most times, they were released without charges. Government has always justified the detentions by invoking the state of emergency. Apart from the arrest and detention of opposition party officials, the masses have been on the wrong end of police and military actions especially in lockdown periods.
In a lockdown, the public is prohibited from venturing out for whatever purpose. The restriction seems appropriate in as much it is done to preserve the safety of the people, but there is a negative side. The negativity rests on the inability of government to work out the required modalities prior to the pronouncement of a lockdown. Sierra Leone is not a welfare state, and talks about provisions for the welfare of people are out of place.
But, the most frustrating side, no exemption is made for the less privileged when they go out in search of water, food and other basics of life. In the first lockdown, few months back, several complaints of human rights abuse and violations were reported. The security operatives were accused to have taken part in a number of serious human rights abuses that would have warranted investigations by government.
A local activist and teacher of good years, Mr Yusif Bangura has told this medium that At Calaba Town, east of Freetown, the less privileged were targeted for harassment and intimidation. He said a number of people were tortured by police personnel for a slight breach of the lockdown measures.
During lockdowns, he went on, the people had a genuine cause to move and that cause is to seek life supporting elements especially water. The security forces, Bangura said, would not countenance any excuse given by the people.
“What they know: no one moves for anything. They behave like robots or automated machines,” he said.
Bangura further told this press that he had witnessed incidents in which people were asked to lie down on the ground and watch the sun. One such incident, he went on, occurred at Calaba Town, east of Freetown.
“These are serious abuses of human rights by the security operatives,” he said.
He made it clear that the state ought to have investigated into the alleged incidents, but no such action was taken by the state.
Torture, he said, was prohibited by the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone making it obligatory for government to investigate such incidents. The investigations never came, and a culture of impunity reigned among police and military officers.
Calaba Town is not the only community where these incidents took place; other communities in Freetown and in the provinces also saw it too. Since no rules existed to guide the state of emergency, Bangura said, government had opened a wide gate for lording it over the people.
Bangura also told this press that the human rights abuses have one thing in common; they are carried out in opposition strongholds while other parts of the country were spared.
“Communities in the south and eastern Sierra Leone were not harassed or intimidated let alone tortured,” he said.
As if proving right Bangura’s claims, a resident at Allen Town community narrated a sad story during her encounter with the security forces. Adama Kanu told this press that she went out to fetch water during the second day in the lockdown.
Before reaching the well, she went on, she caught up with police officers who told her to go back.
But, her dire need for water held her back. She insistently pleaded to be allowed to fetch water for use for the remaining day of the lock down. The plea angered the police officers who subjected her to torture. Section 29 of the Constitution of Sierra Leone confers powers on the President to pronounce a state of emergency when the life of the nation is threatened by war or disaster.
The same provision also obliges the executive to provide rules and regulations on the implementation of the state of emergency. Under a state of emergency, the President enjoys unlimited powers.
He could order the arrest and indefinite detention of citizens without charge. He also enjoys absolute immunity for whatever measure he takes to restore order. The law prohibits probe into actions of the presidency in an emergency period.
But, the proclamation must be endorsed by parliament before it takes effect. Indeed, the state of emergency was debated and a two-third resolution was passed in parliament, and the SOE came into force.
But, the unfortunate side it lacked rules to regulate its implementation. The erstwhile Attorney-General, Dr Priscilia Schwartz did not present rules for debate.
Almost invariably, Schwartz’s successor also failed to present rules.
Consequently, the state of emergency went without rules, a situation that poses one of the biggest threats to citizens’ rights. The absence of rules became a concern among Sierra Leoneans owing to its potential to violate rights, civil liberties and freedoms of persons.
The rights of Sierra Leoneans were actually abused and violated during curfews and lockdowns, but went unpunished. Nobody questioned what happened in the lockdown, and no one was questioned about the human rights abuses.
The supreme law of Sierra Leone strives to build a culture of human rights to ensure peaceful co-existence in post-conflict Sierra Leone. Human rights experts have argued that fundamental rights are God-given rights to which everybody is entitled.
But, abundant evidence has shown that those rights are under constant threats of abuse especially in emergency situations.
The public loudly calls on opposition parties to present a strong case for the nullification of the state of emergency to stop the abuse.