After waves of political wrangling as one of the most controversial bills has been passed into law. Cyber Security and Crime Act, 2021 is now here to regulate the cyber space. The new law criminalizes distribution of pornographic materials, blackmailing, incitement among others. The law is very much akin to Part-Five of Public Order, 1965.
Minister of Information and Communication has shown strong insistence on the passage of the bill into law. Minister Swarray made his way through owing to arguments that if other countries have such laws why not Sierra Leone. The information Minister cited a number of conventions that provide for digital regulation.
Opposition parties were jittery and panic stricken when the bill was initially introduced in parliament.
The bill contained dangerous clauses that directly hinge on the privacy and other civil liberties of the citizens. It confers much powers on the Minister of Information and the police. The bill initially empowers a police officer to go into a person’s mobile phone to look for materials relevant to a crime.
Fearing police unprofessionalism, Parliamentarians argued that the bill should not be passed into law if it remained in that state. The umbrella body for journalists (Sierra Leone Association of Journalists), civil society organizations and other members of the public expressed similar concerns.
They foresee and fear rampant violations of the law. SLAJ, in particular, made recommendations that proposed slight modifications to the bill. Owing to the acrimony, Speaker of Parliament ordered the Information Minister to embark on more public sensitization on the law.
The order was complied with, and proposed modifications effected. The minister’s powers were considerably cut down in the second bill now law. Almost invariably, police powers under the new law were restricted. A police officer who, for instance, reasonably suspects that a particular person has committed a crime under the new law must make reference to a competent judicial authority before he effects an arrest.
The police officer is obliged by law to give satisfactory reason for the arrest. If the judge agrees with him, the police can effect the arrest. The situation is very much the same as when police officer wanted to arrest anybody on warrant. The warrant has to be signed by either a magistrate or judge before the police officer can arrest.
These are safeguards under the new law to forestall ultravires. But, the question of police adherence to the rules is the most frequently asked. The relevance of this fundamental question is linked to police behavior in recent times.
Despite conditions and directives found in the constitution about police arrest and detention, the police have trampled on these laws with impunity.
References were made to the arrest and detention of high profile members of opposition parties especially the main opposition All People’s Congress (APC). A senior member of APC and former minister, Dr Sylvia Blyden was picked up and detained for close to three weeks in police custody for minor offences.
By her status, Sylvia was supposed to have been granted bail on self-recognizance. But, owing to police unprofessionalism and myopic loyalties to PAOPA, consideration for bail was completely ruled out.
In a related development, wife of former Minister of Defence, Isata Saccoh was also illegally arrested and detained beyond the recognized maximum detention period. Sierra Leone’s Constitution says a person can be detained three days for minor offences and 10 days for capital crimes.
Capital crimes include treason, murder, Robbery and offences that carry the death penalty. Despite these legal safeguards, the former minister’s wife was held in custody for over two weeks for an offence of facilitating the escape of her husband who was on remand for an alleged treason.
Police officers and state lawyers could prove none of the offences for which Sylvia and others were arraigned. They are concocted charges and the methods used to bring them to court falls outside the ambit of the law.
Reference was also made to police and army conduct during state of emergency.
The public health emergency which was proclaimed to contain COVID-19 was abused by security operatives. The provision which directs government to formulate rules in the form of constitutional instruments was never complied with. Throughout the year, rules were never laid before parliament.
This means the state of emergency was implemented at citizen’s detriment. A state of emergency without rules means the citizens are at the mercy of the security forces.
Arguments about illegality of the Commissions of Inquiry was also brought in. Section 150 in the constitution which provides for the formulation of rules to regulate the practice and procedure of all commissions of inquiry was also not complied with.
The commission existed and wrapped up without rules. All these considerations of legal boycotts and police unethical behaviour frighten a great many sierra Leoneans about the new law.
Elections are very close. WhatsApp group members and others fight their media wars by digital means. Messages of Adebayor would be sought after. The police will not hesitate to do the bidding for PAOPA.
Mobile phones and computers are no longer safe. Once seized and taken to a police station on slight and unreasonable suspicion, computers and mobile phones become state property. They even get missing in police stations.
Computers and mobile phones of members of opposition would be the most vulnerable. Police loyalty to government of the day remains unshaken even if it is a shadow or caretaker government. The public waits to see how the new law would be enforced.