By Andrew Keili
What to write about this week is indeed a no brainer. Last week we all got absorbed into the euphoria or lack thereof of the National Peace and cohesion conference. The conference did take place and was indeed well organized, if not patronized by some major political players. The oratorical skills and the message of the young Ms. Samai admonishing our leaders, the rhetorical flourish and peace overtures of the “latter day saint and Peace Ambassador”, Alpha Kanu, the mastery of issues by Dr Kandeh Yumkella and the public display of filial and party unity with his brother, Minister Foday Yumkella, on the podium would all compete for the entitlement of deep “pondering” for the week. I particularly found the contribution of the Rwandan and Kenyan Resource people enlightening. We can certainly learn from their trials and tribulations to get their commissions to where they are today.
Nothing is however worth “pondering” more than the saga involving the Bar Association President Basita Michael who has been praised and vilified for her contribution at the conference. She seems to have become a thorn in the flesh to avid supporters of this government. I listened with intent to her contribution-and you could hear a pin drop when she outlined her views with clarity and candour. What exactly did Batisa say? Let me provide a summary:
Batisa said the current government is practising a policy of “division and marginalization” and suggested that this discourages investment. According to her, the division along tribal lines is undoing institutions. “You cannot preach peace and sack people from tenured jobs, you cannot preach peace and impose a speaker on Parliament against the wishes of the majority in parliament. You cannot preach peace and deny access to justice in political cases, including cases brought forward by the Bar Association”. She forcefully suggested the country needs “committed leadership”, as suggested by the Chief Minister, who she said did not elaborate on what he meant by this. She opined that committed leadership means “respectable behaviour and immediate attention to the marginalized”. Even the First Lady was not off limits as she suggested the Office of the First Lady should advise her to tone down her rhetoric as it was getting divisive. The First Lady is regarded as “mother of the nation”, she stressed, and should bring all ”her children” together. She criticized the Lands Minister for forceful seizure of land without adherence to rule of law.
Her contribution seemed to catch government supporters and some others off guard. The Minister of Tourism and Culture, Memunatu Pratt, herself, a Peace Expert momentarily dropped her Peace hat. According to her, the Bar Association and Civil society should also be added to the list of those who bear the brunt of the blame for the nation’s divisions. Former first lady, I.J. Kabbah, in her contribution from the floor was equally critical of the Bar Association. “Where was the Bar Association when SLPP women who were raped in the party office after the 2007 election could not get justice in court”, she asked. An avid supporter of the First lady was livid and suggested Batisa had no right to mention the first lady as she was not part of any national division.
Then came the time for Batisa to provide answers to contributions from the floor. If she had not provided enough clarity to her contribution, her clarification of issues was even more explosive.
She was not responsible for the “action or inaction of past administrations of the Bar Association” She agreed with her “inquisitors” that “today is a product of the past” but mentioned forcefully that we should not allow the past to hold us to ransom. “We should not be shackled by the past. Bad stuff by the past administration should not justify bad stuff by the current administration. If we are not careful, we will be in a quagmire of an epic proportion”. According to her, people in the past administration had done bad things and are being punished by the holding of Commissions of Inquiry to make them accountable. She stressed that what was needed now was-“adherence to the rule of law, respect for the constitution and practising human rights”.
One would have thought that this sparring would stop in the hall. No, it continued in the media and there were pro and anti Batisa camps. Her role has overshadowed other issues which could have been brought to the fore by the conference.
A vitriolic critic noted:
“Let’s face it, Basita was completely out of line for not owning up to the Bar’s excesses or better still, our Bar’s complicity in ravaging our Constitution during the Ernest Bai Koroma Presidency.”
He quoted her as supporting the ouster of ex VP, Sam Sumana by a statement he attributed to her:
“In other words by seeking asylum or refugee status he (the VP) removed himself from his own office with the intention of no longer being part of this government. The subsequent announcement therefore by the president of the dismissal of the VP was just a natural consequence of the unwillingness of the VP to be subject to our jurisdiction.”
Other statements of support or condemnation have bordered sometimes on the personal. There is little doubt however that whilst opposition supporters regard her as a champion, government supporters view her negatively.
But what does Batisa Michael and the Bar Association stand for? Who is the real Batisa Michael? Her utterances would seem to indicate she is a woman of many parts, who does not mind upsetting the status quo.
She has been known to speak out against criminal and seditious libel laws:
“We respectfully urge the President His Excellency Julius Maada Bio to fulfil the long standing promise to repeal the Criminal and Seditious Libel laws consistent with the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the needs of a democratic society.”
She has fought for implementation of the results of the Constitutional Review commission:
“We also urge the Government to take active steps to ensure the review and implementation of the recommendations of the Constitutional Review Commission in line with the wish and aspirations of the people of Sierra Leone”
She has fought to review the sexual offences Act
“By urging the Government to comply with section 150 of the Constitution and to amend Section 19 of the Sexual Offences Act, ALL we are simply asking for is a LITTLE LITTLE RESPECT for the Constitution and the Rule of law. Is it too much to ask?”
Batisa has taken her fight to the Lebanese community leaders and has shown she is also a champion for women. After the recent election of their executive, she wrote:
“However I also wish to take this opportunity to note with dismay that not a single woman is on the committee. With the strides that have taken place in women’s representation across the world it is frankly embarrassing. How will the interests and concerns of women be properly addressed if they are not represented on the Committee? Is the Committee of the opinion that women’s issues are insignificant? Unfortunately this reality even extends to YSC and Lebanese School where capable educated women have been ignored and only men appointed to the Board of Directors of these institutions.”
The Bar Association under her leadership made it very clear that they welcome the commission of inquiry and at the same time applauded the government’s effort to combat corruption and ensure accountability. They insisted however that the commission of Inquiry must fully comply with section 150 of the 1991 constitution of Sierra Leone on the rules of court committee. When the APC suggested the Association had condemned the commission of Inquiry, they categorically said this was erroneous and dissociated the Association from the views expressed in the APC’s Press Release
Whatever may have been its failings in the past, the Bar, more lately has been proactive. Even the previous administration of the Bar Association, headed by Rhoda Sufian Kargbo Nuni had taken on the previous government on police excesses, IMC exceeding its mandate by acceding to government’s request to stop the operation of the Monologue programme and many other “excesses” of government and the Police. Rhoda wrote in her end of term report:
“I pledged that the SLBA will continue to participate in and have a voice on issues of national importance. …………the Bar must be seen to act as a pressure group on all spheres of society including government to ensure adherence to the rule of law, democratic principles and good governance. As a Bar we’ve always strove to maintain that fine balance between limitations placed on us by the nature of our constitution and the expectations of the public who regard us as the upholders and defenders of Right.”
What is astonishing in this Bintumani case is that in a short presentation before a wide national audience, Batisa Michael succeeded in condemning all three branches of government. Whatever may have been its failings in the past, it is heartening to note that a Professional Association is raising its head above the parapet to make government accountable. A professional organization performs services that are intended to improve public health, safety and welfare. This demands dedication beyond Pecuniary and Personal-Commitment to the ‘calling’ with ethics and quality of work should transcend any other issues. How I wish other Professional Associations, which over the years have been treated with levity by successive governments could rise up to the challenge. Up to now my own Association,-the Sierra Leone Institution of Engineers has been fighting unsuccessfully, despite meetings with all the Ministers of Works over the past 15 years to revise its governing Act and to give the Institution more teeth to regulate the work of the Engineering profession. Even the Architects, Accountants and other Associations are dispirited by the inaction of successive governments’ to their entreaties to improve the national situation.
Kudos to the lawyers. As for Batisa, she has recently received three Awards- One for being amongst the most 100 influential Sierra Leoneans, another for being one of the 50 most influential women and a third for being the most outstanding female legal Practitioner, 2019. The hope is that she and her Association will continue the fight for truth and justice and help bring sanity to our governance landscape.
The tendency in this country to portray anyone who dares criticize government as a pro-opposition operative is not a new one and must be resisted if we are to develop as a nation. Criticism from certain quarters, if genuine can sometimes help keep the government on its toes to achieve great things. The Bar Association should be given the latitude to work alongside government and civil society partners to both strengthen government institutions—with a focus on the justice system—and reinforce people’s capacity to demand justice and accountability, two basic components of sustainable peace.
Batisa may be regarded now as a “thorn in the flesh” but the government must take this in good faith and address the issues raised and justify those which in its view can be justified. The Apostle Paul from whom the expression “thorn in the flesh” is derived stated thus:
“Therefore, in order to keep me from becoming conceited, I was given a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. 8 Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. 9 But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”-2 Cor 12: 7-10) Basita may be a “thorn in the flesh” (but certainly no messenger of Satan!) but sometimes we need someone to keep us in check (as Paul’s ailment did) in order for us to rise to higher heights.
Ponder my thoughts.