The Sierra Leone Advocacy Movement- Global (SLAM-Global) has blasted the All People’s Congress (APC) Secretary-General, Lansana Dumbuya, accusing him of committing a “historic betrayal” by refusing to take the disputed June 2023 elections to court.
According to SLAM-Global, Dumbuya’s decision not only robbed millions of Sierra Leoneans of their constitutional right to have the results tested in law but also gave President Julius Maada Bio and the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) an open path to entrench what the group continues to describe as an “illegitimate regime.”
The move, SLAM-Global insists, will go down as one of the APC’s gravest blunders, a choice that silenced its supporters and handed the government political cover at a time when international observers themselves had raised concerns about transparency and credibility in the electoral process.
In a press released, SLAM-Global accused Dumbuya of committing a “grave historical blunder” by refusing to pursue legal redress after the disputed June 2023 elections.
According to the advocacy group, that refusal not only betrayed the will of voters, but also handed President Julius Maada Bio and the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) a free pass to consolidate what SLAM-Global has consistently described as an “illegitimate regime.”
The controversy stems from the decision by the APC leadership not to challenge the official election results in court despite widespread allegations of vote-rigging, manipulation, and what international observers called a “lack of transparency” in the tabulation process.
The advocacy group further argued that by declining to file a petition before the Supreme Court, the APC squandered its constitutional right to contest the results, effectively, silencing millions of citizens who believed their votes had been stolen.
“History will judge Mr. Dumbuya harshly for failing to take the battle to the courts,” No matter how compromised the judiciary may appear, it was still the duty of the APC leadership to exhaust every constitutional mechanism available. By refusing to do so, the APC helped legitimize the very fraud it condemned in public,” SLAM-Global declares in its statement.
The question of accountability, SLAM’s intervention comes at a time of mounting frustration among Sierra Leoneans, especially APC supporters who feel abandoned and politically stranded. Many expected the party to challenge the results in court as a matter of principle, even if the odds of success were slim. For them, the refusal reinforced suspicions that sections of the APC leadership were more interested in safeguarding their personal privileges than defending the democratic rights of the people.
Furthermore, the group insists that Dumbuya must take responsibility and publicly admit the mistake. “Leadership requires courage,” SLAM-Global noted. “Mr. Dumbuya cannot continue to pretend that the party’s inaction was a strategic move. It was a failure plain and simple that has allowed the Bio regime to continue misgoverning without restraint.”
Observers pointed out that taking the matter to court would have had symbolic value even if the judiciary ruled against the APC. It would have placed the disputed results on formal record, created a paper trail for future reference, and kept international attention on Sierra Leone’s democratic shortcomings.
Instead, critics say, the APC’s silence gave the government room to normalize its contested victory. Within months of the election, the SLPP strengthened its grip on state institutions, while opposition voices grew increasingly muted.
“Silence is complicity”: By failing to litigate, the APC denied the people a voice in the highest court of the land. They failed to demonstrate resistance where it mattered most,” SLAM-Global argues.
Pressure from within and without: Dumbuya has defended the APC’s decision on several occasions, often citing a lack of trust in the judiciary and fears that a court challenge would be futile, a reasoning SLAM-Global describes as “shortsightedness”.
In even compromised systems, SLAM-Global argued that as opposition party must have tested the limits of the law rather than concede defeat without a fight.
International organizations including the United States and the European Union, have also expressed concerns about the credibility of the 2023 election.
According to SLAM, a court challenge would have bolstered these voices and perhaps led to stronger external pressure on Bio’s administration.
As the APC prepares for future political battles, SLAM warns that it must confront the ghosts of 2023 if it hopes to regain public trust, insisting that without accountability, the opposition risks alienating its base and ceding the moral high ground to the ruling party.
“Mr. Dumbuya owes the APC membership and the people of Sierra Leone a frank admission that the party’s refusal to seek justice in court was a grave mistake. Anything less is dishonesty,” the SLAM statement maintains.
For many Sierra Leoneans, this debate is not just about the past election, but about the future of democratic accountability in the country. If political leaders can walk away from contested polls without exhausting legal remedies, critics fear it sets a dangerous precedent that undermines electoral justice.
Eventually, the call by SLAM-Global is therefore more than a political jab it is a demand for truth-telling, accountability, and lessons learned. Whether Lansana Dumbuya and the APC leadership heed that call remains to be seen. But, one fact is clear; the refusal to go to court after the 2023 elections has become a defining moment in Sierra Leone’s political discourse, one that will continue to haunt both the opposition and the ruling party for years to come.