Sierra Leone’s President Julius Maada Bio is now three months in office since his controversial declaration winner of the June polls, and Sierra Leoneans still await action from Britain. Unlike the United States which has acted tough on Bio’s government by imposing travel ban, visa restrictions and withholding the much-needed USD444m development fund under the Millenium Challenge Compact.
US’s action aims at nothing other than to restore democracy which has been hijacked by President Bio. By compelling the Chief Electoral Commissioner, Mohamed Kenewui Konneh to declare him winner of the elections under threats of brute force, Bio isolates himself from the rest of the community of democratic nations. It is a move of the United States which is the world’s greatest nation will never forgive him.
Bio, apart from allegedly stealing elections in daylight, he also threw insults at the international community for not doing enough to help Sierra Leone especially when the country was caught in the throes of a civil war, a move that has attracted tough feedback from the United States. Unlike the first ban which only restricted only government officials from entering the United Sates, the second restriction is blanket since a US visa ban has been imposed on all Sierra Leoneans. But, Bio has still not wavered in his provocation against the US and the west.
No country was left out when Bio openly challenged the rest of the world, but Britain still drags her feet towards Sierra Leone’s situation. The Brits, one time Sierra Leone’s colonial authorities and the permanent head of the Commonwealth are expected to act tougher than the United States to ensure that Bio does not get away with the theft of Sierra Leoneans’ votes.
Although Britain has stopped funding, many say, the action alone is not enough especially when one looks back at British role in the 2018 political transition. Their pronouncement of a regime change saw power changing hands from erstwhile President Ernest Bai Koroma to Bio.
In what appeared a British-sponsored political transition, former President Ernest Bai Koroma was lured into handing over power to President Julius Maada Bio amid concerns that Bio did not win the election. Former British High Commissioner to Sierra Leone, Guy Warrington nearly established offices at State Lodge, State House and ECSL (Electoral Commission for Sierra Leone) to ensure that APC did not continue in office after 2018.
Britain wanted to see that bio became President at all cost, and Koroma was threatened with human rights crimes if he acted otherwise. It came to pass as presidential power was handed over to Bio amid big doubts that he won the elections since the main opposition, All People’s Congress (APC) had more seats than SLPP itself.
Apart from the political support Bio enjoyed from Britain, the former colonial authority also helped to stabilise his regime by sponsoring the defunct Biobele Georgewill commissions of inquiry whose mandate was to probe persons who were President, Vice President, ministers and deputies.
Much of the money used to keep the commissions in full swing during the investigation came from British tax-payers’ money. Although the commissions lacked rules of evidence, most of their findings and recommendations were endorsed by government as former government officials’ estates have been seized while others still battle it out in the Appeals Court.
Now, the time is here for Britain to act tough on Bio who still retains the presidency after he has lost the June-24 election, a real subversion of the will of Sierra Leoneans. A popular argument holds that Britain would clear its name only if it comes down heavily on the current government the same way it did against then APC regime.
However, signs that Britain will come down hard on Bio remains faint since they are still quiet about the situation. Silence means consent, and too much silence will raise suspicion of collusion or complicity between Bio and the Brits.
Prominent Sierra Leoneans in the diaspora, have few days ago, accused Britain of playing double role in Sierra Leone’s post-election crisis as they appear to be surreptitiously backing Bio’s government owing to undisclosed reasons. Although others have argued to the contrary, the allegation against Britain however appears to be watertight especially when one looks at the action of the British High Commissioner to Sierra Leone, Lisa Chesney.
Chesney’s recent courtesy visit to the Mines Minister was seen a big attempt to legitimise Bio’s government which many Sierra Leoneans as well as the world community consider illegitimate. Her action has caused much ink to be spilled by media observers as well as enlightened members of the public casting big doubt on her actions.
Sierra Leoneans still wonder what prompts the visit as Britain too appears to have snubbed Bio for holding what many called “a stolen mandate.”
The High commissioner however has been tightlipped about why she goes against her country’s interest. Chesney’s action also raises questions about her true loyalty to the democratic cause in Sierra Leone since this moment calls for tough action. Chesney was with other ambassadors who spent sleepless nights in the provinces to see that Sierra Leone conducted free and fair bye-elections anywhere a vacancy occurred.
Sierra Leoneans saw firsthand how the diplomatic corps passed the night in a booth in Tonkolili district to ensure that peace and fair play prevailed throughout the electoral process. They had their experience from other parts of the country where bye-elections were violent and troublesome.
In Tonko Limba, for instance, an APC supporter was fatally injured in a violence that erupted there during voting. Koinadugu in the Northern region and Bonthe in the South and in Sierra Leone’s capital were no difference in thuggery during voting with opposition members and supporters always on the wrong end.
The outcome of a violent election is hardly acceptable since voters would not get the required atmosphere to exercise their franchise. The deployment of diplomats in polling centres ahead of elections is a proactive strategy to maintain peace during voting, but there was a conundrum which was not easily discernible.
The deployment sent shock waves and danger signals to Bio that his regime was at an end regardless of gains made over the years. As a former army general, he quickly red between the lines, interpreted the meaning and worked out clear-cut strategies to retain power after elections.
Rigging, intimidation, arrest and detention of opposition politicians, harassment, creation of a police state and the use of widespread terror tactics constituted Bio’s main strategy to win the elections.
But, it is a test of the waters as he is sure to go if the international community and the people of Sierra Leone go against him. He would however score a big goal if the diplomatic officials and Sierra Leoneans turn a blind eye at the political situation. To ensure that Bio is forced to a re-run of the June election which has been the people’s focus at the moment, the people of Sierra Leone continues their strong appeals to Britain to tread on the US path owing to the tight diplomatic relations that have existed between the two countries for decades.
At the moment, the United States has no true friend and ally than Britain, and no one expects the latter to act contrary to US’s interest. The two countries support each other in the protection of the values comes for which they stand for, and neither side has disappointed the other.
The world saw how Britain supported the US-led invasion of Iraq to disarm President Saddam Hussein, remove him from power and to free the Iraqis. Britain also backed up the US in the overthrow of the Afghastani Taleban regime that posed a big threat to global peace and security.
Britain also threw her back to the US in the removal of the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi from power owing to serious abuse of human rights. In all these missions, Britain and the US were successful as they spoke with one voice. Why Britain delays in supporting the US in restoring democracy in Sierra Leone?