By Allieu Sahid Tunkara
Hundreds of prisoners remanded have walked out from pre-trial detention facilities across the country. They were held there for months, and they now enjoy the light of a free day. The offences for which they were kept behind bars are minor, misdemeanour and summary. By virtue of the offences allegedly committed, they were supposed to be speedily tried. But delayed trial is the norm.
Hassan Kamara, one of the freed prisoners, explained to nightwatch that he was in custody at the Pa Demba Road Male Correctional Centre for months. Kamara had no knowledge about the offence for which he was arrested and incarcerated.
“I don’t know the reason for my arrest and detention,” he disclosed.
Hassan made this statement in Krio as he is an uneducated migrant from upcountry. He is in Freetown to seek fortune through hawking of goods. Other freed prisoners narrated similar ordeal.
As they leave the prisons with no skills, their capacity to earn has been drastically reduced as most are grappling with various ailments. Most are pale and sickly with no means to return home. No clothes to wear and nowhere to sleep. They roam the streets of Freetown and sleep there. Life is terrible for these freed prisoners.
Legal Aid Board Sierra Leone (LABSL) is an agency set up by the state to address gaps fraught with the justice system. LABSL has demonstrated keen effort in that direction especially pro bono legal representation for indigent citizens.
Most of the freed prisoners, who spoke to the nightwatch newspaper, expressed hope in LABSL as they said the agency is properly positioned to champion the cause of justice for all. It can be argued that the legal expertise of LABSL restores the liberty of the remanded prisoners.
Though LABSL has undertaken great steps in the struggle for a serene justice system, gaps are still present and this article seeks to explore them.
VICTIMS OF MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE
Current trends in the justice system have indicated that many people, including those freed prisoners, are victims of a miscarriage of the country’s justice system. Interviews conducted show that most of the freed prisoners were arrested and detained without knowledge of the offences they committed. They were remanded for months and released without the pronouncement of a guilty verdict.
Others were released for want of prosecution, meaning sufficient evidence could not be adduced against them. Owing to these irregularities, factual or procedural errors often result into a miscarriage of justice. In situations of this nature, the poor and downtrodden are at the wrong end of these unsealed gaps.
Quite recently, the judiciary pronounced a ‘bail and sentence’ policy for misdemeanour offences to cut down the pre-trial detention phenomenon. According to this policy, persons who meet the conditions of ‘suretyship’ must be accorded the right to stand for all arrested or detained persons as long they do not pose flight risk except for felonious offences, which carry capital punishment.
THE COMPENSATION MYTH
The Constitution of Sierra Leone Act No.6 of 1991 is very much silent on the right to compensation for victims of miscarriage of justice. The Constitution, though contains in chapter three a bill of rights titled: “RECOGNITION AND PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS, has no compensation clause. The right to compensation must be an entrenched fundamental provision in the country’s supreme law. An experienced civil servant, Ibrahim Bangura, has expressed his opinion on the supposed right to compensation. Bangura totally frowns at the absence of such right in the country’s legal system.
“Imagine a situation in which someone is held in custody for a year or two behind bars. They are not found guilty. They come out after wasted years with no means of subsistence. No foundation to build upon. Their lives are shattered. Immediate family members cannot be traced. The person’s entire life has been placed in permanent jeopardy,” Bangura imagined.
Via BBC media link, a freed prisoner in Britain was compensated thousands of pound sterling as a reparation package to reform his life after lengthy years on remand. According to BBC news, the prisoner’s name was mistakenly deleted from the list remanded prisoners. This mistake caused the prison authorities to forget about the prisoner not until when it was later discovered that the said prisoner has been on remand.
The question of compensation, though is yet to be answered by the country’s laws, still remains the most thorny and contentious. Seasoned criminal lawyers have always explained that, in a criminal trial, it is the restoration of liberty of the accused that reigns supreme. This means in an event a person is accused by the state to have committed a criminal offence for which they are arrested and detained, the only benefit the accused can enjoy is to set them free after a proof of innocence conducted before a competent judicial authority. Implicitly in this expert opinion, compensation right is immaterial.
Three years back, 14 soldiers attached to 4th Brigade at the Teko Barracks in Makeni were arrested and remanded at the male Correctional Centre at Pa Demba Road in Freetown for over two years. The court martial trial was held at the military defence headquarters on Wilkinson Road, West of Freetown. The ‘alibis’ raised by the defence team, comprising Julius Nye Cuffie Esq., Robert Kowa and Ishmail Philip Mamie and others, eventually led to the acquittal and discharge of all the 14 soldiers by the then presiding judge, Justice Otto During.
The ill-fated soldiers were elated because their freedom hitherto at stake had been restored to them, but they were disillusioned as no compensation package was offered to them. Their lives have been imperilled by the absence of compensation, but they expressed their willingness to continue to serve the army.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND MOB JUSTICE
The right to presumption of innocence is a fundamental right that is universally recognised and protected. This right is found in almost all constitutions of nations of the world community. Even in Islamic jurisprudence, this right is recognised and upheld. This right is also found in the country’s constitution of 1991, meaning that Sierra Leone recognises and protects the right to presumption of innocence.
In permanent and ad hoc international tribunals, such as the International Criminal Court, The European Court of Human Rights, the ECOWAS Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
The Nuremberg Trials for the warlords of the Second World War and the Special Court for Sierra Leone, among others, the right to presumption of innocence is recognised and protected. It says: ‘An accused person is presumed innocent until a court of competent jurisdiction says the person is guilty.’ This is a cardinal judicial principle that has stood the test of time in all civilised jurisdiction known to the law. It is also a right that is accompanied by several privileges, including freedom from pain and torture, unfettered access to bail, access to humane treatment and other privileges.
In the Sierra Leone situation, this right is the most neglected and abused. A greater percentage of the country’s population is yet to imbibe the culture of presumption of innocence and its attendant privileges. Those in conflict with the law are convicted before they are taken to court evidenced by the type of treatment meted to them.
Quite recently, four men purportedly commercial motorists, who attempted to break and steal from a dwelling house in Bo, were brutally murdered with machetes by community safety volunteers known as ‘vigilantes.’ Whether the allegation is true or false, it is only day of judgement that would reveal the truth and falsity of such allegation. An attempt by any citizen to explain to the uneducated majority of this fundamental right could be interpreted as connivance between that citizens and criminals.
The non-recognition of this right undermines, to a large extent, the country’s justice system and it calls into question the relevance of the police and the courts in the country.
Thus the justice gaps explored in this article, as many have argued, are inimical to the existence of a pure and serene judicial atmosphere. The public outcry says practical action must be taken now.