34. Ever since its formal establishment as a British colony in the Nineteenth century, Sierra Leone has operated with a two-tier legal system: traditional or customary justice based on local chiefs and an English common-law based court system. The formal status of the traditional element has varied over time but has always remained the main conduit for justice for the vast majority of the population. This is a pattern common to most African ex-colonial states. In structural terms, and in descending order, there is a Supreme Court, a Court of Appeal, a High Court, Magistrate Courts and Local Courts (also known as Chief’s courts). The Local Courts apply “customary” justice in their area and there is a right of appeal to a Magistrate (sometimes heard in a Magistrate’s court, sometimes in what is called a District Appeal Court, when the Magistrate is assisted by two experts in customary law).
......
39. In 2003, the progress made in encouraging police officers to make arrests was being undermined by the fact that, there were only around 12 magistrates in the country (most based in Freetown) and all openly corrupt. If the police arrested someone (e.g., for stealing), in the unlikely event that the case actually made its way to the courts, the magistrate was simply bribed to release the accused. As a result, ordinary Sierra Leoneans saw little point in using the official state channels of justice and remained reliant on their traditional justice mechanisms (delivered by village elders or by witch doctors) as a way of seeking redress.
40. The traditional justice system is based upon a hierarchy of chiefs: village chiefs, town chiefs, sector chiefs and, at the top, a paramount chief, each of whom was responsible for administering justice in their specific area. This structure had been recognised formally by the colonial authorities in 1937, when the chiefs were allowed to preside over court cases affecting people in their area . Following independence, this power was repealed by the 1963 Local Court Act, which limited the chiefs’ powers to minor civil cases and created local courts led by court chairmen (appointed by the Government) and assisted by a panel of elders and others. Despite these provisions, the chiefs continued to be the first point of call for most citizens seeking justice.
41. Today, the picture is even more complex. The conflict destroyed much legal infrastructure in rural communities and violence was also directed at chiefs seen to be favouring the “wrong” side. Knowledge of the (unwritten) customary laws became weak (even by those supposed to be applying them) and many chiefs invented new laws. As a result, judgments can be wildly different from one case to the next. With little knowledge of the laws that are supposed to apply to them (state and traditional) and a low literacy rate, hindering clarification, people have turned to alternative mechanisms to help mediate in disputes: family headmen, faith groups, secret societies, youth associations etc.
A study for the UK-supported Justice Sector Development Programme counted 16 different justice mechanisms of some sort in Sierra Leone.
Bookmarks