Ibrahim Abdullah wrote:
> >Dear Kelfala, >I find it very difficult to accept your proposition that the most pressing problem is that of security.How >you could separate the issue of security from control of resources of state, which in turn determines who >gets what and how, misses the crucial dynamics of, what a friend recently labelled, la question Sierra >Leonais. >Perhaps you would accept my proposition readily if you were to go to Baoma Koya and open your civic education school there right now in order to teach about the "control of resources of state, which in turn determines who gets what and how" to the RUF and the SOBELS, the only people now inhabiting that area of Kenema District. I just hope that you would remember to take an AK47 and some rounds of ammunition. The RUF might have other ideas about civic education. If you survive through general orientation, you might have a better appreciation for why I say that SaLone's most pressing problem at the moment is security.
> >How, for example, do you come out with a modus vivendi in the present >circumstances with the sole demand being the democratization of society at >the local level? How do you democractize at the local level and leave the >core of state power intact? What I'm getting at is that we need to approach >the issue from the perspective of a total overhauling of the system: you >cannot do one and leave the other. >Ibrahim, I think you should reread my postings in which I have agued that we need to rethink the whole governance system in Sierra Leone. (This is why I find the foolish talk of elections in Freetown obscene and fraudulent.) But, and we may disagree on this, I think that our most immediate attention should be directed at: (1) finding a solution to the present conflict; (2) implementing a national defense system that is effective in keeping the countryside free of rebels, sobels, and stragglers; (3) a phased resettling the refugees; and (4) rethinking our Constitution at a much broader level so that whatever we get would be supported and understood by the average Sierra Leonean, in that order. It is only at the constitutional reform stage that I see much value in civic education. But since you think my priorities are in the wrong order, you are welcome to go to one of the numerous refugee camps in Sierra Leone and talk to the starving refugees about civic education. I believe that the result would be the same as my earlier suggestion about setting up a civic education school at Baoma Koya.
> >Your ideas about reforming the rather archaic feudal institutions need some >serious rethinking.It is not a new idea, nor is it as radical as some have >suggested.Just recently, Basil Davidson, a leading "friend " of >Africa,posed the question in not too dissimilar terms:experimemt with the >feudal institutions of pre-colonial Africa. For me the question is not one >of reforming these institutions, the issue is to democratize /popularise >them so that the idea of the supreme Paramount Chief ceases to have any >meaningful political role.>
Frankly, I do not care about what Basil Davidson or anyone else says regarding how we govern ourselves in Sierra Leone. While they can advise us, only the opinion of Sierra Leoneans matter to me. I know Sierra Leone and have lived in all its regions. I am also very much involved in local government within my chiefdom. Therefore, I think that I am a better authority on what might work in Sierra Leone than Basil Davidson.
In Constitutional matters, a system that stands the test of time is what is generally preferred. The British boast about having the oldest (unwritten) Constitution, even though it has what some people call an "archaic" monarchy.
Yet, Baroness Chalker is in Freetown lecturing us about democracy. The Americans talk about their republican constitution as the oldest writtten constitution. Yet, they have an Electoral College that most people consider archaic. In Sierra Leone, likewise, we have our own traditional form of governance, which, I grant, you have every right to label as archaic. But, I think that many people all over the Sierra Leone Provinces would disagree with you. This notwithstanding, the role of Paramount Chieftaincy is a constitutional matter that should be addressed at a latter stage. And, I believe that when that time comes, "the peoples'" verdict will prove you wrong. For now, let's work on having peace, institutionalizing a workable defense alternative to the one that has failed us so disastrously. We'll have enough time to work on a Constitution that the people would support. But, as I noted in my observation about Rashid's earlier piece, your analysis appears to me as the "tail wagging the dog syndrome." If you have a plan for peace, other than intellectual "wordsmithery" (this is Pede Hollist's politically correct version of "penmanship" and "gamesnaship"), lay it out for all to see.
>
>To say that these chiefs are elected by the people makes me wonder why they >do what they do when >they get "elected".
>
I cannot respond to that since each chiefdom has its own local laws and traditions. But, I repeat, there are constitutional means to remove a paramount chief for egregious behavior against his/her people, and many have been removed in the past.
>
>Is it not correct to say that they are selected by the governing party--the >colonial state, the SLPP,and the >APC-- through district councillors and >other local notables?
>
Ibrahim, for one who thinks that the average Sierra Leonean needs political education, I thought you knew about the local government system in Salone. (Perhaps we all need a little civic education.) No, by and large, Paramount chiefs are not selected by the governing party. The role of the central government in the whole process is two-fold: (1) review the voter roll prior to an election; and (2) determine whether a candidate has the birthright to contest for a chieftaincy in a particular chiefdom. The actual voting is done by the chiefdom councillors. The chiefdom councillors are elected by all tax-paying adults in the chiefdom. Since every adult in the Chiefdom pays local tax now (only men used to pay), the process is real grassroots democracy.
Each person wanting to be a councillor actually has to have a certain number of taxpayers literally standing behind him/her. The American Electoral College is the best example of this process. Voters do not vote directly for a presidential candidate; they vote for their elector, as the average adult does in a paramount chieftaincy election. (I wrote a paper as an undergraduate in which I argued that because this system had been practised in the provinces of Sierra Leone much longer than in America, the Americans must have copied the electoral college system from us!!!)
I grant you that the central government (or the leadership of the party in power) tries to influence these elections in key chiefdoms. However, whether such a strategy is successful depends on the local response. Obviously, there are many instances when the APC tried to get someone elected PC who had no right to be chief. They did this generally by instructing the District Officer to approve individual's candidacy, regardleess of the objections posed by the Chiefdom people. Guess what!!! In one such case that I know of, in Lower Bambara chiefdom, Kenema District, the chiefdom councillors nullified it by voting solidly for PC Farma II, who is still the PC. Also, in spite of the late Sir Milton Margai's close friendship with the late Chief Samba of Jawi, Kailahun district, the latter was removed when the people determined that his actions were egregious. Furthermore, Sir Albert intervened in the chieftaincy election in Nongowa on behalf of the late Mustapha Koroma (alias Guyu), but, it was Foray Vangahun, not Guyu, who became chief. (and Albert became unemployed.) More recently, in Nongowa again, the APC threw its weight behind the candidacy of the late M. K. Vangahun for the chiefship after Foray Vangshun's death. Guess what!!!
Kapuwah was elected Chief.
As the evidence from the Eastern Province shows (I hear another Mende expletive delete coming), perhaps paramount chief elections are the only elections whose outcomes are still determined by the people. And, for as long as a majority of Sierra Leoneans support that system of local governance, I think it would be presumptious, if not hypocritical, for anyone to impose his/her own conception of democracy on them just because he/she thinks that PCship is archaic.
>
>For reforms to be meaningful, Kelfala, we need to institutionalized a system of popular elections involving >all adult memebers of the respective areas. This would be a good starting point.
>
I have no quarrel with that, although I think that the tail is wagging the dog again. The issue with which I am concerned is how we reform the military so that everyone in the country can be protected as well as the lucky ones in Freetown.
>
>And we do not need "reform so that local authorities(would) have the means
>to defend their people against future Foday Sankoh".
>
I disagree!!! When systems fail a people as the current military arrangement in Sierra Leone obviously has, it is naive to believe that those affected by this failure would trust that system to protect them in the future. (Call it a Mende middle-class program or whatever, but that's the truth.) Therefore, from my point of view, the Chiefdom militia setup will be implemented in Salone precisely because the majority of Sierra Leoneans would support it.
>
>What we need to do, and this the challenge for those of us who still believe
>that ideas have a role to play in the transformation of our society, is to
>devise an arrangement/framework that makes it impossible for future Foday
>Sankoh's to emerge.Such a system should be inclusionary, not
>inclusionary;competitive, not restrictive,and so on.
>
The Chiefdom militia proposal is one such arrangement/framework. Remeber, also that even when we devise the best system imaginable, not everyone plays by the rules. (Who would have in their wildest imagination dreamt that sierra Leoneans had the capacity to destroy their own country with such ferorcity?) Remember also that we had a system that worked reasonably well. But what happened when we gave it to Siaka Stevens? He manipulated it (with the help of the intellectual class), and used the coercive powers of the state (which he gained total control of with a slim majority) to terrorize political opponents and force a dictatorship on Sierra Leoneans. I suspect that had the military resources been decentralized, Siaka stevens would have found a harder time sending troops to say Joru to beat people up just because they had the audacity to vote for another party. Systems need checks and balances, and the current one needs them badly.
>
>Let us dont forget that it was the exclusionary politics of the APC which
>created the objective conditions for the RUF to emerge.If we allow the
>present regime to reproduce those very conditions we would have nobody to
>blame but ourselves.Let us keep playing with ideas.
>
Ibrahim, I agree!!! I have said as much on this net several times. Finally, my friend, I do not think we have any new ground to cover. You believe that provincial institutions of governance are archaic and I do not. But we both believe that to prevent history from repeating itself, we need to democratize the instrument of power in Sierra Leone. Let's agree to end this discussion on that note for now. I, therefore, do not intend to revisit this issue with you any further because we seem to be going around in circles. However, were you to provide us with a blueprint that lays out the bare essentials of how you wish to protect the countryside now that the current system had failed us and the chiefdom militia concept is unacceptable to you, we can then discuss the relative merits of that plan vis a vis the chiefdom militia concept.
Take care, my brother. We both know that we all want what is best for Salone. And should you want to learn aboout chiefdom politics, let me know. I might help you when the situation arises, after peace has finally arrived. I hope that you are not too cold.
Kelfala M. Kallon