Netters,

Sometime ago, Sylvia Blyden posted a piece titled "Kabbah Broadcasts from Conakry in Krio." In that broadcast, President Kabbah promised to ferret out and punish all those who cooperate with the illegal AFRC-RUF hoodlums that are currently masquerading as a government in Freetown. To emphasize his resolve, the President promised to ferret out collaborators who may hide in "arrata" holes with sticks if necessary. In her usual editorializing, Ms. Blyden found fault with the President’s determination to enforce the laws of Sierra Leone, which, by the way, is his key constitutional responsibility. Indeed, Ms. Blyden’s editorial—and those that followed in the same genre—i.e. Sheku (Kallon’s), among others—seemed to suggest one or both of the following postulates:

1) Citizens of Sierra Leone have a right to support any regime, even illegal ones.

2) President Kabbah’s resolve to bring to justice Sierra Leoneans who collaborate with the AFRC-RUF is unlawful.

This essay will interrogate these two premises using both the Constitution of Sierra Leone and case law on treason, as well as the general notion of treason in the modern nation state. On Postulate (1), it is worth noting that the Constitution of Sierra Leone enshrines the "duties of citizens" in Chapter II (Section 13). For our purposes here, Section 13(a), which requires every citizen to "abide by this Constitution" and to "respect its ideals and its institutions...and authorities and offices established or constituted" under its authority, is most germane to the question of whether the citizens of Sierra Leone have a constitutional right to support and/or collaborate with coups. Therefore, any argument that citizens have the option to support or not support coups would have to rest on whether coups violate the Constitution, which the citizens of Sierra Leone are required to abide by and respect.

On the issue of the constitutional legality of coups (or the lack thereof), reference should be made to Section 108(8) which holds that "[a]ny suspension, alteration or repeal of this Constitution other than on the authority of Parliament shall be deemed to be an act of treason." Therefore, in as much as coups violate the Constitution as well as the Treason Acts of the early 70s, citizens of Sierra Leone who support and/or cooperate with coup makers are guilty of violating at least Sections 13(a) of the Constitution of Sierra Leone.

Citizens of Sierra Leone are not only required to abide by the Constitution, but are also required to "participate in and defend all democratic processes and practices [Section 13(i)]." Because coups suspend the Constitution and the civil authorities and institutions that gain legitimacy and authority therefrom, the requirement to defend all democratic processes is a requirement to defend the Constitution itself, from which these democratic processes gain their legitimacy. Defense of the Constitution means, in this case, opposing coups and refusing to cooperate with regimes that result from them. In view of the above therefore, it is easy to conclude that collaborating with coup makers is a crime in Sierra Leone. But what crime? Based on the laws of Sierra Leone on treason (at least, how they have been implemented in the past), I will venture to say that those who collaborate with coup makers are just as guilty of treason as those who actively engage in the act of overthrowing a lawfully-constituted government.

First, it must be noted that the act of treason does not end when the coup has succeeded. As Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Section 108(8) clarifies, any action which alter or amend or replace any provisions and/or sections of the Constitution, other than under the authority of Parliament, constitutes acts of treason. This suggests that those who help draft, promulgate, and/or enforce decrees issued by illegal regimes are aiding and abetting in the commission of treason. We note also that Sierra Leone law views even the suppression of information about treason as a treasonous act, as was the case of the late Brigadier David Lansana, among many others, who was convicted and hanged for treason for allegedly knowing about the plot and not reporting it to law-enforcement authoities. Furthermore, Sierra Leone, like almost all other countries, view the aiding and abetting of enemies of the state to be treasonous and thus punishable by death.

Even the United States of America, which requires perhaps the most stringent evidentiary proof for conviction on the charge of treason, views the aiding and abetting of the enemies of the state as acts of treason. I have found the tragic case of Ezra Pound most instructive in this respect. Ezra Pound was a renowned American poet and perhaps one of the most controversial figures of the 20^th century. In his latter years, he became a follower of Major Douglas’ faulty writings on economics. The faulty economic reasoning fueled Ezra’s antisemitism of the 1940s and his ultimate admiration of Mussolini during World War II to the point that he made about 300 anti-American propaganda broadcasts over Radio Rome during the war. At the end of the War (in 1945), Ezra was arrested and charged with treason. Due to the influence of his many fans, he was judged mentally incompetent to stand trial (although he continued writing and publishing) and was therefore incarcerated in a mental hospital in Washington, DC until his release in 1958--again, thanks to influence of his fans. (The moral of the Pound tragedy is that perhaps an ounce of proper economic training is the cure for a pound of tragic folly and, therefore the best way to ensure one’s freedoms.)

Note that Ezra Pound never actually participated in the overthrow or an attempt to overthrow the Government of the United States. He was charged with treason only because he cooperated with the enemy of the United States. We must be likewise reminded that Sierra Leone is one of the states in modern times that has been very forceful in holding treason and the aiding and abetting of treason to be synonymous. Therefore, in as much as collaborators with the AFRC actually aid and abet the latter’s continuous acts of treason since May 25, 1997, they are also guilty of treason, in my humble opinion.

One the legality of President Kabbah’s resolve to ferret out all AFRC collaborators and subject them to the full force of the laws of Sierra Leone, one merely has to recognize the President’s constitutional obligation to enforce the laws of Sierra Leone to know that he is obligated to bring criminals to justice. Absent a presidential pardon, therefore, failure on his part to do this, when constitutionality would have been restored, could constitute a violation of his oath to "protect and defend the Constitution" and thereby subject to possible impeachment.

Much regards. To those currently "exiled" in the US, enjoy the Labor Day weekend.

Kelfala M. Kallon, Department of Economics; University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado

"Evil triumphs when good people do nothing."