Sierra Leone's legal system faces scrutiny as citizens increasingly question its effectiveness in serving the people. Despite having a Constitution, a legislative body, and a functioning court system, public trust in the law's protective role is eroding. The country's 1991 Constitution outlines the governmental framework and rights but relies on the integrity of those interpreting it. This has raised concerns about whether laws are thoughtfully created and judicial decisions based on sound principles.
Professor Upendra Baxi's essay, "Demosprudence versus Jurisprudence," provides a philosophical basis for reflections on Sierra Leone's legal landscape. His analysis introduces three concepts: jurisprudence, legisprudence, and demosprudence. Jurisprudence deals with how laws are understood and applied, while legisprudence focuses on the legislative process. Demosprudence, emphasising the role of the public, examines how well legal institutions allow citizens to partake in democracy and challenge injustices.
The challenge for constitutional governance in Sierra Leone is exercising authority fairly and for the public good. Legisprudence is crucial in this regard, particularly in the ongoing debate over the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2025/2026. Parliament should engage in thorough debates to assess the necessity and legality of proposed laws, rather than simply rubber-stamping decisions. However, party loyalty can hinder this independence, leading to poor-quality lawmaking.
The judiciary in Sierra Leone must uphold principles of justice and ensure fairness in its decisions, which affect not only the immediate parties but the wider society. The Indian Supreme Court's approach shows that judicial activism can enhance rights but can also blur the lines of institutional authority. In Sierra Leone, it is essential to guard against treating judicial intervention as good or bad in itself; instead, decisions should be based on sound constitutional principles.
As the public interfaces with the law, it is crucial that legal rights are accessible and meaningful. There is a need to confront barriers that prevent ordinary citizens from seeking justice, particularly those from vulnerable communities. The appointment of Justice Nicholas Colin Browne-Marke as Chairman of the Law Reform Commission provides an opportunity to assess not just outdated laws but the overall functioning of legal institutions.
To restore public confidence in the law, Parliament must produce laws worthy of public respect, courts must issue judgements that inspire trust, and citizens need avenues to engage meaningfully with their governance. When Parliament prioritises majority power, judicial authority lacks coherent reasoning, or the executive treats constitutional limits as merely suggestions, public disconnection grows.
Ultimately, the Constitution should be a living document in familiar dealings between citizens and the state, ensuring that the law indeed remembers the people. It is imperative to remind ourselves that the Constitution exists to protect not only those who govern but especially those governed. Legal frameworks should resonate in the experiences of everyday citizens, and efforts must be made to revive public confidence before trust in the law diminishes further.
Key points
- Public trust in Sierra Leone's law is eroding despite the presence of a Constitution, legislative body, and functioning court system.
- The country's legal landscape is influenced by concepts of jurisprudence, legisprudence, and demosprudence.
- Restoring public confidence in the law requires Parliament to produce laws worthy of public respect, courts to issue judgements that inspire trust, and citizens to have avenues to engage meaningfully with their governance.
