By Joseph Turay
In Sierra Leone, where democracy and freedom of expression are still fragile, a collision is unfolding between legal frameworks designed to protect cyberspace and the real‑world suppression of investigative journalism. What was once a vibrant press scene is now under siege — not from lack of public interest, but from laws and state power deployed in ways that chill free expression, shield powerful interests, and obscure the truth about corruption and cross‑border crime.
For journalists reporting on sensitive issues — especially corruption, illicit drug trafficking, and government complicity — the risk is no longer merely professional: it has become personal, legal, and existential. This article examines how vaguely drafted cybersecurity and related laws have become tools of intimidation; how journalists are being charged, interrogated, and detained; and how investigations into one of the world’s most notorious cocaine traffickers, Jos Leijdekkers, have been entangled in political controversy and official denial.
Cybersecurity and cybercrime legislation was introduced in Sierra Leone with ostensibly benign objectives: to protect citizens and institutions in the digital age, combat online fraud, and provide legal frameworks for tackling emergent cyber threats. Yet, like in many emerging democracies, the drafting and implementation of such laws have raised serious concerns among media professionals and rights advocates.
At the heart of this tension are provisions in the Cyber Security and Crime Act, which contain vague terms like “cyberbullying,” “cyberstalking,” and offences relating to online content that causes annoyance, distress, or reputational harm. Such expansive wording gives authorities broad latitude to interpret ordinary journalistic reporting — even when factual and in the public interest — as criminal conduct.
When civil society, journalists, and media associations like the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ) and the Media Reform Coordinating Group (MRCG) raised concerns about these laws during their drafting and subsequent implementation, they warned that such provisions, without safeguards, could be abused to stifle critical reporting. Their fears, detailed in position papers and press freedom reviews, emphasized that without clear definitions and procedural protections, cyber laws might become tools for repression rather than protection.
The shift from cybercrime enforcement to targeting journalists became evident in a series of cases beginning in 2024. Cases documented by MRCG, SLAJ, and international press freedom monitors reveal a troubling pattern: journalists reporting on corruption, police misconduct, or controversial public matters have increasingly found themselves under investigation or threat under cybercrime provisions. 
In May 2024, the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) issued an arrest warrant for journalist Justice Boima, CEO of Justice FM and TV, for alleged cyberstalking and bullying related to his reporting on land grabbing involving senior officials. Authorities under the Cybercrime Act sought to detain him for posting audio recordings alleging wrongdoing by a deputy minister and a senior police officer. The warrant was still outstanding months later, signaling how cybercrime charges can hamper journalists’ freedom of movement and safety. 
In the same period, freelance journalist Alie Badara received threatening phone calls after posting investigations into alleged police corruption tied to drug seizures in Bo, Southern Sierra Leone. Though not directly charged under cybercrime law, his experience reflects the hostile environment for those covering drug enforcement and corruption. 
Also in 2024, Patrick Kai, a Calabash newspaper journalist, was invited to the Kenema Police Division for questioning under alleged cybercrime violations over a controversial Facebook page critical of an educational institution. Detained for hours and released on bail, his case exemplifies how cyber law can be invoked even in disputes disconnected from public‑interest journalism. 
In 2025, Thomas Dixon, editor of the New Age newspaper and Chairman of the Guild of Newspaper Editors, was summoned to the CID under the Cyber Security and Crime Act after publishing a critical news alert at the behest of a mining company’s complaint. He endured hours of interrogation and was charged with “cyberstalking and bullying,” and though released on bail, the case underscored how legal complaints by private entities are being pursued through criminal rather than civil mechanisms — a departure from standard media regulation practice. 
In August 2025, senior reporter Shar Maturi was briefly detained at the CID in Freetown on cyberbullying and stalking allegations following a report on alleged misappropriation of public funds involving a Member of Parliament. Though released the same day after intervention by SLAJ, the incident drew explicit condemnation from press freedom groups, which highlighted the increasing use of cybercrime provisions to harass journalists. 
These cases, taken together, reveal a broader trend: investigative reporting on politically sensitive or powerful interests is being reframed as criminal conduct under cybersecurity and related laws. Media organisations warn that this pattern creates a significant chilling effect, where journalists increasingly self‑censor to avoid legal repercussions, imprisonment, or harassment.
According to reports by civil society organisations, online and offline intimidation, physical assaults, and legal harassment have collectively contributed to a shrinking space for press freedom in Sierra Leone. Journalists have begun to avoid coverage of corruption, abuses of power, and illicit drug networks — topics of high public interest but high personal risk. 
Press freedom advocates argue that such chilling effects not only undermine individual journalists but erode democratic accountability by depriving citizens of vital information about corruption, governance, and public safety.
At the heart of one of Sierra Leone’s most contentious public scandals is Jos Leijdekkers — a Dutch national and convicted cocaine trafficker. In January 2025, Reuters reported that Leijdekkers, sentenced in absentia to 24 years in prison by a Dutch court for smuggling more than seven tonnes of cocaine into Europe, had been living in Sierra Leone since at least early 2023 and appeared to be receiving high‑level protection. 
Videos and photos verified by Reuters show a man matching Leijdekkers’s identity sitting near Sierra Leone’s President Julius Maada Bio at a church service on January 1, 2025 — allegedly beside a woman identified by sources as the president’s daughter. Though the government initially denied knowledge of the individual’s identity, the images fueled international scrutiny and allegations that Sierra Leone was harbouring one of Europe’s most wanted drug traffickers. 
In response, Sierra Leone’s information ministry announced an investigation into the reports and pledged willingness to cooperate with international law enforcement agencies, including Interpol and Dutch authorities, despite the lack of a formal extradition treaty with the Netherlands. 
The public controversy intensified when footage published by international media outlets appeared to show the fugitive drug lord in social settings with political elites, raising questions about collusion or protection at high government levels. These questions have been compounded by allegations — reported in international outlets — that senior officials may have facilitated his stay, though official denials persist. 
The Leijdekkers case has placed Sierra Leone at the intersection of international law, organised crime, and press freedom. On the one hand, authorities insist they are investigating and committed to cooperating with foreign governments. On the other, the lack of transparent action and the continued presence — or perceived presence — of a high‑profile fugitive witness to sensitive reporting has raised doubts about political will and state complicity in shielding powerful individuals. 
Meanwhile, journalists attempting to investigate international drug networks have found themselves caught in the crossfire. As reporting on these networks points to gaps in law enforcement and potential corruption, cybercrime and related laws have been invoked in ways that discourage coverage and limit public scrutiny.
International standards on freedom of expression, including those codified by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), emphasise that restrictions on speech must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate, and cannot be used to criminalise legitimate journalistic activity. Yet the expansive language and broad application of Sierra Leone’s cyber laws have failed to provide clear protections for journalists undertaking investigative work.
Rights bodies have also expressed alarm over additional legislative proposals, such as a Counter‑Terrorism Bill that contains provisions punishable by long prison sentences and ambiguous definitions of offences that could encompass reporting in the public interest. These developments risk deepening a climate of repression and self‑censorship. 
Media advocacy organisations within Sierra Leone and across West Africa have repeatedly called for reform. SLAJ and its partners have urged that disputes involving journalists be handled under civil defamation law rather than criminal charges, and that cybersecurity legislation be revised to protect press freedom explicitly. 
And , They have also emphasised the need for institutional safeguards such as judicial oversight of data interception, protections for confidential sources, and clearer boundaries preventing the misuse of law enforcement powers.
Obviously, To reverse the chilling effect on journalism and strengthen democratic accountability, the following reforms are urgently needed and that is ; Legal Reform: Amend the Cyber Security and Crime Act and related statutes to remove vague language that can be misused against journalists and ensure compliance with international human rights standards, Judicial Oversight: Establish clear safeguards and oversight mechanisms for surveillance, data access, and cyber investigations, with independent review to prevent abuse, Journalist Protections: Enact explicit protections for journalists, whistleblowers, and their sources, ensuring that investigative reporting is recognised as legitimate public‑interest activity, Transparent Action on Crime: Investigate corruption and criminal networks transparently, including cases like the Leijdekkers controversy, and cooperate fully with international law enforcement to uphold the rule of law, Public Accountability: Strengthen media–state dialogue mechanisms that protect press freedom while ensuring legitimate concerns about misinformation are addressed without criminalisation .
Sierra Leone stands at a critical juncture.
For sure , The clash between cybersecurity enforcement and press freedom is not just a legal debate — it is central to the nation’s democratic health, international credibility, and capacity to confront corruption and organised crime.
In essence, Without decisive reforms that protect journalists rather than punish them, the chilling effect created by misused cyber laws will continue to silence voices that expose wrongdoing. In the absence of transparent action against powerful figures, including those alleged to be involved in international cocaine trafficking, citizens will be deprived of the information they need to hold leaders accountable.
And so , If democracy is to flourish in Sierra Leone, it must be grounded in robust protections for those who speak truth to power — not in prosecutions that reward silence and shield impunity.
