Mohamed A Warisay, USA
Terrorism has become a pressing concern in West Africa, with countries like Nigeria, Mali, and Burkina Faso experiencing frequent attacks from extremist groups. In response, many West African nations have enacted counter-terrorism laws to combat this threat. However, the proposed counter-terrorism law in Sierra Leone raises concerns about its potential misuse, particularly under the current administration.
The Maada Bio government has previously accused the main opposition APC party of terrorism, which has sparked fears that the proposed law could be used to silence political opponents. This is not an unfounded concern, given the government’s history of using laws to target opposition members. For instance, the Sierra Leone cybercrime law has been used to prosecute political opponents, despite the country lacking the necessary infrastructure to justify and implement such a law.
Proponents of the counter-terrorism law may point to the Boko Haram threat to Sierra Leone some few years ago as a justification for its enactment. However, this argument is flawed, as the threat from Boko Haram is not unique to Sierra Leone, and the country’s security challenges require a more nuanced approach than a blanket counter-terrorism law.
In contrast, Western countries like the United States and the United Kingdom have enacted counter-terrorism laws in response to specific security threats. For example, the USA PATRIOT Act was passed in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, while the UK’s Terrorism Act 2000 was enacted in response to the threat from Irish republican groups. However, these laws have been subject to intense scrutiny and debate, with many critics arguing that they infringe upon civil liberties in several ways.
In Sierra Leone’s case, the proposed counter-terrorism law is particularly problematic given the country’s fragile democratic institutions and the government’s lack of transparency and accountability. The law could be used to further entrench the ruling party’s power and suppress opposition voices. In conclusion, while the threat of terrorism is real, the proposed counter-terrorism law in Sierra Leone is misguided and potentially dangerous. The government’s track record of using laws to target opposition members, combined with the country’s lack of infrastructure and democratic institutions, makes it clear that this law would be used to further undermine democracy and silence dissenting voices. Instead of rushing to enact a counter-terrorism law, the government should focus on addressing the root causes of insecurity and promoting transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.
