14th October 2005
Hon. Mr. Justice Ade Renner-Thomas
Chief Justice of Sierra Leone,
C/o Chief Justice’s Chamber
Law Courts Building
Siaka Stevens Street, Freetown
My Lord Chief Justice,
Re: MISC. APP. 252/2005 2005 H. NO. 8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIERRA LEONE
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR BAIL PURSUANT TO SECTION 79 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1965.
BETWEEN
DR. FATMATA HASSAN
REGINALD BULL – APPLICANTS/
OLU CAMPBELL RESPONDENT
AND
ADRIAN FISHER ESQ. – 1ST RESPONDENT/
(Coroner, Magistrate’s Court No. 1A APPLICANT
THE INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF – 2ND RESPONDENT
POLICE
THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS – 3RD RESPONDENT
I write to register my very grave concern about certain developments in the above matter (in which I am Counsel for the 1st Respondent/Applicant) which occurred during my recent absence from the Jurisdiction, and which have in my view caused or brought about a stalling of the due Judicial process, contrary to the interest of all concerned in this matter, and the system of justice in Sierra Leone generally.
(A) BACKGROUND The background to this matter is by now well-known to all and sundry as it has been well reported in the local press, but I will highlight the main points just to ensure the coherence of this letter. On the 10th May 2005 Hon. Dr. Fatmatta Hassan accompanied by her three (3) Children Bai BurehKomeh, Ahmed Komeh and AminataKomeh, and also by Messrs Reginald Bull and Olu Campbell went to the building at No. 1 Short Street, Freetown, which was then occupied by FOR DI PEOPLE Newspaper and other press houses in order to ensure compliance with 7.45 pm deadline for closure of the building which she had arbitrarily imposed on the tenants therein, and while they were there a fight ensured in which Harry Yansaneh, the Acting Editor of FOR DI PEOPLE Newspaper was mercilessly beaten up by Hon. Dr. Hassan’s children assisted by Reginald Bull in the presence of Hon. Dr. Hassan. The incident was reported to the Police who apparently took statements from all concerned but preferredno charges against anyone. Between 10th May 2005 and 27th July 2005 the health of Harry Yansaneh deteriorated significantly and he died at the Cupid Clinic on 27th July 2005.
Meanwhile the three (3) Children of Hon. Dr. Fatmatta Hassan had left the country after making statements to the Police. After a public outcry and a request from the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists, Government set up a Coroner’s Inquest and appointed MR. ADRIAN FISHER as CORONER to look into the death of HARRY YANSANEH. At this point, it is necessary to note that Section 7 of the Coroner’s Act Cap. 9 of the Laws of Sierra Leone states:
“7.It shall be the duty of Every Coroner to hold an Inquest or an Inquiry, according as this Act directs, on the body of any deceased person within his district, whenever there is reason to suspect that the deceased person died from violence or unfair means, or by culpable or negligent conduct either of himself or others and also whenever any death shall have occurred under circumstances appearing to the Coroner to require investigation….”
(emphasis mine.)
The Inquest was conducted by Magistrate Adrian Fisher from the 17th to 26th August 2005 during which some twenty (20) witnesses were heard, and on Friday 26th August 2005 the panel of six (6) Jurors returned a unanimous verdict of involuntary manslaughter, with a final conclusion that Yansaneh’s death was an unlawful and illegal death. Consequent upon the verdict of the Coroner’s Jury the Coroner acting in accordance with his powers under Section 27 of The Coroner’s Act Cap. 9), issued warrants in the prescribed form for Hon. Dr. Fatmata Hassan, her three (3) children, Mr. Reginald Bull and Mr. Olu Campbell, in pursuance of which DrFatmata Hassan, Mr Reginald Bull and MrOlu Campbell were duly arrested and committed to Prison on Friday 26th August 2005. All Counsel who participated in the Inquest showered praise on the Coroner for his speedy and efficient conduct of the proceedings at the Inquest.
(B) THE APPLICATIONS FOR BAIL
(i) In the Coroner’s Court
My Lord Chief Justice, thus far, it seemed to all that the judicial system was working well, and that the Law would be allowed to take its course. But then those who believe that there is a different law in operation when it affects one of the “Lord’s Anointed” seemed genuinely upset that Hon. Dr. Fatmata Hassan had been ordered to be arrested and committed to Pademba Road Prisons, and so on the very next day improper and illegal attempts were made to get her out of prison for reasons which are not clear to me, and she was actually taken out from prison by the Head of the C.I.D. who had no proper authority to do so, but she was later returned when it was made clear to him that his action was unlawful. However, by Monday 28th August 2005 it came as a shock to me when I heard the Hon. Attorney-General and Minister of Justice proclaiming publicly on UNAMSIL Radio that the Coroner Justice proclaiming publicly on UNAMSIL Radio that the Coroner had been wrong in issuing a warrant of arrest for Dr. Fatmatta Hassan, when the State Law Office, (which is responsible for the prosecution of all alleged indictable criminal offences,) had not taken any steps to quash the proceedings of the Inquest or the verdict thereof by certiorari or appeal as provided by Law.
By this time, I had begun to seriously wonder whether the Law would be allowed to take its course as we had all hoped during the proceedings at the Inquest. On Monday 29th August 2005 a Motion was filed by C.A. Osho-Williams Esq. on behalf of Dr. Fatmatta Hassan and the other two (2) Accused for an order that Bail be granted to them pursuant to Section 33 of the Coroner’s Act Cap. 9. That motion was brought before the Magistrate the same day (29th August 2005), but on an objection by me as Counsel representing the Harry Yansaneh Family and The Sierra Leone Association of Journalists, C.A. Osho-Williams Esq. was ordered to serve the Motion and Affidavit on me as an Interested Party by 10am the following day, 30th August 2005, and hearing was fixed for 30th August 2005 at 12noon. All Counsel duly appeared on the 30th August 2005 and arguments were heard on all sides including the State Counsel who made it clear that they were not opposing bail but were infact supporting the said application. As Counsel for the Family of Harry Yansaneh and The Sierra Leone Association of Journalists, I opposed the application for bail, and made reference to an affidavit sworn to by Ibrahim Ben Kargbo, President of SLAJ on 30th August 2005 in which he had said, inter alia,
“…(2) That I was present in Court on the 18th day of August when the Fifth Witness DPC 1515 Abu Conteh testified on oath at the Coroner’s Inquest.
(3) That he said, inter alia, that on the 5th July 2005 he went to the residence of Hon. Dr. Fatmatta Hassan at 77 Thunderhill, Kissy, and waited for an hour before she came out. He then identified himself and started explaining the purpose of his visit, i.e. to ask Dr. Hassan to produce her children to the Police. He said that Dr. Hassan exclaimed in a loud voice “Don’t you know I have Parliamentary Immunity?” He said she was loud and he was polite and always answered “Yes Ma!” to whatever she said.
He said he invited her to come to the Police Station but she replied angrily “… I am not going to any Police Station!” and he said “Yes Ma”. He said he asked her to produce her children and she asked him to leave her compound or she would report him to the I-G. He told her that as she had told him to leave he would not go to her house again, and that he would let the authorities know.
He said he felt completely intimidated and later informed Inspector Samura. He said he considered the behavior of Dr. Hassan as an obstruction.
(4) That I was also in Court when Inspector Samura testified on oath and confirmed that DPC Conteh had reported to him about the behavior of Dr. Hassan.
(5) That I was also in Court when Chief Superintendent Kalia Edward Sesay testified on oath. He told the Inquest that Abu Conteh had reported that Dr. Hassan had driven him from her compound and had claimed Parliamentary Immunity. He also said that when he contacted Dr. Hassan on 10th July 2005 and asked her to produce her children she said that the Police are supporting the Journalists against her and did not produce her children…”
After hearing all the arguments of Learned Counsel the Coroner ordered the amendment of The Arrest and Committal Warrant by the deletion of the words “willful murder” and the replacement thereof by the word “Manslaughter” The Coroner then adjourned to Wednesday 31st August 2005 to give a considered Ruling on the Application for Bail which had been made by C.A. Osho-Williams Esq. The aforesaid Motion before Magistrate Fisher was adjourned at about 2.30pm, and all of us who were Counsel in the matter departed from the Court hoping to return the following day for the Ruling, including Messrs Osho-Williams, Browne-Marke and MonfredSesay. That Ruling has never been delivered to this day.
ii. In the High Court before Showers J.
That same day at about 4:15pm I was in my Chambers seeing clients as usual, when I received a telephone call from someone in the Law Courts Building who asked me whether I was aware that an application for bail was being made at that very moment by Browne-Marke Esq. before Justice Showers. I was shocked and astounded and said I was not. The voice on the phone then said rather anxiously, “well… in that case you better come quickly as they are going on now…” I thanked the caller and hung up the phone. I thought for a few minutes and advised myself not to go there as it was obvious I was not wanted there.
After a few minutes my caller rang again and told me that bail had been granted to Hon. Dr. Fatmatta Hassan and the other two (2). I asked my caller who had been present in Court and I was told that Messrs Browne-Marke and Osho-Williams represented the Applicants, and Monfred Sesay from the Law Officers’ Department represented the Inspector-General of Police and the Director of Prisons. I asked whether there was anyone representing the interest of Harry Yansaneh’s Family or SLAJ and was told there was no one. Later that same day I received a telephone call from the President of SLAJ Alhaji I.B. Kargbo who asked me whether it was true that Dr. Fatmatta Hassan had been granted bail by the High Court and I said that this was what I had been told. He then asked me how this was possible when there was a ruling pending on the same issue before the Coroner the following day, and I had to confess that “I could not explain” and did not know what had happened. He promised to come and see me the next day.
The next morning, 31st August 2005 I was able to obtain a copy of the Motion Paper dated 30th August 2005 together with the affidavit in support sworn to by Nicholas Colin Browne-Marke Esq. as Solicitor for Dr. Fatmatta Hassan, Reginald Bull and Olu Campbell presently detained at Central Prisons, Pademba Road pursuant to an order made by Mr. Adrian Fisher sitting as a Coroner, seeking an Order made by Mr. Adrian Fisher sitting as a Coroner, seeking an Order that the applicants be admitted to bail, and that they be immediately released from Prison. I also obtained a copy of the Order made by Showers, J the same day 30th August 2005.
Upon perusing the aforesaid documents I realized that the said Order had been most irregularly obtained in an indecent haste and desperation to get Hon. Dr. Fatmatta Hassan out of prisons as soon as possible.
C. THE IRREGULARITIES
(i) I observed that in the Motion Paper Mr. Adrian Fisher the Coroner who conducted the Inquest and issued the Warrants of Arrest for the Accused Persons had been joined as 1st Respondent in the Application for Bail, contrary to the express provisions of Section 77 (1) of the Courts Act No. 3 of 1965 subtitled in the margin “Protection of Judicial Officers”, and which states.
“… No Judge, Magistrate or other person acting judicially shall be liable to be sued in any civil court for any act done by him within the territorial limits of his jurisdiction in the discharge of such duty, whether or not within the limits of his jurisdiction…”
Magistrate Adrian Fisher, in my opinion, had been wrongfully and unlawfully joined as a party to the application for bail as a result of doing his judicial duty under Section 27 of The Coroner’s Act Cap. 9 of the Laws of Sierra Leone, and at a time when he did not even have custody of the Accused Persons.
(ii) The Motion of the 30th August 2005 clearly showed on its face that it was an inter partes Motion addressed, inter alia, to Mr. Adrian Fisher, Magistrate, but an order arising therefrom showed on its face that the said Mr. Adrian Fisher (1st Respondent) was not present at the hearing nor was he represented by a Counsel, which was contrary to one of the Cardinal Rules of Natural Justice to wit, “Audi AlteramPartem”,, (the other side must be heard), especially so as very serious allegations of error in law, misconduct and bias were made against him in the affidavit of Nicholas Colin Browne-Marke sworn to on the 30th August 2005 at 12 noon, even before the application for bail was made by Osho-Williams Esq.
(iii) The drawn-up Order of 30th August 2005 had nothing therein to show that Special Leave was granted to the applicants for the Motion dated 30th August 2005 to be heard and determined on the same day notwithstanding that two (2) clear days notice had not been given between the service of the said Motion for hearing of the said Motion, i.e. 30th August 2005 contrary to order 39 rule 5 of the High Court Rules.
(iv) That event though the application before the Court was purportedly being made pursuant to the provisions of Section 79 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Act No. 32 of 1965, there was nothing before the Court to show that the Applicants had been charged before any Court where such charge was pending or that such Court had not thought it fit to grant bail to the Applicants as required by the said Section 79(5) of the Act.
In my respectful submission, the allegation in paragraph 8 of the affidavit of Nicholas Colin Browne-Marke Esq. sworn in support of the Motion of 30th August 2005 at 12noon that same day that,
“….But it would appear that the 1st Respondent, sitting now as a Magistrate, is not inclined to grant them the said Bail…”
Is (a) Erroneous, becausehe was still sitting as Coroner under Section 33 of the Coroner’s Act’
And
(b) At best fanciful, because at 12noon when the affidavit was sworn the application for bail had not even been made yet by C.A. Osho-Williams Esq.
(a) That there was an application for bail under Section 33 of The Coroner’s Act Cap. 9 pending before the 1st Respondent
Which had been fully argued only a couple of hours before the application was made in the High Court AND WHICH HAD BEEN ADJOURNED TO WEDNESDAY 31ST AUGUST 2005 for Ruling. I am certain that if the Learned High Court Judge had been so informed she would not have proceeded with the application before her or granted the Order she did.
(b) The Counsel for the applicants also failed to inform the High Court that the words “Wilful Murder” in the Arrest and Committal Warrant had been amended to read ‘Manslaughter” at the hearing on that same day 30th August 2005.
My Lord Chief Justice, by the time I finished going through the Motion, Affidavit and Order of 30th August 2005, I had no doubt in my mind that the whole procedure was an abuse of the process of the Court. Thereafter I was consulted by Mr. Adrian Fisher who also brought within the Motion, Affidavit and Order of 30th August 2005, and complained that they had been left with one of his Clerks on the afternoon of 30th August 2005 while he was sitting as a Magistrate, and had only been brought to his attention after 5 pm that day, by which time the Order had already been granted. He expressed to me his surprise and concern that he had been joined as a party to the application for bail which was already pending before him, and felt neglected, abandoned and vulnerable that he had not been represented even by the Law Officer who had appeared at the hearing before Justice Showers and had announced representation for the Inspector-General of Police and the Director of Prisons. He felt he needed toclear his name and put the records straight vis-à-vis the allegations of Browne-Marke, and to see that the correct thing was done. He asked me if I would act on his behalf and I agreed to do so.
Accordingly on the 6th day of September 2005 (after a delay of a few days when I was unwell,) my firm filed a Motion and Affidavit sworn to by Mr. Adrian Fisher seeking, inter alia, AN ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20TH AUGUST 2005 granting bail to the Applicants on the grounds of irregularity, as hereinbefore set out. On Thursday 8th September 2005 all parties duly appeared in Court before Justice Showers and I started making my application. To my utter surprise State Counsel for the 2nd and 3rd Respondents got up and took a preliminary objection to my application, that the 1st Respondent being a public officer could not act through a Private Practitioner but must consult the Law Officers’ Department who are bound by the Law Officers Act to represent him. He asked the Court to STRIKE OUT our Motion with Costs. I replied by saying that it was the constitutional right of the 1st Respondent to consult and appoint a Lawyer of his own choice, especially as he had been wrongfully and unlawfully joined as a Respondent to the Bail Application, and allegations of misconduct and bias had been made against him.
The Learned Judge then adjourned for a Ruling on the Preliminary objection and promised to send out Notices when the Ruling is ready. THAT RULING HAS NEVER BEEN DELIVERED, notwithstanding the very important issues raised in argument on the preliminary objection, particularly as regards
(i) The protection afforded to serving Judicial Officers under Section 77 of the Courts Act No. 31 of 1965.
(ii) The constitutional right of every citizen to consult and appoint any Solicitor of his own choice to defend him when he has been brought before a Court of Law by another citizen.
On the 9th September 2005 I left the Jurisdiction for a short vacation which had already been much delayed, but in my absence, two (2) dates were fixed by the Court for the Ruling to be delivered, but this was never done. The Ruling remains undelivered as I write, hence my statement earlier that the Judicial process had been “stalled”.
D. THE INTERVENTION
On the 18th September 2005, I telephoned my chambers from the U.K. to check on things generally and more particularly to find out whether a date had been set for the Ruling by Justice Showers. The reply I got SHOCKED ME TOTALLY! My Senior Clerk told me that the Chief Justice had intervened in the matter and ordered Magistrate Adrian Fisher, the 1st Respondent/Applicant to write a letter to the Master and Registrar withdrawing his application, which he had reluctantly done, and so there was no ruling. I hung up the phone and tried to clear my head, as I could not believe what I had heard. I decided to call Mr. Fisher to confirm the information, and when I got through to him, he not only confirmed it but told me that he had been thoroughly scolded and put under relentless pressure by the Chief Justice to write and withdraw the application, and when he showed reluctance to do so, was ordered and commanded by the Chief Justice to do so forthwith. He read the letter he had been ordered to write by the Chief Justice to me over the phone. I reproduce it here.
“To The Master and Registrar
Law Court Building
Freetown, Sierra Leone
12 September 2005
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Case No. 252/05 Dr. Fatmatta Hassan and Ors.
“Following discussions with the Honourable Chief Justice, I write to withdraw the above pending application before Mrs. Justice Showers as directed by the Honourable Chief Justice with immediate effect.
Yours faithfully,
Adrain Fisher.
c.c. Hon Chief Justice
Hon. Attorney-General and Minister of Justice
Mr. J.B. Jenkins-Johnston Esq. …”
In consequence of the Chief Justice’s intervention detailed above, Mrs. Justice Showers was effectively prevented from delivering her ruling on the very important issues mentioned above. It is my very seriously considered professional opinion that Your Lordship’s intervention in this matter at the time it came, and in the manner in which it came, was, to put it as mildly as I possibly can, MOST UNFORTUNATE! It was unfortunate because Your Lordship could and ought to have intervened earlier, when your CORONER was joined as a 1st Respondent to an application for bail contrary to the letter, spirit and intendment of Section 77 (1) of the Courts Act No. 31 of 1965, as a result of an order made by him as Coroner under Section 27 of the Coroner’s Act. In Halsbury’s Laws of England Vol. 8 Para 890 Judicial Immunity, it is clearly stated.
“….A Coroner, like any other Judicial Officer, is immune from legalproceedings in respect of acts done or words spoken in the exercise of his judicial duty…”
It is my view that Your Lordship had an excellent opportunity to intervene in the matter at the stage where the file was submitted to you for assignment of a Judge in order to protect your Coroner/Magistrate from what was clearly an unlawful act, but you did not do so, and instead left the original motion to proceed, fraught with all the irregularities listed earlier until the irregular order for bail was granted. However, Your Lordship chose to intervene when the 1st Respondent decided to fight back to clear his name and see that things were done properly.
Your Lordship’s intervention was even more unfortunate because of the manner in which it was done, as indeed it is my considered view that once a matter is before the Court and a party is represented by Counsel, and the Court has actually sat on the matter, that matter can only properly be withdrawn by Counsel seeking the leave of the Court in open court on the instructions of his client to withdraw the motion, summons or other process, NOT by a party being coerced to write a letter to the Master and Registrar against his will in the absence of his Solicitor and Counsel to say he is withdrawing his application. The whole episode was very unfortunate indeed!
What then is the effect of Your Lordship’s intervention?
(a) Justice Showers has been prevented from delivering her ruling in the course of her judicial duty, on matters of considerable importance to the parties, the legal profession and the public generally.
(b) The 1st Respondent has been frustrated and prevented from clearing his name (which is his constitutional right,) and at least attempting to see that things are properly and regularly done.
(c) The irregular Order made on 30th August 2005 granting bail to Dr. Hassan and others still stands and the judicial process has effectively been ‘stopped’ in so far as that order is concerned.
Consequent upon all the foregoing, I venture to suggest that all is not lost and that the situation can and ought to be corrected if Your Lordship is so disposed in the following manner:
(1) Your Lordship directs Mr. Adrian Fisher, Coroner, to fix a date for the delivery of his ruling on the Application for Bail filed by C.A. Osho-Williams which was adjourned for Ruling on 30th August 2005.
(2) Your Lordship directs Justice A. Showers, J. to fix a date for the delivery of her ruling on the preliminary objection taken by Monfred Sesay Esq. and the reply given by J.B. Jenkins-Johnston Esq. in the Motion herein which was adjourned for Ruling on 8th September 2005.
E. CONCLUSION
My Lord Chief Justice,
I have taken the trouble to set out the above in such detail for two (2) reasons, Firstly, because I hope that from the foregoing it can be seen that something needs to be done immediately to rectify the situation in the above matter; And Secondly, and more importantly, because I believe that it is essential that urgent remedial action be taken to rescue the image, standing and reputation of the Sierra Leone Judiciary.
I have no doubt that you have been aware that for several years now the majority of people in this country have had a very poor and negative impression of our Judicial System, and only come to the Courts when there is absolutely no other means of resolving any particular issue or dispute. It is particularly sad that people in general seem to have the perception that whenever the Government or a particular Minister or member of the ruling party is interested in a particular matter before our Courts, then the other party should give up all hope of success because the courts will always lean in favour of the Government, the Minister or member of the ruling party. In the above matter, (Re: Dr Fatmatta Hassan) it was particularly sickening to see the way the Motion for Bail was filed, heard and the Order made all in the same day (notwithstanding all the irregularities listed above,) and the way in which even the State Law Office, which is supposed to be prosecuting the Honourable Lady and the others, were falling over themselves in their cooperation and collaboration with Defence Counsel to see that the said Honourable Lady was released from prison without any delay whatsoever. Since that order for bail was obtained, so many members of the public at all levels of society have asked me questions like,
(a) “…. Is this the end of the Yansaneh Case?”
(b) “…. With the pronouncements of the Attorney-General over Radio Unamsil and the conduct of State Counsel in supporting Dr. Fatmatta Hassan in Court, is there any hope that this matter will ever be brought to Court?”
(c) “So Yansaneh died for nothing?”
(d) “Are there two (2) systems of Law in Sierra Leone, one for the rich, powerful and well-connected , and another one for the poor, voiceless and those with no connections?”
(e) “When will we have real justice in Sierra Leone?”
Can ordinary members of the Public be blamed for asking these questions? I think not. In his famous work, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, Prof. H.W.R. Wade states at Page 179 that
“… The Court is more concerned with appearance than with reality.
The test is not whether there is a real likelihood of bias but whether a reasonable man would suspect it. Justice must be rooted in confidence…”
Per Lord Denning MR in Metropolitan Properties v. Cannon (1969) QB 577.
I need hardly remind Your Lordship that in the Constitution of Sierra Leone Act No. 6 of 1991 at Chapter II thereof under the “FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY,” it is clearly stated at Section 8(1) as follows:
“8(1)… The Social order of the State shall be founded on the Ideals of Freedom, Equality and Justice.
In furtherance of the Social Order,
(a) Every citizen shall have equality of Rights, obligations and opportunity before the Law, and the State shall ensure that every citizen has an equal right and access to all opportunities and benefits based on merit….”
(b) The State shall recognize maintain and enhance the sanctity of the human person and human dignity.
(c) The Government shall secure and maintain the Independence, impartiality and integrity of the Courts of Law and unfettered access thereto, and to this end shall ensure that the operation of the Legal system promotes Justice on the basis of equal opportunity and that opportunities for securing justice are not denied any citizen by reason of economic or other disability…”
These are laudable principles indeed! But the Question is ARE THEY REALLY IN OPERATION IN SIERRA LEONE?
DOES Every citizen really have equal rights and obligations before the Law?
DOES The Legal System really promote justice on the basis of equal opportunity? I WONDER!
In other countries we see equality before the Law in operation, so what is wrong with us in Sierra Leone? In the United States of America, President Bill Clinton was actually in office as President, the most powerful man in the world, but that did not stop the Law from taking its course, and so he was prosecuted before the Senate, and only escaped impeachment by the skin of his teeth.
In the United Kingdom, in recent times two (2) members of the Upper House of Parliament (The House of Lords) one of them being Lord Archer, were actually prosecuted and convicted of criminal offences. Lord Archer actually served his prison sentence fully. The Crown Prosecution Service did not hesitate to prosecute them because they were members of the House of Lords but because equality before the Law is a reality in Britain. In South Africa, President Mbeki did not hesitate to sack the Deputy President Jacob Zuma when he got himself mixed up with a business partner with criminal tendencies, and he too will soon face the Law. Examples abound all over the world, and time will not permit me to go into any more.
I hope that by now, the point I am trying to make is clear enough. Our Constitution enjoins the Sate to recognize maintain and enhance the sanctity of the human person……. I hope that applies to all of us, including Harry Yansaneh (now Deceased). Our constitution guarantees us equality of rights and obligations before the law…. I hope that applies to all of us, including Hon. Dr. Fatmatta Hassan.
I know for a fact that the world is watching, and that the Judicial system itself is on trial over this matter. I sincerely hope we will not be found wanting. In the words of Emperor Ferdinand 1 (1506-1564)
“………. FIAT JUSTITIA, ET PEREAT MUNDUS”
“Let Justice be done, even though the world perish”.
Finally, I have copied this letter to all those who I consider to be important Stakeholders in the Administration of the Law in Sierra Leone, interested parties in this matter, and those of our diplomatic friends who were sufficiently interested in the fate of Harry Yansaneh to have issued a joint statement on the 2nd August 2005.
July 30, 2013