| AI Index: | December |
Sierra Leone
No one to turn to: Women’s lack of access to justice in Sierra Leone
"I couldn’t go to the chief [as] he would not have taken my matter
seriously; I didn’t go to the local court [as] I had no money. If human rights
had not been there I don’t know what I would have done. I suppose I would have
left it to God."
Introduction
Amnesty International
considers the discrimination women suffer and their lack of access to justice in
Sierra Leone to be of serious and urgent concern. This briefing paper provides
an overview of the barriers that women face in accessing justice that Amnesty
International found on a recent visit and includes recommendations to address
them. The briefing paper, to be followed by a longer report in 2006,
specifically targets participants of the Stakeholders Conference on Human
Rights, being held in Freetown, Sierra Leone from the 6-8 December 2005(1). The
Conference brings together the Government of Sierra Leone, United Nations
agencies, donors, international organizations and members of civil society to
discuss the critical human rights issues facing Sierra Leone. These discussions
will feed into the National Human Rights Action Plan and into the work of the
Human Rights and Rule of Law component of the United Nations Integrated Office
in Sierra Leone (UNIOSIL) - due to start operations in early 2006(2).
Many cultural, legal, and social factors impact women’s access to
justice. Justice is compromised by discrimination in the law, lack of laws to
protect women against gender based violence, discriminatory social attitudes in
the family and wider society, as well as discriminatory attitudes and practices
of officials administering the law. Furthermore it is exacerbated by a general
lack of legal advice and assistance.
Women face discrimination and
inequality in laws, in custom, and in rulings by Chiefs and Local Court
officials primarily in marriage, divorce, inheritance, and property. The
consequences are devastating for women as it further entrenches many into
poverty, forces some to stay in violent relationships, contributes to
homelessness, and severely compromises women’s ability to properly care for
themselves, and their children. Not only are laws that relate to matters in the
domestic setting discriminatory, but there exists little protection in the law
against gender based violence. By promoting laws, which protect rather than
subordinate women, and taking concrete steps which aim to improve women’s access
to justice, Amnesty International believes Sierra Leone’s overall development
will benefit.
Customary law in Sierra Leone is unwritten and based upon
deep rooted social practices that coexist with the formal legal system.
Customary law, recognized and relevant to 85%(3) of the local population is
based on traditional beliefs and attitudes and administered predominantly by
men. Traditional practices dominate and tend to deprive women of their human
rights or silence them when their human rights are not respected. While
discrimination on the basis of sex is prohibited in Sierra Leone’s constitution,
this protection is undermined by condoning discrimination under customary law.
Laws governing marriage, property, and inheritance impacts women in
every aspect of their lives. Yet women find the process of pursuing remedies
related to these human rights confusing and inaccessible. Further, these laws
are unwritten, not systematically recorded, influenced by region, religion, and
differ depending upon the individual administering it. Women’s unfamiliarity
with laws and procedure leave a lot of room for manipulation by those
administering the law. Amnesty International found women’s experiences with the
Local Courts and Chiefs often resulted in unlawful rulings, humiliation, and at
times, imprisonment and trumped up charges and exorbitant fines of the women
seeking justice.
Recognition of the link between women’s equality and
the reduction of poverty is highlighted in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
which the Government of Sierra Leone has committed to over the next several
years and highlights that the "focus needs to be on gender equality and
empowerment as well as promotion and protection of the human rights of women in
the process of achieving poverty alleviation and sustainable economic growth".
Other commitments of the government include the adoption of the recommendations
of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which prominently feature women’s
human rights including the repeal of all discriminatory statutory and customary
laws. Some bilateral donors have taken steps to address this issue, for example
the UK Department for International Development (DFID) has allocated £25 million
over five years to reform the justice sector which may offer hopeful
opportunities.
UNIFEM, the Ministry of Social Welfare, Gender, and Children’s Affairs and the International Rescue Committee have been working with the Law Reform Commission(4) to develop a Women's Law Reform Agenda. These discussions have fed into the current draft laws on marriage, succession, sexual offences and inheritance, soon to be presented to Parliament by the Law Officers Department of the Attorney General and Ministry of Justice office. Consultations are currently being carried out on domestic violence legislation. Once the laws are passed in Parliament, a much greater challenge will be to change the prevailing local attitudes towards women’s human rights. The government’s reluctance to interfere is reinforced by a strong belief among Chiefs and some of the elders in the community that the government has no business interfering and changing cultural norms. Amnesty International believes this is the area that needs great commitment and attention by the Government of Sierra Leone, civil society, traditional leaders, and UN agencies.
Sierra Leone has ratified the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Discrimination (CEDAW) which guarantees equality before the law and the equal
protection of the law, and ensures that women have effective remedies if their
rights are violated. International law also obliges states to modify
discriminatory social and cultural patterns of conduct. By failing to confront
discrimination and practice Sierra Leone is violating these obligations.
Amnesty International notes that the Stakeholders Conference on Human
Rights is a critically important forum to ensure that women’s human rights are
prominently featured in the National Human Rights Action Plan and central to the
work of the Human Rights and Rule of Law component within UNIOSIL due to start
in early 2006.
The Legal System in Sierra Leone
The laws of
Sierra Leone, as defined in Section 170 of the 1991 Constitution, comprises of
the Constitution itself, along with laws made by Parliament, statutory
instruments, the existing law, and the common law. The common law includes the
English common law and customary law. English common law is institutionalized
into the Judiciary headed by the Chief Justice, and comprises the Supreme Court,
Appeals Court, and High Court which are the superior courts of jurisdiction. The
Magistrates Courts constitute the inferior courts. These courts adjudicate
criminal and civil matters under statutory and English common law.
Customary law, largely unwritten, are the rules and regulations that are
applicable by custom and to particular communities in Sierra Leone(5). Customary
law is also defined as any rule, other than a rule of general law, having the
force of law in any chiefdom province(6). Common law which includes both English
common law and customary law, as described above, is applicable throughout
Sierra Leone except for Freetown where only English common law is applicable. In
the instances where British Common law and customary law clash, the Sierra Leone
Constitution mandates that British Common law supersedes.
The Local
Court is the only institution permitted by the Constitution to adjudicate
customary law under the Local Courts Act of 1963. The majority of the cases they
preside over include marriage, divorce, debt, succession, and land tenure. There
are 147 chiefdoms in Sierra Leone and each chiefdom has one to three Local
Courts. They are presided over by a Court Chairman, Court clerk, a panel of
elders and chiefdom police who act as marshals during court sessions. The Court
Chairman is appointed by the Paramount Chief for three-year terms with final
approval from the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. The Local
Courts are administered by the Executive branch of the government through this
Ministry. The Customary Law Officer, in the Law Officers Department in the
Attorney General and Ministry of Justice Office, also part of the Executive
branch of government, has the power to supervise the Local Court Chairperson and
review the decisions made by the Local Court to ensure that they are fair.
Lawyers are not allowed to appear in Court and the Judiciary currently has no
role in how the Local Courts function. In general Paramount Chiefs and the
elders in the community are considered to have the most power over how the Local
Courts function which raises questions about their independence(7).
Civil claims in family matters
The 1991 Constitution states
equality before the law and equal protection for the law, by prohibiting the
making of any law which is discriminatory. Chapter III Section 27 of the
Constitution states that "no law shall make any provision which is
discriminatory either in itself or in its effect". However, this provision is
qualified by subsection 4 of Section 27 which makes exceptions for, among other
things, adoption, marriage, divorce, burial, devolution of property on death or
other interests of personal law and in customary law. This means that
discriminatory laws on such matters are not necessarily unlawful under
the Constitution.
For example when a wife dies her husband inherits her
entire property. However on the death of the husband, the wife inherits only a
proportion of his property(8). Moreover a wife has no right under law to ensure
that the husband contributes financially towards the children while the family
is living together. If the couple separates, the wife is eligible for support
but only if he has deserted her. If she has left him or if they have decided to
separate, she is not entitled to support(9). Even then, the amount stipulated in
the law for support for the children is grossly inadequate.
There are
provisions in law on the surface provide for equal treatment of men and women,
however have a discriminatory effect on women. For example, there is a
restriction with regard to petitioning a divorce making it difficult to do so
within the first three years of marriage. While this law is applied equally to
men and women, it may have the effect of requiring a woman to stay with her
husband who is abusing her because of the financial implication she would
encounter if she left him. As another example, there is no minimum age of
marriage. This fails to protect girls from forced marriage as it is common
practice for girls, even as young as 10, to be forced to marry adults. Among the
many human rights violations a girl may be subjected to when forced to marry an
adult man, her ability to mature into an adult with dignity is compromised as
she is deprived of her right to education.
Protections in criminal
law
Despite that the Constitution provides for the right to life, liberty
and security of person and stipulates that no person shall be subject to any
form of torture or any punishment or other treatment which is inhuman or
degrading, criminal law fails to protect women from domestic violence. It is
widely accepted that a man chastise his wife, often translating into condoning
or acceptance of domestic violence. In effect, unless the violence results in
murder or serious wounding, criminal law is not regarded as applicable to the
forms of violence which a husband may inflict on his wife. Since the domestic
arena is where the majority of violence against women takes place, women are
largely left without legal remedies. Involving police or the state in "family
matters" is not regularly practised. Women are unlikely to take any steps that
would break up the family as it would leave her and her children without
financial means including possibly being denied any access to the joint property
of the marriage. As a result, women often simply accept this human rights abuse
and perceive it as natural and inevitable, thus not demanding justice(10).
Customary law
The Constitution states that customary law is
part of common law of Sierra Leone but does not define it. The laws themselves
are not written and the rulings are rarely recorded and so the population is
forced to rely on what they understand as custom and the memory of Local Court
officials to apply the law in good faith. Some of the customary practices that
are understood as customary law relate to marriage, property, and inheritance.
Customary law is supposed to comply with the national constitution and should
not contradict enactments of Parliament or principles of natural justice and
equity(11). However customary law works in ways which are often discriminatory
or which perpetuate violence against women.
For example, it is customary
that if a husband dies his widow is required to marry the brother of her late
husband in order to continue to have access to the property. In another example,
if a woman marries she loses her rights to her parents’ property or any say in
how it is administered. In cases of divorce, men are not required to pay
compensation to the wife although in some communities she is required to pay
back the dowry(12) which was given to her family when she married.
In
cases of sexual assault and rape the customary practice is for the families of
the victim and of the perpetrator to settle these cases by compensating the
victim’s family with money and/or goods. The main focus is to salvage the
reputation of the victim’s family rather than bring the rapist to justice or
provide redress for the victim and protect others who may be at risk. While
Local Courts do not have jurisdiction in sexual assault and rape cases, families
continue to bring them for settlement and the Local Courts continue to handle
them. If the victim was previously a virgin there is a stiff penalty, usually a
sum of money, that the perpetrator is supposed to pay to the victim’s family and
the Chief; however if she was not previously a virgin, a lesser penalty is
normally imposed. In some Muslim communities family pressure is put on the
victim to marry the rapist, since her chances of getting married are greatly
reduced by the fact that she is no longer a virgin(13). However, with recent
improvements in the training of Local Court officials, particularly with regard
to the scope of their jurisdiction, it appears in some district towns that they
are now declining to exert jurisdiction in such cases and are increasingly
referring them to the Magistrates courts to be dealt with under the criminal
code(14).
Administration of customary law by Local Courts and
Chiefs
The majority of the cases where women appeared before the Local
Courts and Chiefs were family related cases, often brought by their husband or
other relatives. It was less often that women appeared before the Local Court or
Chiefs on their own initiative in matters of their own protection or remedies.
Women in general underutilize Magistrates Courts due to the long distance, the
expense, and ignorance of them and their procedures. Appearing before the Chiefs
and Local Courts, at times was the only option for women, despite the feeling
that their case would not be taken seriously, would be treated unfairly, and
would be expensive. Cases involving women and Local Courts and Chiefs included
trumped up charges and exorbitant fines against women themselves, unlawful
rulings, humiliation, and even, imprisonment of women seeking justice.
Confusion around where one mechanism’s jurisdiction begins and ends also
leaves a lot of room for manipulation and impacts upon women’s access to
justice. This is true for both women and for those administering the system, as
it is unclear where the boundaries of the different jurisdictions lie. Amnesty
International found that external assistance from paralegal organizations was an
effective way in which women could access this system and avoid some of the
manipulation and unfairness that normally took place. In some cases Chiefs were
unlawfully imposing fines and detaining people in so called "native"
prisons(15). Under the laws of Sierra Leone, Chiefs are not allowed to
adjudicate cases, impose fines or imprison people. The Local Courts have no
power to impose detention leaving only fines as possible punishments. Also it
was reported that Local Courts, sometimes also adjudicated cases that fell
outside their jurisdiction as in cases of rape.
In addition to family
disputes and similar matters, cases involving women accused of witchcraft were
brought to Chiefs and Locals Courts. Little information is available as to how
they attempt to rule on these cases, because there is a lack of clarity in law
as to the content of such offences and their rulings are not recorded
systematically. While the Customary Law Officer in the Law Officers Department
of the Attorney General and Ministry of Justice office has the power to review
cases there is only one officer allocated for the entire country. He is unable
to carry this task out systematically. Likewise despite a Constitutional
provision that provides for the right to appeal Local Courts’ decisions before a
Magistrate’s Courts, such appeals are rarely carried out.
Amnesty
International believes that more external assistance, including paralegal or
legal aid, and greater oversight of the actions and the rulings of Chiefs and
Local Courts are urgent and critical to address. In the cases below women were
supported and helped to access the judicial system by various paralegal and
legal national NGOs including the Catholic Church’s Access to Justice
Project in Makeni, Lawyers Center for Legal Assistance (LAWCLA) in
the district capitals and Freetown, and Tinap for Justice in Magburuka
and Bo. These NGOs have assisted many people including women in the district
towns and surrounding villages. However they all told Amnesty International that
they were completely overstretched with many more cases than these organizations
could handle. Staff of community based organizations told Amnesty International
that the manipulation and unlawful behaviour experienced by these women is
common at the local level due largely because the authority of Chiefs or Local
Court officials is rarely challenged. Clearly the women, the most vulnerable in
the community, were impacted significantly making their already very difficult
situation, much worse.
Case I
JK and her son were
accused of witchcraft by her husband who brought the case to the chief in the
village.
My son and I live in a village near Makeni town. My son is
13 years old and he suffers from epilepsy. In September this year (2005) my son
and I were accused of witchcraft. My husband brought this charge to the Chief.
My husband said that our child was bewitched and it was me who was responsible
for bewitching him(16). Based on this accusation that my husband made, the Chief
charged both me and my son with witchcraft. He said that we each had to pay him:
one five gallon of palm oil, 50,000 leones (US$15), one goat, and 20 ft pan of
straw rice, each.
I pleaded with the Chief for mercy claiming
that I had no way of paying those kinds of fines. His answer was to order me to
go to the tribal prison. He told me to stay there until I paid him bail money of
12,000 leones (US$4). After I gave him the bail money he released me. He then
demanded that I pay him the fines. I didn’t have that kind of money so I begged
him to let me go to Freetown to get the money together to pay him. He said he
would only let me go if I could identify someone in the village who could pay
the fine if I did not return. My uncle, who also lived in the village, agreed.
The next day I went to Freetown to find my brother. He was the
only one I knew who could help me. I left my son in the village with the other
people in my family. I stayed in Freetown for awhile as it took a long time to
convince my brother to return to the village with me. When I finally returned
with my brother, I found my son in the care of community worker. The community
worker told me he had become destitute because no one wanted to care for him as
they thought he was bewitched. Upon hearing my story, the community worker
advised me and my brother to take the matter to a human rights lawyer from the
Access to Justice Project (17) in Makeni. We went to Makeni to talk to the
lawyer there. After they heard our story they sent a letter to the Chief in our
village. Immediately when the letter reached the Chief, he dropped the witch
craft charge and all the fines that he had imposed on me. I am not sure what I
would have done if it had not been for the human rights lawyer with the Access
to Justice Law Center in Makeni.
Case II
KD was
abandoned by her husband who was also trying to evict her from her family home
where she and her five children were living. In the process of trying to evict
KD she experienced unlawful practice and behaviour by both the Paramount Chief
and the Local Court.
I am married and have five children with the same
father who until very recently was my husband. A few months ago my husband left
me to marry another woman. He is now trying to evict me and our five children
from the property where we have lived for so many years. The first thing that
happened was that an order came from the Paramount Chief through the Chiefdom
police that we should leave our family home. When the Chiefdom police arrived, I
was terrified and told them that I couldn’t move as my children and I have no
where else to go. When the Paramount Chief found out that I had refused to move
he took the case to the Local Court.
At the same time that the
Paramount Chief transferred the eviction charge to the Local Court, my husband
had also asked the Local Court to grant us a divorce. The main justification
that he gave to the Local Court for the divorce was that I had been wearing
trousers when I was in bed with him, and failing to perform my wifely duties.
The Local Court presented me with divorce papers which my husband had already
signed. I did not know what to do. I know I wanted to stay in my family home and
wanted to have continued support for my children. What I did not know was what
would happen if I signed the divorce papers. I decided to ask for advice from
the legal aid people at LAWCLA. They advised me not to sign the divorce papers.
The next day I got an urgent summons to immediately appear before
the Local Court. When I arrived at the Local Court, they asked me why I had not
signed the divorce papers. Before I could answer they detained me. I stood in
the middle of the court barrie. It was open and every one could see me. They
made me stay there all day. It was very humiliating. When LAWCLA heard about
this they came to the Local Court and told them that they could not keep me
there. The Local Court Chairman then told me I could leave.
The
next day I received another summons from the Local Court. This time it was about
the eviction notice and the fact that I had not left my family home with my
children. I called LAWCLA again. This time LAWCLA wrote a letter to the Local
Court Chairman with copies to the Paramount Chief and Resident Magistrate
stating that I had not committed a criminal offence by not leaving the premises,
that I had every intention of staying there, that the Local Court was acting
outside of its jurisdiction, and that the Local Court was unlawfully applying
the law. Soon after the Customary Law Officer became aware of the ruling made by
the Local Court and in my presence he told the Local Court Chairman that they
had no jurisdiction in this case. Following this, the Attorney General and the
Customary Law Officer wrote to the Local Court Chairman stating that my husband
had no right to evict me from my home and if my husband wanted to divorce me he
could do so but would have to pay support for the children.
My
husband still refuses to pay his children’s school fees, food and clothing
costs. LAWCLA has written to him about this and have also warned him that if he
continues to hassle me about leaving our family home then I will consider taking
legal action against him or reporting him to the police. I want to take him to
court anyway if he doesn’t pay the support for the children. When I go to court,
I won’t go to the Local Court. I will go to the Magistrate
Court.
Case III
PP was taken to the Local Court by her
husband after she left him for sexually harassing her. She experienced heavy and
unlawful fines imposed by the Local Court.
I was sued to the Local
Court by my husband whom I left because he was sexually harassing me. After I
left my husband I went to stay with my brother. The next day I was summoned to
the Local Court. The Local Court Chairman told me that my husband was suing both
my brother and I and we were charged with the following: 750,000 leones (US$250)
for cash and property, for abruptly leaving my marriage without his consent, and
for refusing to have sex with him. He charged my brother for taking me without
his consent, and for using abusive language. While these charges were pending I
asked for a divorce which was easily granted by the Local Court.
Upon the request for the divorce, my husband asked for the return
of the dowry to the amount of 1 million leones (US$333,000). In the end the
Local Court, dismissed the first charge of 750,000 leones (US$250) for cash and
property however the rest of the charges resulted in heavy fines. I was charged
with 73,000 leones (US$24) for leaving my marriage without the consent of my
husband, 112,000 (US$37) for failing to perform my duties as a wife (or for
refusing to have sex with him) and 500,000 (US$167) as a repayment for the dowry
which so far I have paid 200,000 leones (US$66). My brother was charged with
250,000 (US$83) for taking me without the consent of my husband and both my
husband and my brother had to pay 50,000 (US$16) to the Local Court for using
abusive language.
Women’s access to justice is compromised by so
many factors including their perception of what they are entitled to, making
access to justice extremely limited. The women interviewed by Amnesty
International represent the minority of women who were able, with external
assistance, to have access to some judicial remedies or to avoid the imposition
of discriminatory fines, to be evicted from their home, or to ensure support for
their children. Amnesty International believes there are so many women who
suffer in silence.
Legal Obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil
the human rights of women
The Government of Sierra Leone has the obligation to respect women's human rights through its direct action, agents and structures of law. In order to adequately protect women’s human rights the government must take all necessary measures to prevent individuals or groups from violating the rights of each individual. The government is also required to fulfill the human rights of women by ensuring opportunities for individuals to obtain what they need or so they can provide for themselves. International law has developed the standard of due diligence as a way to measure whether a government has acted with sufficient effort to live up to its responsibilities to uphold human rights for example to respect, protect and fulfill.
Sierra Leone is a party to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and its Optional Protocol. Under UN
leadership, women's organizations are helping the Government of Sierra Leone to
prepare its initial report to the CEDAW Committee. Sierra Leone is a party to
African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and it has signed, but not ratified
the Protocol to the African Charter on the Rights of Women in Africa.
With regard to discriminatory legislation and practices, under Article 2
(f) of CEDAW it states that state parties undertake to "take all appropriate
measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws,
regulations, customs, and practices which constitute discrimination against
women."
Under Article 5 of CEDAW it further states that state parties
shall take all appropriate measures "to modify the social and cultural patterns
of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of
prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of
the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped
roles for men and women".
With regard to discrimination in matters
relating to marriage and family relations, Article 16 of CEDAW establishes the
principle of equality between men and women and in particular for states to
ensure "the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its
dissolution" (see Article 16, paragraph 1, c.)
It also provides for
temporary special measures, in accordance with article 4, paragraph 1, of the
CEDAW to increase women’s representation in all spheres and levels of public and
political life, accompanied by skills training and other support programs to
allow women to effectively take advantage of such opportunities.
With
regard to the practice of forced marriages, the UN Committee on the Rights of
the Child, in its consideration of the initial report of Sierra Leone, stated
that it "is very concerned at the practice of arranging marriages - under
customary law - for very young girls, in particular against the free will of the
child. The Committee notes that such practices violate the provisions and
principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child." And it recommended
that "the State party undertake child rights promotional activities in
communities which apply such customary law practices, explaining the rights of
children in this regard with a view to ensuring that a minimum age for marriage
is established, that it is the same for both boys and girls, and that girls are
not forced into marriage."(18)
With regard to violence against women, and
in particular domestic violence, General Recommendation 19 of CEDAW clearly
links discriminatory laws and practices to gender-based violence and makes
specific recommendations to states parties to take measures to overcome all
forms of gender-based violence, including violence in the
family.
The way forward
As the rehabilitation and
reform of the administration of justice in Sierra Leone takes place, it is
imperative that priority is given to ensuring legal aid and paralegal services,
law reforms, administrative and other measures aimed at creating an environment
where women are able to enjoy access to justice. Special attention needs to be
on reforming statutory law, common law and customary law and practice to ensure
that gender-based discrimination which pervades the laws and practices of Sierra
Leone is eradicated in all its forms. Laws also need to be developed which play
a role in protecting women from domestic violence, harmful traditional
practises, and other gender based crimes. The Government of Sierra Leone must
take the responsibility for ensuring that this happens. The UN and the
international community must facilitate this by assisting Sierra Leonean
institutions to protect and promote the rights and equality of women as a
crucial step to both the survival of peace in and development of Sierra
Leone.
The withdrawal of the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone
(UNAMSIL) will take place by the end of the year. It will be replaced by UNIOSIL
whose mandate is largely comprised of human rights and rule of law components.
The focus of the mission provides a key opportunity for women’s human rights to
be front and center in its work with the Government of Sierra Leone. The
Stakeholders Conference on Human Rights provides the forum to begin these
discussions on the development of the National Human Rights Action Plan. Tasks
to be performed by the u Human Rights and Rule of Law component of UNIOSIL in
2006 must be clearly defined and involve women’s human rights to be fully
incorporated into the United Nations country team’s human rights initiatives in
Sierra Leone.
Recommendations
Amnesty International’s
recommendations are specific and targeted to the content of the National Human
Rights Action Plan and the composition and activities of the Human Rights and
Rule of Law component of the UNIOSIL due to be in place beginning in January
2006.
Recommendations to the Government of Sierra Leone on the
National Human Rights Action Plan
The National Human Rights Action
Plan should reflect a comprehensive and serious commitment to women’s human
rights. Commitments should be divided into short and longer term steps
including:
In the short term
i) Legal aid services and paralegal services should be made available at the district headquarters and Freetown level. Paralegal services should be made available throughout the country to give advice on and mediate civil cases.
ii) Legal Reform for laws concerning marriage, succession, inheritance, and sexual offences which meet international human rights standards are quickly passed and implemented. Domestic violence legislation, currently under consultation, should be fast tracked. Further analysis of discriminatory laws should be carried out as part of the government’s commitment to domesticating CEDAW, and the codification of customary law and ensuring that they meet international standards of fairness and justice.
ii) Institutional reforms must be carried out, such as the development of better oversight mechanisms of the Local Courts through hiring more Customary Law Officers, providing a greater link between the Local Courts and the Magistrate Court, educating people about the possibility of appealing to the Magistrate Courts, make legal aid assistance available for appeals, greater oversight on rulings and fines, and regular monitoring of the Local Court rulings and actions taken by the Chiefs with punitive action taken if necessary.
In the longer term
iii) Training to include gender sensitive and women’s human rights needs to be targeted at staff in the administration of justice institutions including the police, the judiciary, and the prisons, and as well government functionaries at all levels and with traditional leaders including Chiefs, Local Court personnel, and community members.
iv) Developing codes of conduct for the above professionals and community members as well as related guidelines, outlining specifically how they can and should integrate gender concerns into their work. This should be done through a consultative process for regular and transparent review and accountability, in relation to such codes of conduct and guidelines.
vi) Capacity building through further strengthening of community based organizations, local and national organizations through the provision of funding, training in research, advocacy, and networking. Further enhance regional groupings and provide funding for groups to carry out joint advocacy.
vii) Focus on rural areas: Local government, traditional leaders, and members of community should be encouraged to improve women’s position in the community and demonstrate to family and the wider community of supporting and protecting women rather than subordinating them. Development of women’s leadership should also be encouraged.
ix) Development of data collection systems to more systematically analyze the prevalence and effects of gender based discrimination that negatively impacts women’s human rights in Sierra Leone should be set up by the Government of Sierra Leone.
Recommendations for the Human Rights and Rule of Law component of
UNIOSIL
To work with relevant ministries within the Government of
Sierra Leone to ensure the National Human Rights Action Plan is adopted and
implemented effectively by: