By Kadijatu Ishmatu Bangura (Expo Intern)
On August 5, 2026, Parliament opened debate on amendments to the 1991 Constitution. The conversation is long overdue. But how we amend this document will determine whether we strengthen Sierra Leone’s democracy, or quietly dismantle it.
A constitution is not a government memo. It is a covenant between the state and the people. The 1991 Constitution ended one-party rule, restored multiparty politics, and gave us the freedoms we now take for granted: speech, assembly, vote. Thirty-five years later, it is creaking. We need reforms. But reform is not the same as retreat.
The government, through the Attorney General Alpha Sesay, says the amendments are about accountability. The headline proposal is new eligibility rules for Parliament: 24 months physical residency, years of NASSIT contributions, and five years of tax payments. For dual citizens, the bar is even higher.
The intention sounds reasonable. “We cannot have people making laws for Sierra Leoneans when their primary loyalty and residence is elsewhere,” Sesay argued.
But intention is not impact. And the impact of this clause is to tell a generation of Sierra Leoneans abroad that their service is not wanted.
Let’s be honest about who we are targeting. Nurses in London who send remittances that keep hospitals running. Engineers in the U.S. who fund schools back home. Lawyers in Canada who drafted pro-bono briefs during the Ebola crisis. Entrepreneurs in Dubai investing in Freetown. These are not “absentee landlords.” They are Sierra Leoneans who left because the country pushed them out, and who never stopped claiming it.
To say you must live here 24 months before you can represent here ignores why many left: war, unemployment, and yes, bad governance. If we want them back, we should build a country worth coming back to, not change the rules to lock them out.
An MP warned during debate:“You cannot build democracy by shutting the door on your own people.” He is right. Diaspora Sierra Leoneans already contribute more to the economy than most government projects. The answer to disengagement is not exclusion. It is engagement.
The second danger is timing. This debate is happening weeks after police blocked the Sierra Leone Bar Association’s AGM with no court order. It is happening while we are still arguing about judicial appointments and anti-corruption powers. In that climate, any constitutional change will be read as political, not patriotic.
Perception matters. If citizens believe amendments are designed to keep certain people out and certain people in, they will not own the new constitution. And a constitution nobody owns is just paper.
What we actually need from the 1991 Constitution review is clear and urgent.
First, strengthen the independence of institutions. Give the Judiciary, ACC, and Electoral Commission real financial autonomy so they do not have to beg the executive every year.
Second, devolve power. Local councils should control more of the budget. A councillor in Kenema should not wait for Freetown to fix a drain.
Third, protect civic space explicitly. After what happened to the Bar Association, we need language that makes it a crime to obstruct lawful assembly without a court order.
Fourth, deal with presidential powers. Term limits must be ironclad. The temptation to tinker with them every 10 years is what has destabilized our neighbors.
What we do not need is a constitution that confuses loyalty with location. A Sierra Leonean in Minnesota who pays tax here, votes here, and buries parents here is not less Sierra Leonean than someone who never left.
John Baimba Sesay wrote this week:“There is no price too high to pay for democracy in Sierra Leone.” That price is vigilance. It is saying no when a good idea is dressed in bad law.
Parliament now goes to Committee stage, then public consultation. This is the moment for citizens to speak. Not with slogans, but with specifics. Ask: does this clause make government more accountable to me? Does it make justice faster? Does it make my vote matter more?
If the answer is no, reject it.
The 1991 Constitution was born out of struggle. It was written after we had seen what happens when one man controls everything. We must not amend it out of panic or politics. We must amend it to hand more power to the people, not take it away.
Amending a constitution is surgery. You do not use a sledgehammer to remove a splinter.
Let’s repair what is broken. But let’s not break what still works in the process.
Copyright –Published in Expo Times News on Wednesday, 12th August 2026 (ExpoTimes News – Expo Media Group (expomediasl.com)
