EDWINA HAWA JAMIRU VS THE STATE OF SIERRA LEONE (PLUS JUSTICE MOMOH JAH STEVENS) - RE CYBER CRIME ARREST. CASE STUDY NO. 2.

         Ms Edwina  Hawa  Jamiru vs The State

In Sierra Leone, there is a crucial legal distinction between a Police “INVITATION” for questioning and a formal “ARREST” of an individual suspect or a concerned person of 

interest. The Law requires the Police authorities to bring an arrested person before a court and either charge or release that person(s) within a specific time frame, 

depending on the nature of the suspected offence. The practice of detaining an 

“INVITED PERSON (S)” in Sierra Leone for over seventy-two hours {(72 hrs i.e. Three 

days (3) and up to Ten (10 days) for a suspected felony offences)} as the law requires, raises serious Human Rights and Constitutional issues.

     Edwina Hawa Jamiru: on a Bright day

Before going any further, let me lay out the distinction between an “INVITATION” Vs. an 

“ARREST” in Sierra Leone of a person(s) of interest to the police.

INVITATION: Legally speaking, a Police “INVITATION” literally implies that the person of interest’s attendance is “VOLUNTARY”. One is not in custody; one is free to leave at any 

time; and one is entitled to legal representation when attending such “INVITATION” asthe demands. (Sierra Leone Constitution, Section 17 (1) (e & f).

The Police usually issue an “INVITATION” when they want to clarify a situation or gather more facts before deciding if an arrest is necessary.

ARREST: An arrest involves a physical touching or confinement, or a submission to 

custody by words or action. A person(s) once arrested is officially in police custody and 

is subject to strict constitutional time limit for detention before being brought to court (i.e. three days or 72 hours – (Section 17 (30 (b) 1919 Sierra Leone Constitution). 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/16bFkyn4Lj/

        The Inspector General of S L Police 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/17DeXnRotd/

What we observe as an occurring practice in Sierra Leone, the police many a time use 

the term “INVITATION”, to avoid the immediate legal constraints and procedural 

safeguards associated with a formal arrest. Deceitfully so, they “INVITE” the targeted 

Person(s) of Interest” for questioning (as in the ongoing case of Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru 

– the case by extension, of Justice Momoh Jah Stevens Vs Ms Edwina Hawa Jamaru.)

However, if a person(s) is physically prevented from leaving the Police Station, when invited, that person(s) is effectively under arrest or detention, regardless of the 

terminology used. We have been seeing that tactics at play in Sierra Leone in recent 

times.

Having kept Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru , {the twenty one (21) year old mother of Justice 

Momoh Jah Stevens baby (as confirmation by the infamous DNA TEST showing 99.999% 

of him being the father)}, for more than four days without her freedom to leave the Police 

Station, (nor being formerly charged of any offence), one could conclusively state that 

she (Edwina) has been effectively detained, even though she has not been officially 

arrested.

Legality of her Detention: The 1991 Sierra Leone Constitution Act 6 of 1991, stipulates 

that any person arrested or detained must be brought before a competent court within 

24 hours (Section 17 (3)(b). Thus, by holding her for over three (3) days now, the Police 

has violated this constitutional provision. The constitutional further stipulates that no 

person(s) should be held in custody beyond this [72 hour] period without the express 

authority of the court: another police violation of the constitution.

The legality of Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru thus far, could be challenged via a petition to the 

High Court by her Legal representatives – her Lawyers, or ANY Friend of the court – for a 

review of the detention – a right guaranteed by the Sierra Leone Constitution. By the way 

she has been treated, her status is effectively now seen as “DETAINED WITHOUT 

PROCESS”, meaning that the Police have BY PASSED the constitutional requirement to 

seek Judicial Approval for Extended Questioning. 

These constitutional violations should be immediately leveraged by her Legal 

representatives, to demand her release or the Police formalise the arrest and bring her 

before a Magistrate Court with no further delay.

https://youtu.be/4vDt-NgHklQ?si=wTOydzddJIpFEb1Y

https://youtu.be/MXRHR0YW3jY?feature=shared

The Cyber violations: The alleged cyber-crimes for which the Police “INVITED” Ms 

Edwina Hawa Jamiru, is likely to be classified as a misdemeanour. If this is so, the 

limit the Police must bring her to a court is 72 hours (or 3 Days); for a Felony it is 

Ten (10 Days). However, these limits are contingent on the 24hours court 

appearance rule being met. Having held her for more than four days, renders the 

Police action a serious breach of her rights and that of the 1991 Constitutional 

provision. Throughout her detention within this period, she should have been 

entitled to consult and be represented at all stages, by a legal practitioner or other 

qualified persons provided by the State.

What is Ms Jamiru’s position so for on this? For the Police to hold and detain Ms Edwina 

Hawa Jamiru, for over three (3) days as the law provides, without formerly arresting 

her and bring her before a court is a violation of her fundamental Human Rights as 

enshrined in the Sierra Leone Constitution and the Human Rights Acts. Her 

detention is illegal as she is in the Police under the false premise of a

“VOLUNTARY INVITATION”, and not free to leave. The Police cannot detain an 

“INVITED” person (s) indefinitely or beyond twenty-four (24) hours constitutional 

limit without a court order. This violation of the constitution is ongoing, and it is 

totally unacceptable.

Misuse of Mental Health Claims: While the Police can detain an individual who 

appears to have a Mental Health Disorder, and is in immediate need of care or 

control, (often under specific Mental Health Acts, which may vary by jurisdiction, 

but, generally require a professional assessment within 24 hours), this power is 

for the detained individual person’s safety and NOT for indefinite Police 

custody or use as a punitive measure.

POLICE STATION IS NOT A PLACE OF SAFETY! The Police Station is generally not the appropriate legal venue for a prolonged mental health assessment. Detainees 

suspected of Mental Health issues, should ideally be taken to a ‘place of safety, 

usually hospital or clinic, for assessment by a qualified medical professional. It is not for anyone to second guess the individual’s mental capacity if not qualified so to do. 

So far, the information going around, is that the police have not formerly arrested Ms 

Edwina Hawa Jamiru, nor formerly detained her under the relevant Mental Health 

provisions. No medical examination and/or assessment by a competent/qualified doctor or Mental Health Professional has been done, nor has she been brought before a Magistrate within the24 hours (since effectively detained at the Police station) to request a Court Order which would require medical evidence - for the court to decide. 

The Police and Many Social Media Posters have labelled Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru an 

“Unstable. It seems that the Police are using this claim of ‘Mental instability’ to justify her continued otherwise ‘unlawful detention’; thus, circumventing the strict 24- hour constitutional limit for bringing a detainee to court. While her detention is highly problematic, it is most likely illegal for the following reasons:

 “Invitation” does not equal to lawful detention. As stated earlier above, “Invitation” is voluntary and not compulsory. As Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru has been held for 

over three (3) days now and not allowed to leave voluntarily, she is thereby “effectively detained”; whether the Police call it an “arrest” or an “invitation” the terminology does not override the constitutional provisions nor the rights she has. Secondly, by holding her over three days violates the provisions of the 1991 

constitution which mandates that any person detained must be brought before a 

court within 24-hours. Her detention for over the constitutional time limit without 

a Court appearance is a clear violation of this fundamental provision and her right. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 9 provides that no one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. 

It is not in the hands of the Police to decide when a Court determines stability. They 

must obey Section 17 (3) (b) of the 1991 constitution and bring her to the court 

first. The holding in detention over the time limit is a clear breach of the provision 

and her lawyers must emphasise that. The International Convention of Civil and 

Political Rights (ICCPR - Article 9 :3) also states: “Anyone arrested or detained on 

a criminal charge shall be brought promptly before a Judge… and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release.

What the Police are doing have done to Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru so far is purely and is 

simply an ‘abuse of power’ and an illegal detention. He legal team shoul  immediately proceed with an Habeas Curpus Application to challenge the lawfulness of her detention and secure her immediate release and not play games to KILL the case against Justice Momoh Jah Stevens with the pretension 

that she is mentally unstable, when this judge is so deep in in her accusation of his sexually exploiting her, consistently accusing him of raping her, Defamed her character and added he “DID BAD/EVIL THINGS TO ME”!, and other suspected sexual offences under the Sexual Offences Act sections 4 and/sections 6 - 2008 (as Amended in 2019). Not leaving out Offences under the Anti- Corruption Acts 

(ACC) of 2008 & 2019 – 

Sections 42 Abuse of Office;

Section 43 – Abuse of position  

Section 44 Public Officer Using Office for (sexual) advantage and subject to the ACC Act Section 134 – suspension of a Public Officer charged with corruption; in this case sexual corruption. We hope the ACC Commissioner is observing.

 Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru has rights to Legal Representation and Information. Her rights 

in detention should have been respected from the moment she could not leave the Police Station and provided for by the State if she is incapacitated to provide one. The Sierra Leone Constitution Section 17 (2) guarantees the right to be informed of the reasons for her arrest or detention and the right to consult a legal practitioner. Her legal team/lawyers ensure these rights were upheld by the 

Police.

Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru also like any other Sierra Leoneans, have a Right to Humane 

Treatment and Dignity regardless of what anyone thinks of her. Using the Mental 

Health claim as an excuse for prolonged detention in police cells is a degrading 

and inhumane treatment and indirect punishment. This breaches the UN 

Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) Article (5): “No one shall be subjected to 

torture or to cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment. This also 

equate with the Right of Vulnerable Individuals (Mental Health Aspects). If the 

Police genuinely have concerns, the legal pathway must be followed, focusing on 

care, and not punitive detention in an inappropriate Police cell environment.

Equally, the UN Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness (as the 

police and some Social Media pundits are alleging), then the stipulation of these 

principles must be adhered to. Individuals should be assessed by qualified professionals and treated in appropriate therapeutic environment, NOT indefinitely held in Police Lockups. The burden is on the State to provide a VALID MEDICAL NECESSITY and follow established medical procedure via Court order.

Following from the above, Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru’s continued detention is a severe 

breach of the Laws of Sierra Leone and International Human Rights Standards, which could compel the High Court to order her immediate release, or a lawful transfer to a medical facility via proper court channels. 

Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru is a young mother with has Justice Momoh Jah Stevens‘ 4-5 

months old baby. This infant’s best interests are paramount in all decisions concerning the child, a principle recognised in Sierra Leone Laws. 

Violation of the ‘Best Interest of the Child’ is enshrined in the Sierra Leon’s Child Rights 

Act 2007. And the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), which Sierra Leone has ratified. All decisions affecting this child (and any other children) must be considered in their best interest as the primary concern. A police lockup is a highly inappropriate and potentially dangerous environment for any infant, impacting their health, hygiene, nutrition and 

development. If the child is not with her mother, that brings out another complicated factor.

The problem of Health and development Rights must also be considered. Police 

detention conditions typically lack adequate health care, sanitation and nutrition suitable for a nursing infant. This places the baby’s health at significant risk (if the baby is with her at the Police Station) and violates her right to the maximum extent of survival and development (section 21, Child Rights Act). This leads me to point out the Right to Special Care and Assistance provided in Article 25 (2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This states that “Motherhood and 

Childhood are entitled to special care and assistance”. This current DRAMATIC 

situation with Ms Edwina Hawa Jamuru versus the State, denied the baby this 

essential care and must be seriously considered. By extension, let’s look at the

Arbitrary Detention of a Child. This baby, having committed NO OFFENCE, is 

effectively being detained arbitrarily by circumstances, (if the infant is with her 

mother in the Police Station). This is a violation of the Child’s Liberty Rights.

Further violations regarding Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru are the Right of Maternal Aspects. 

The detention also violates her Rights toa new, nursing mother, exacerbating her 

stress and vulnerability. Equally, her Right to Family Unity and Parental Responsibility while separation might be ordered in certain circumstances, the initial placement of the mother and child in prolonged Police detention without a proper Court Order is an infringement of family life and parental responsibility.

This violation also extends to the further Risk of Psychological Trauma. Thestress, anxiety and trauma, experienced by Ms Edwina Hawa Jamiru, due to her unlawful detention and concern for her very young baby, couple with all the a she has gone through including the DNA Test Case and previous encounter with the Police and Couth Bench warrant of arrest,, can directly impact on her mental  health and, by extension, the wellbeing of the infant baby through maternal distress. Ms Jamiru must not ne subject to further Inhumane or Degrading Treating. Keeping a nursing mother and her infant in Police custody conditions foran extended, unlawful period can be is tantamount to inhuman and degrading 

treatment, which is strictly prohibited under (section (20) of the Sierra Leone 

Constitution 1991. 

The court’s attention should be drawn by her Lawyers or legal representative, that the 

Police have a DUTY OF CARE to ensure that the infant child is safe and that e continuing to hold both mother and child in an unsuitable environment is an ongoing Human Rights violation. He Lawyers must expedite the Habeas Corpus Application, and this should demand he immediate release of both mother and baby together, to an appropriate safe environment. The Baby’s right is indeed 

paramount and compelling. I bring to focus, the Urgency and illegality in challenging the Police actions.

           THE SIDE CHICK Vs THE JUDGE

------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Author:

The Author Israel Ojekeh Parper Snr. Is a  Lecturer  in Futher and Higher Education. A father of girls and boys, an elder brother of Seven Sisters (five still alive) and 

many female cousins and nieces and friends. He experienced caring for some of his sisters at the age of 22 – 27 with great responsibility.

 He is a Lecturer who has had long experience is education of mixed classes of male and female and students - teenagees and matured and is mindful of general behaviours of students of all characters and Background.

This Case is one of great lesson of social, religious, psychological, legal, Safeguarding and ethics.  He views the episodes and happenings with interest and evaluates it contexts and contents from many disiplines without prejudice to the parties concerned. 

EDWINA HAWA JAMIRU Vs JUSTICE MOMOH JAH STEVENS: A CASE STUDY No.1!

𝐒𝐮𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐉𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞   𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞, 𝐌𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐮 𝐉𝐚𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐬, 𝐒𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐇𝐢𝐬 𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐦 𝐌𝐬. 𝐄𝐝𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐚 𝐇𝐚𝐰𝐚 𝐉𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐫𝐮 𝐓𝐨 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐨𝐧. 𝐇𝐞 𝐀𝐛𝐮𝐬𝐞d, 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐠𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐃𝐮𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐇𝐞𝐫 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐛𝐲. 

Click Link

Edwina - Arrested and in Police cell

      Interview when at school in Kenema -

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/16TzmtcFeX/

She was 15𝐓𝐞𝐞𝐧 when Justice Momodu Jah Stevens first know her, impregnated her at 18𝐓𝐞𝐞𝐧, dumped her at 21 years old.  The issue confused women who joined some men to trolling Edwina do not consider, is the powerfulness of this 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐉𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞, Justice Momoh Jah Stevens. He is a judge and a lecturer of law in the university, where Edwina is a student. That means he came down on Edwina with a huge power, and the poor woman hadn’t any choice but succumb to this law officer. 

Edwina is a beautiful and brilliant Sierra Leonean woman, and 80% of Sierra Leonean men take advantage of women in Sierra Leone. That aside, a judge must not be seen being insincere, because that indicates how he delivers his judgements. If this happens in overseas countries, he would have been disbarred and all the cases he has delivered judgements on, will be dismissed with immediate effect.

Also, we are looking at how much this judge can be fair when he is on bench. He is not fit to be even a lawyer let alone a high court judge. He should have been disbarred before now, you attacking Edwina means you're confuse and spineless. He denied the child, came to the public and cried bloodily foul, seeking public sympathy at the same time dehumanize and stigmatizated Edwina. He have the police arrested and put her behind bars, he video the entire process in her most vulnerable moment crying and begging him to get her released. Certainly, which he refused.  He publicly distrubed all these videos and private messages they both exchanged for all and sundry to see and make mockery of her. 𝐑𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐮𝐬 𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞, 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧?

𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐡 𝐉𝐚𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐁𝐞 [in] 𝐉𝐚𝐢𝐥!

Again what we are insisting is that him as her lecturer/law officer, should not have involved in any relationship with his student. That is a law and policy of the University. Hope we open your eyes to that angle of the story, also it has been proven that Justice Momodu Jah Stevens is promiscuous. Meaning he is not trustworthy and therefore not fit to be a lawyer first of all and a judge. Associate with us in that direction, it could have been your daughter or sister. What would you have done?

𝐐𝐮𝐢𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨 𝐪𝐮𝐨!

If he has a little bit of dignity left in his bone, he should have resigned long time ago, or the justice department should have disbar him. A dishonest person should not be a lawyer. That is clearly proven, It does not matter whether the relationship was consensual or not. It's the wrong doing of dating and impregnating your student, that is abysmally wrong and unlawful. 

𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐡 𝐉𝐚𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐁𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞!

Justice Momoh Jah Stevens must be remove from the Bar totally, he should not sit either on bench or the bar. That is the honest thing to do, a law officer must be unblemished.

𝐓𝐨 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐡 𝐉𝐚𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐝𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐖𝐢𝐟𝐞.

We're very sorry that this situation affects you and your family deeply in so many ways, your mental health, peace and sanity. Your husband invited all these foolishness to your door step, he betray your love, trust, loyalty and take you for granted. That's why he brought it to the public, issue he should have be discreet about. We see you, we feel your pain, we understand your distress, and we sympathize with you. 

𝐓𝐨 𝐀𝐥𝐥 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐌𝐞𝐧 𝐑𝐮𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐖𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬.

May God gracefully direct you to a better solid or carbon copy of Edwina with more strength, Female in Africa will be very supportive and standing by to remove your pant and cover your head in shame.

#LeaveNoWomanBehind

-------------------------------------------'zzz

CLICK THE LINK BELOW FOR A FULL EPISODE OF THIS CASE STUFY DRAMA!

(Followibg this analysis, the Court Ordered Two, DNAvtests: Result, 99.999%  confirms Justife is the biological father and ordered Justice Stevens to pay LNe10,000 to Edwina Hawa Jamiru for tge child's upkeep. Meanwhile, Jamiru has taken her cry for "Justice" (compensation and calls for Justice Stevens removal from both as a Judge and as a Lecturer at FBC University of Sierra Leone)

Click this link

Deadbeat Justice -

https://youtu.be/4vDt-NgHklQ?si=Zqr9KsSYKb8Y2ZPG

The Bold African Voice (BAV) brings you another deep dive into a scandal shaking Sierra Leone’s judiciary.

In this episode, we analyze the explosive allegations by Edwina Hawa Jamiru, the 21-year-old girlfriend of High Court Justice Momoh Jah Stevens, who accuses him of blocking her court appearance, abandoning their child, and misusing the Domestic Violence Act against her.

We unpack the case with critical analysis, Africa-wide comparisons, and a forward-looking approach:
• What does this mean for Sierra Leone’s judiciary?
• How do other African countries handle similar scandals?
• Can digital activism force accountability where courts fall short?

This is more than a lovers’ quarrel—it’s a continental lesson on power, gender, and justice in Africa.

👉 Stay tuned till the end for a call to action to African leaders—and to you, the people, who hold the real gavel of accountability.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords: Sierra Leone judiciary scandal, Justice Momoh Jah Stevens, Edwina Hawa Jamiru, domestic violence in Africa, gender justice, judicial misconduct, Africa politics, Bold African Voice
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tagline: “When justice becomes personal, the people must make it public.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hashtags:
#BoldAfricanVoice​ #SierraLeone​ #JusticeStevens​ #EdwinaJamiru​ #DomesticViolence​ #GenderJustice​ #AfricaPolitics​ #JudicialReform​

[NB: Justice Momoh Jah Sevens is an Appeal Court Judge who has served on the Bench for 20 years first as Magistrate, then as a High Court Judge and now an Appeal Court Judge.

 He is also An Associate Lecturer at Fourah Bay College, University of Sierra Leone in the Faculty of Law, where Edwina Hawa Jamiru also is studying Law at the same Faculty.] Her first accusation appeared in Instagram on 15th December 2024. He appears not to have taken necessary action to deal with the matter.

IN COURT

--------------------------------------------------------------------

𝐀 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫 𝐈𝐬 𝐁𝐨𝐫𝐧. 𝐀 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐔𝐩𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐚𝐰𝐲𝐞𝐫, 𝐌𝐬. 𝐄𝐝𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐚 𝐇𝐚𝐰𝐚 𝐉𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐫𝐮.

She was 18 years old when A judge and an Imam 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐡 𝐉𝐚𝐡 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 over 50 years old decided to mentor her, he promised her the moon but impregnated, used, abused and dump her and the baby. 

𝐌𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝐃𝐨 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐆𝐮𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝟏𝟖𝐓𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐘𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐎𝐥𝐝 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝? 𝐀𝐫𝐞 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐒𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝, 𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐒𝐥𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐍𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐖𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐖𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐇𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐨 𝐇𝐞𝐫 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐘𝐨𝐮'𝐫𝐞 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐀𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝?

At 18 years old most of us women are still figuring out our personal hygiene, not knowing what to do with our menstruation and asking on ending questions about our body-changes. Whiles at 18 years old most boys are still learning how to wipe their ass, some 18 years boys even used the bathroom (number 2) and wipe their asses on the wall or on trees, some don't even wipe their ass at all. They're the once expecting Edwina Jamiru to make sound judgment at 18, and expect perfection from her.

At 21 Edwina is now confronting a judge who is also her abuser is rare in general to see, she is strong enough to finding her voices and confronted him. This is so powerful for all women, especially when he is in the legal settings that shows no one is above the law. This capture the essence of a woman standing up to a powerful abuser.

𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧'𝐭 𝐇𝐚𝐯𝐞 A 𝐂𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐏𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐓𝐨 𝐕𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐨, 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐒𝐡𝐞'𝐬 𝐀 𝐁𝐞𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐲 𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧. 𝐃𝐨 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐖𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐓𝐨 𝐃𝐞𝐧𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐓𝐨𝐨?

This is not about her alone, but encouraging other young girls who are going through similar situations to speak up. It also highlight the courage and resilience of those who have experienced abuse, and are able to finding their voice, overcoming trauma, and setting boundaries. 

Her actions signify and emphasize the importance of independent thought and the internal healing process. Addressing the psychological impact of abuse and the dynamics between perpetrator and victim. The emotional wounds are often highlighted as more painful than physical ones. Ultimately, we normally suggest that healing allows survivors to regain control of their lives. 𝐒𝐨 𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐮𝐬 𝐢𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐬𝐡𝐞'𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐨𝐚𝐫𝐝, 𝐛𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐮𝐬. 𝐖𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐨𝐨𝐧 𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐟𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭!

𝐏𝐚𝐲 𝐀𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐒𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐚 𝐋𝐞𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐫 𝐀𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 

We believe in her, she is standing up for her self,  when women are failing her. She's going to be one in a million best lawyer in her generation, Edwina will be a very good and dangerous Lawyer when she finally becomes one. You would not want to cross her path. 𝐌𝐬. 𝐁𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐚 𝐌𝐢𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐞𝐥 we recommend you take her as and 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 under your wings, Edwina is a gem in Sierra Leone that needs a little bit of polish.

#LeaveNoWomanBehind

------------------------------------------------------------------

CLick Link beloe

https://youtu.be/i6M3CO74PUk?si=NiVA_-9vRH5C5-KE

In this explosive episode of BAV Inside Salone, host Isatu Kamara-Kargbo investigates the unfolding scandal at Fourah Bay College, where Justice Momoh Jah-Stevens faces serious allegations of sexual harassment and corruption made by student Edwina Jamiru.

We unpack how the University of Sierra Leone is handling the investigation, analyze the deeper implications for academic integrity, gender rights, and judicial ethics in Sierra Leone, and draw powerful comparisons with similar crises across Africa—from Ghana’s Sex for Grades exposé to South Africa’s university reform movement.

Join The Bold African Voice (BAV) as we deliver critical analysis, Africa-wide perspective, and a forward-looking approach—examining how institutions can rebuild public trust and protect the powerless.

Key discussion points:
• The Fourah Bay College press statement and the internal probe.
• The balance between institutional reputation and victim protection.
• The role of social media and public pressure in accountability.
• Lessons from Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, and Kenya.
• The road ahead for justice, transparency, and reform in African academia.

📢 Presented by: Isatu Kamara-Kargbo
🎙️ Channel: The Bold African Voice (BAV)
🎥 Segment: Inside Salone – Investigating Sierra Leone’s Stories with a Pan-African Lens
________________________________________
💬 Tagline: “Where Courage Meets Truth – The Bold African Voice.”
________________________________________
🔍 KEYWORDS
Fourah Bay College | Justice Momoh Jah-Stevens | Edwina Jamiru | University of Sierra Leone | sexual harassment in universities | Sierra Leone judiciary | FBC investigation | academic misconduct Africa | gender justice Africa | African universities accountability | student rights Sierra Leone | Inside Salone BAV | Isatu Kamara-Kargbo | The Bold African Voice
________________________________________
🔖 HASHTAGS
#TheBoldAfricanVoice​ #BAVInsideSalone​ #JusticeMomohJahStevens​ #FourahBayCollege​ #SierraLeoneNews​ #GenderJustice​ #AcademicIntegrity​ #UniversityAccountability​ #AfricaNews​ #CorruptionInAfrica​ #InsideSalone​ #IsatuKamaraKargbo​ #BAVReports​ #BoldVoiceForAfrica​

———————————————

Comment: Lielalay News: CULLED 

*WHEN JUSTICE MOMOH JAH STEVENS WAS LIVING RECKLESSLY AND FEELING INVINCIBLE, WE WERE NOT HEARING ALL THIS NOISE*

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

When the fever of his extramarital affairs caught up with him and struck him down, suddenly this man who wore his arrogance like a scarf, this man who conducted a witch hunt against his child’s mother, his side lover, now he catches cold and begins to tremble like a drenched cat. Now he tries to compensate the lady and begins to take care of his baby. What a foolish boy.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

Good afternoon , everyone. From what we have witnessed and heard regarding Lady Edwina’s case, it appears that many SLPP supporters were backing this profoundly foolish Justice Momoh Jah Stevens in his power play battle against the mother of his child from an affair.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

When Momoh Jah Stevens was playing the role of the reformed man to please his wife after being caught, in Lady Edwina’s previous videos, the lady told the public that when Justice Momoh Jah Stevens was living recklessly and engaging intimately with her until she became pregnant, he was enjoying the relationship thoroughly and had no complaints. But when the time came to care for the baby, the brother ran away.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

Obviously, the lady knew that she had erred when she embarrassed Momoh Jah Stevens on social media. That is why she made a secret video pleading with this same Justice Momoh Jah Stevens, saying she would be the number two wife in the shadows and would always respect the legitimate wife. He should have accepted the lady’s apology quietly.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

Instead of accepting this lady’s quiet apology, this foolish man deliberately released the lady’s apology video on social media to tarnish her name. He did not know that it was a trap the lady had set for him, because we heard that the same lady had already gone to do a quiet DNA test and already knew that Justice Momoh was indeed the biological father.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

Justice “I Live Recklessly” Momoh made the biggest mistake of his life when he tried to destroy the lady’s good name on social media. He thought that his child’s mother, his side lover, would feel the pressure and back off.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

By doing so, he thought he would silence the lady. Even his rowdy boys, the SLPP supporters, went so far as to embarrass and ask the side lover to go do a DNA test to know if this foolish Justice Momoh Jah Stevens was the biological father. We had already heard that this was exactly what the lady wanted: to disgrace the foolish man in public.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

When the positive DNA test result came out, all those cockroaches who had been supporting this reckless justice disappeared and left him to fight his own reckless battle.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

Some men say the side lover went too far to disgrace this justice, but if it were their own daughter being treated this way, some men would have drawn machetes to settle the matter.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

We are concerned for this lady’s mental wellbeing. It appears that nobody is looking to help the lady because anywhere she tries to go for help, this reckless Justice Momoh Jah Stevens has friends who are always trying to shut this lady down.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

We all know that our Sierra Leone judiciary is rotten and corrupt. If they do not take time, this lady must begin to dismantle them, because as the Chinese proverb teaches us, a thousand miles starts with a single step. This is how other people must go after our corrupt judiciary.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

This Lady Edwina’s story has given much wisdom and counsel to all those brokenhearted side lovers: if a man fathers a child with you and refuses to take care of your child, forget about the courts and police complaints. Use social media to bring them down to their knees.

HANDS OFF OUR GIRLS AND WOMEN WHO YOU SAY ARE COPYING THE LONDON FIRST LADY

@lielaylaynews.com *THE RECKONING OF JUSTICE: When Power Meets Its Match in a Mother’s Courage*

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

An Editorial

There exists, in the shadowed corridors of power, a particular species of man who believes himself untouchable. He drapes himself in the robes of authority, speaks in the measured tones of jurisprudence, and moves through society with the confidence of one who has never known consequence. Justice Momoh Jah Stevens was such a man. Until he wasn’t.

Picture, if you will, the scene: A man of the law, sworn to uphold truth and fairness, living a double life with the casualness of one changing shirts. In the intoxicating darkness of secrecy, he pulled down his trousers not just literally, but metaphorically, shedding every shred of dignity that his position demanded. He enjoyed his pleasures. He took what he wanted. And when the inevitable fruit of his indiscretion began to grow in Lady Edwina’s womb, this champion of justice did what cowards have done since time immemorial: he ran.

But here is where our story transforms from tragedy into testament.

Lady Edwina did not wither. She did not disappear into the convenient silence that men like Stevens depend upon. Instead, she did something revolutionary in a nation where the judiciary has become a fortress of corruption, where justice is a commodity purchased by the powerful and denied to the poor: she became her own advocate, her own army, her own avenging angel.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

When Stevens thought he could humiliate her into submission by releasing her private apology on social media, when he believed his network of influence could crush her spirit, when his supporters descended upon her like vultures demanding DNA tests to question her truth, she was already three steps ahead. She had the evidence. She had the proof. She had the DNA results that would transform his arrogance into ash.

Can you see it? Can you feel the moment when that positive DNA test emerged into the light? It was not merely paper and science. It was a mirror held up to the face of hypocrisy. It was the sound of a gavel coming down, not in Stevens’ courtroom, but in the court of public opinion, where no amount of legal maneuvering could save him.

Those cockroaches who had scurried alongside him in the daylight of his power vanished the moment darkness fell. The SLPP supporters who had cheered his cruelty suddenly remembered urgent appointments elsewhere. The “respectable” friends who had helped him silence this woman discovered, too late, that they had backed the wrong horse in a race that the entire nation was watching.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

But this story is larger than one foolish justice and one courageous woman. It is a parable for our time, a roadmap for revolution.

How many Lady Edwinas walk among us? How many women carry the weight of abandoned children and broken promises while the men who fathered those children sit in positions of honor, their reputations intact, their consciences apparently untroubled? How many times have we watched the powerful exploit the powerless, confident that the systems designed to protect us have been thoroughly corrupted to protect them instead?

Our judiciary, that sacred institution meant to be the last refuge of the oppressed, has become a marketplace where verdicts are sold to the highest bidder. We know this. We whisper about it in our homes. We shake our heads and shrug our shoulders, as if corruption were weather, something to be endured but never changed.

Lady Edwina has shown us another way.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

When the courts fail you, when the police ignore you, when every door closes because the man who wronged you has friends in high places, there remains one courtroom that cannot be bought: the court of public opinion, amplified by the democratizing power of social media. This is not mob justice. This is accountability when all other avenues of accountability have been deliberately destroyed.

The Chinese proverb whispers its wisdom across centuries: a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Lady Edwina has taken that step. Her courage has illuminated a path that others must now follow.

But let us be clear about what is at stake. This woman stands alone, her mental wellbeing threatened, her support systems systematically dismantled by a man who uses his connections as weapons. Where are we in this moment? Are we the silent witnesses who watch injustice and do nothing? Are we the cockroaches who scatter when the light gets too bright?

Or are we the ones who stand in solidarity, who refuse to let another woman be crushed by the machinery of corrupt power?

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

To every young woman who has been used and discarded, to every mother who has been abandoned to raise a child alone while the father lives comfortably in respectability, to every person who has ever felt the weight of a system designed to protect the powerful at the expense of the powerless: take note. Document everything. Speak your truth loudly. The walls that seemed impenetrable can crumble when exposed to sustained public scrutiny.

To Justice Momoh Jah Stevens and every man like him: your days of consequence-free exploitation are ending. The women you thought you could silence are finding their voices. The systems you thought you controlled are being exposed. The arrogance that made you feel invincible will be the very thing that ensures your fall.

And to our broken, corrupted judiciary: Lady Edwina is coming for you. Not with lawyers you can bribe or judges you can influence, but with something far more powerful—the truth, spoken plainly, witnessed publicly, impossible to ignore.

This is how revolutions begin. Not with armies or manifestos, but with one person refusing to be silent, one story that becomes a thousand stories, one act of courage that inspires a movement.

🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨

HANDS OFF OUR GIRLS AND WOMEN.

The fever that caught Justice Stevens is spreading. Let it burn through every corridor of power where men have behaved badly and gotten away with it. Let it consume every institution that has protected predators instead of victims. Let it transform our nation from one where justice is a cruel joke into one where accountability is guaranteed, not by corrupt courts, but by an awakened people who refuse to look away.

Lady Edwina did not set out to be a revolutionary. She simply wanted a man to take care of his child. But in that simple demand, in her refusal to be silenced, she has lit a fire that may yet burn down the rotten structures that have oppressed us all.

The question now is not whether we support her. The question is whether we have the courage to follow where she has led.

The answer will define us.

@lielaylaynews.com

———————————————-

Click link- Is there Justice in this land?

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BRiiauXBj/

My comments in another post

𝐅𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 -ʷᵒᵐᵉⁿ ᵒᶠ ᵃᶠʳⁱᶜᵃⁿ ⁿᵃᵗⁱᵒⁿˢ ʷᵒʳˡᵈʷⁱᵈᵉ. She [EDWINA], constantly said he did "BAD THINGS"  TO HER. But she is  too ashamed to state the "BAD THINGS" pondering all in deep pain, and angry and dissapointed. 

Read between the lines: "BAD THINGS"! He is over 55 strong and she  18 (or 15) now 21 and small. "BAD THINGS"!  Is this one of those cases of " JUS GI AM BELE, E GO SIDOM SAFUL" Syndrum? She could not fight him off physically, and too ashamed now to spell out the "BAD THINGS", hence her bitterness, anger following the outcome, risk to her education and responsibility to her child which he denied initially but confirmrd by the DNA RESULT- 99.999%. What a shame! 

Was it wise for the judge to take her to Court for DOMESTIC VIOLENCE (a crminal offence) in the first place? She got vexed at his leaking the personal audio just between the two of them apologisung for her wrongs and asking for his forgiveness as in any relationship break down: one party can beg the other even if he/she knows the wrong was on the other foot. But he leaked the audio on Social media: was that a reasonable and wise action by a well educated, senior judge and a married man with three (now4) children?  Was it wise to allegedly influenced her being prevented from  attending the hearing in Court on the call of the case, resulting in the presiding Judge issuing a BENCH WARRENT OF ARREST, GOT ARRESTED AND LOCKED UP AT THE POLICE CELL? Bitterly crying , begging and mocked, disgraced and, he judge Stevens was at the police retorting to her pleas in tears! Yet you want to call her mental *KRAS in our palance)!

 I just wish and hooe a few good and brave Lawyers, will come to her aid and assist her PRO BONO! Even the Legal Aid Board and the FEMALE LAWYERS ASSOCIATION - 

L.A.W.YE.R.S. shoud have stepped in by now. Even the Minister of Gender abd Childrens Affairs is neglecting her responsibility not leaving out the Minister of Justice in this sordid scandal and messy affair! But she believe in God, as a Christian, her faith will surely uphold her.

——————————————————————

Forcibly Testing Children for DNA in Paternity Disputes - A Human Rights Concern

On 6 October 2025, the High Court of Sierra Leone issued an order in the case of Mohamed Alhaji Momoh-Jah Stevens v. Edwina Hawa Jamiru (Misc. App. 233/25; 2025 S. No. 17), directing that a DNA test be conducted on a six-month-old child to determine paternity. The ruling, delivered by Justice Augustine K. Musa, (in the photo below) authorises samples to be collected from the child and the defendant “voluntarily or by force” to confirm whether the plaintiff, a sitting Court of Appeal judge, is the biological father. While the court’s intent to clarify parentage and secure the child’s rights is understandable, the inclusion of “by force” raises serious ethical and human rights concerns. Under both international law and Sierra Leone’s legal tradition, forcibly testing a child for DNA should remain an absolute last resort.

The High Court’s order requires DNA testing by reputable local and foreign laboratories, supervised by the Master and Registrar of the High Court. Representatives from the Ministry of Gender and Children’s Affairs and the Human Rights Commission are permitted to observe the process. The testing aims to resolve whether Justice Stevens is the father of a child born in April 2025, which could determine the child’s entitlement to maintenance, inheritance, and identity. Yet the directive that samples be taken “voluntarily or by force” implies that if the defendant, Ms Jamiru, resists, the court may enforce compliance through state authority. While the test itself, a cheek swab, is physically harmless, the idea of forced collection raises questions about bodily autonomy, dignity, and the emotional security of both mother and child.

Sierra Leone is a signatory to several human rights treaties, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC). These instruments establish that the best interests of the child must guide all judicial actions. Determining paternity can indeed serve a child’s best interests by clarifying identity and securing support. However, coercive enforcement risks undermining those same interests by creating distress and damaging family bonds. The child’s right to privacy under CRC Article 16 and ICCPR Article 17, and protection from inhuman or degrading treatment under ICCPR Article 7 and ACRWC Article 16, must be considered carefully. Even minimal physical compulsion can become psychologically harmful when imposed through authority.

International law demands proportionality and necessity when a state interferes with personal rights. Any intrusion on bodily integrity must be justified by a compelling public aim and carried out in the least intrusive way possible. Justice Musa’s order includes safeguards, court supervision, clear laboratory protocols, and oversight by neutral bodies, but the express authorisation of force goes beyond what most human rights frameworks consider proportionate. Less coercive options should be exhausted before enforcement is contemplated.

Beyond legality, there are cultural and ethical dimensions specific to Sierra Leone. Paternity disputes are deeply personal and often carry social stigma. In many communities, public disclosure of such cases can lead to ostracism or harm to family reputation. Forcing a DNA test could inflame community tensions or stigmatise the child. The mother’s resistance may reflect distrust of the process or fear of social exposure rather than an intent to obstruct justice. The term “force” in the order therefore needs careful interpretation. If it refers to procedural enforcement, such as sanctions or supervised collection under judicial authority, it may be defensible. But any physical coercion would violate the child’s dignity and the mother’s autonomy.

There are alternatives that respect both legal objectives and human rights. Mediation or counselling could help address the mother’s concerns and achieve voluntary consent. The court could also apply adverse inferences, as in the United Kingdom’s Family Law Act 1986, where refusal to test allows judges to draw conclusions without coercion. Legal presumptions of paternity, if the alleged father has provided care or acknowledgment, can also resolve disputes without invasive testing. These approaches uphold the principle of minimal interference under ICCPR Article 17 while maintaining focus on the child’s welfare.

The High Court’s intention, to determine truth and secure a child’s legal rights, is legitimate. But the power to compel DNA testing must be exercised with restraint. Coercion risks eroding public trust in the judiciary and undermines Sierra Leone’s commitment to child-centred justice. The court should clarify that “force” refers only to procedural enforcement, never physical compulsion, and ensure that independent observers actively monitor for potential harm. This case stands as a reminder that legal certainty should not come at the expense of human dignity. Upholding children’s rights requires not only scientific truth but compassion, sensitivity, and respect for the family’s emotional and cultural context. @followers #sierraleonenews #highlightseveryonefollowers

--------------------------------------------------

                      Edwina Hawa Jamiru

Listen to this interesting discussion which also deals with Edwina Jamiru and Justice MomoJah Stevens case from S V Tv guest, Madam Kadie Conteh - former Director Ministry of Social Welfare and Gender Affairs Sierra Leone up to 2018

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ABiYsP4kK/

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Cx81z4VT4/?mibextid=wwXIfr

THE NEGRO IN ANCIENT HISTORY BY THE REV. EDWARD WILMOT BLYDEN 1869

 

           THE NEGRO  IN ANCIENT HISTORY 

                  Dr. EDWARD WILMOT BLYDEN

"The Negro in Ancient History" by Rev. Edward W. Blyden, published in 1869, argues that people of African descent played a prominent role in the founding of ancient civilizations, drawing a parallel between the ancient Israelites' exodus and what he saw as the potential for African Americans to return to Africa. Blyden connects the ancient biblical descendants of Ham to modern African Americans and suggests that returning to Africa would be a way for African Americans to find freedom and help build a "Christian African empire". 

• Date and origin: The work was published in January 1869 as a detached article from the *Methodist Quarterly Review*.
• Author: The author, Edward W. Blyden, was an educator, writer, and diplomat primarily associated with Liberia.
• Main argument: Blyden uses ancient history to argue that people of African descent had a significant role in founding early civilizations, according to the *NYPL Digital Collections*.
• Historical parallel: He draws a parallel between the ancient Israelites' time in Egypt and the situation of African Americans, suggesting a parallel between Pharaoh and the Egyptian aristocracy and modern anti-Black politicians.
• Ethiopianism: Blyden believed that the African American community could follow the model of Zionism by returning to Africa to redeem and develop it, an ideology sometimes referred to as Ethiopianism.
• Criticism: This perspective was criticized by some African Americans who sought to gain civil rights in the United States rather than return to Africa. 

------------------------------------------------------

Click Link below to read entire manuscript: touch each page to move to the next

THE NEGRO IN ANCIECT HISTORY

The Negro in ancient history:

by REV. E W BLYDEN — The author of the following treatise is a person of unmixed African extraction, born at St. Thomas, W. I., August 3,1832, came to the United.

54 pages·3 MB

PROFESSOR A.D. ALIE, EX FBC ACADEMIC: IS THIS PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN HIRED TO BEND THE TRUE HISTORICAL RECORDS OF THE JULIUS MAADA BIO PAOPA ADMINISTRATION AS WHITE WASH LEGACY UNETHICALLY?

Genuine Concerns Regarding the Unethical Partisan Role and Conduct of the Presidential Historian, Professor Joe A.D. Alie.

Author: Dr. John Idriss Lahai 

Date: 20 November 2025

The following message is formally presented to address serious concerns regarding the role and conduct of Professor Joe A.D. Alie, who currently serves as the official Presidential Historian at State House.

The Nature of the Appointment and its Implication

Professor Alie's appointment and direct employment by State House as the Presidential Historian fundamentally compromise the impartiality required for this critical national function. The principal aim of a Presidential Historian should be to compile and preserve an objective, lie-free, accurate, comprehensive, and academically sound record of the administration for future generations.

However, it is evident that Professor Alie's efforts are overwhelmingly directed towards the protection and promotion of President Maada Bio’s legacy, rather than fulfilling the mandate of genuine historical inquiry. This partisan focus reduces the utility of his work, transforming it into an exercise in political advocacy. Such an output, financed by public funds, is rendered practically without value, as it serves only a narrow political interest rather than the broader public good or the integrity of the historical record.

The Overreach into Legislative Policy

Furthermore, it is imperative to note the recent, inappropriate expansion of Professor Alie's activities into the legislative domain. It is unequivocally not the duty of the Presidential Historian to publicly lobby or call upon Parliament to adopt specific legislation, particularly a bill that seeks to enshrine the "Free Quality Education" agenda of the current administration into law.

This attempt to influence the legislative process demonstrates a profound misunderstanding or disregard for the boundaries of his role and further solidifies his status as a political operative.

Call for Parliamentary Action and Investigation

Honorable Members of Parliament, as the legislative body entrusted with oversight and the safeguarding of national interests, you are respectfully urged to disregard and discount the pronouncements and historical interpretations offered by Professor Alie.

His close affiliation and salaried position within the current administration strongly suggest that he operates not as an independent academic, but as an integral component of the political machinery—specifically, as a loyal member of the Mende-cratic cohort of the Paopa administration. To rely on his narratives would be to sanction a politically skewed account of recent national history.

Crucially, rather than adopting a bill based on political lobbying, Parliament must initiate a thorough investigation into the implementation and financial oversight of the "Free Quality Education" agenda. There are grave, outstanding concerns that hundreds of millions of dollars were misappropriated by the current government in the name of this agenda, which many observers believe has failed to deliver its intended benefits effectively. Accountability for the use of public funds must precede the legalization of any policy.

We call upon Parliament to acknowledge the partisan nature of this role, treat any 'historical' documentation produced by the Presidential Historian with the utmost skepticism, and prioritize a full financial and performance investigation of the education program before considering its status as law.

In disbelief,

Dr John Idriss Lahai

JUDICIARY: HIRARCHICAL AUTHORITY DILEMMA! CAN A LOWER COURT IGNORE, DISREGARD OR REFUSE TO APPLY JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS OF A SUPERIOR COURT IN THE SAME JURISDICTION

COURTSEY: THE CALABASH NEWSPAPER!

Abdul Kpaka Murder Trial in Turmoil as Judge Dismisses Jury Despite Supreme Court Ruling

By Foday Moriba Conteh

 

The ongoing murder trial of businessman Abdul Kpaka, accused of killing his girlfriend, Sia Fatu Kamara, in August 2024, has taken a dramatic legal twist, raising serious questions about judicial consistency, due process and respect for Supreme Court authority in Sierra Leone.

The case, now before Appeal Court Judge Justice Alfred Ganda, is increasingly being viewed as a major test for the country’s justice system. The death of 28-year-old Sia Fatu Kamara sparked widespread public outrage, with many demanding accountability and a fair trial.

After Abdul Kpaka was charged and brought before Magistrate Santigie Bangura on 28 August 2024, the state made an unusual move by invoking Section 136 of the (now repealed) Criminal Procedure Act of 1965, bypassing the traditional preliminary investigation and sending the matter directly to the High Court.

Although legal, the decision was made without explanation, drawing immediate protest from the defense. Despite their objections, the defense complied and proceeded to the High Court.

 

The trial began on 17th September 2024 before Justice Momoh Jah Stevens. Disagreements emerged quickly. The prosecution applied for a judge-alone trial, referencing Section 144(2) of the 1965 Act.

 

The defense countered, insisting:

• The prosecution failed to justify why removing a jury was “in the interest of justice.”

• A recent landmark Supreme Court ruling Ekunolaje Nicole vs The State, affirmed the importance of jury trials for serious offences.

 

The accused has the right to choose the mode of trial as provided under Section 44(1) of the 1965 Criminal Procedure Act. Furthermore, Section 23(1) of the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone guarantees the right to a fair hearing for all.”

 

However, Justice Momoh Jah Stevens ruled in favour of the prosecution, stating that a judge-alone trial would ensure “expeditious proceedings.” He added that the Ekunolaje ruling was merely a guide, not binding.

Concerned about bias, human rights violations and the removal of the jury, the defense escalated the matter to the Supreme Court.

 

In a powerful unanimous judgment, the five Supreme Court justices ruled that:

1. Allegations of bias and human rights violations against Justice Stevens were valid, and the case must be reassigned to a different judge.

2. The case must proceed before a judge and jury, in line with the law and the Ekunolaje decision.

3. All prior rulings regarding protective custody and refusal of bail were squashed. Although bail was not granted, the Court advised the defense to reapply before the new trial judge.

 

The case was reassigned to Justice Alfred Ganda in January 2025.

With Justice Ganda presiding, jurors were empanelled and both sides prepared to restart.

 

But the prosecution repeatedly failed to bring witnesses to court. Across nine court appearances between January and May, not a single witness was presented. The defense and jurors attended consistently, but proceedings stalled.

 

In the May-September criminal session, a new jury was empanelled at the prosecution’s request. Two witnesses eventually testified, but little progress was made.

 

When the third session resumed in October 2025, the legal landscape had shifted: the 2024 Criminal Procedure Act, which abolishes jury trials, had come into force.

 

The prosecution quickly applied to dismiss the jury and proceed by judge alone.

 

The defense objected strongly, arguing:

• This case is governed by a binding Supreme Court order requiring a jury trial.

• Such an order remains valid unless overturned by the Supreme Court itself.

• The state had nine months to prosecute the case under the old law but instead delayed.

 

Lead Defense Counsel, E. T. Koroma, urged Justice Ganda to state a case to the Supreme Court for determination, as permitted in situations of legal conflict.

 

Despite reserving his ruling, Justice Ganda ultimately sided with the prosecution and dismissed the jurors in direct contrast to the Supreme Court’s previous orders.

 

He instructed the state to proceed with its next witness and warned against further delays. His decision has triggered intense debate about whether he has acted in contempt of the Supreme Court, and whether this sets a troubling precedent for judicial hierarchy.

 

Legal observers and members of the public are now asking:

• Is Justice Ganda’s decision a violation of the Supreme Court’s binding ruling?

• Can a trial judge override the explicit instructions of the highest court?

• Will this trigger another round of litigation between the state and the defense?

As these questions linger, Abdul Kpaka remains in custody at the Pademba Road Maximum Correctional Centre. The matter was adjourned to today Wednesday, 19 November 2025, when the next chapter of this highly scrutinized trial will unfold.

‎Follow the The Calabash Newspaper  channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va9YU7OCnA7lO5dUED0V

(C)The Calabash Newspaper

The case of the creole settlers

Settlers’ legacy lingers in Africa.

Influence of Nova Scotia immigrants still felt in Sierra Leone community they founded.

Wayn Hamilton, of Dartmouth, displays photos from the time he spent in Sierra Leone meeting families of Nova Scotia Loyalist de­scent living in the west African nation. (TED PRITCHARD / Staff)

In 1990, Wayn Hamilton received a letter at his home in Hali­fax from a researcher at Fourah Bay College in Sierra Leone.
The researcher, who was studying the history of Black Nova Sco­tians, told Wayn he may have a living relative in Freetown, the capital city of this small West African country.
This relative is Plummer Hamilton, whose ancestors were called the Nova Scotia Settlers, a group of people who emigrated from Canada to what is now Sierra Leone 220 years ago.
The Nova Scotia Settlers were former slaves who escaped from plantations in the southern United States. They were then recruited as soldiers by the British to fight in the American War of Independ­ence. In exchange for their service they were promised citizenship, land rights and freedom. When the war was lost they came to Nova Scotia, where some, in­cluding Wayn’s family, stayed to form what are now the country’s oldest Afri­can- Canadian communities. Others felt unwelcome in Canada, and chose to re­turn to the continent from which they or their ancestors were forcefully taken.
“With the list of the slaves that left and the list of slaves that returned, there was one missing," said Plummer Hamilton.
“We assumed straight away that the brother that didn’t come back is the great­grandfather of Wayn."
This wouldn’t be his great-grandfather in the sense that it was the father of Wayn’s grandfather, but a more distant relative, something like a great-great­great- great- grandfather.
“We knew we had connections, but they were loose connections and we were not able to trace them," said Plummer Hamilton. “We knew some of our great­grandparents were taken as slaves. Some returned and some did not."

Wayn Hamilton wrote to Plummer, and first visited Sierra Leone in 1992 for the country’s bicentenary celebrations. A year later he moved to Freetown to work for an international development or­ganization. It was then he established a family relationship that has lasted for 20 ye a rs.
“People have to realize that our family lineage was broken during the enslave­ment period, and it’s important that we reconnect and that we don’t lose sight of the memory of who we were as a people before we were fractured by the slave trade," said Wayn Hamilton.
The legacy of the Nova Scotia Settlers is at risk of fading in today’s Sierra Leone, but there are still those, like Wayn and Plummer Hamilton, who are trying to keep the bond alive.
In January 1792, 15 ships left Halifax carrying about 1,200 passengers. In March, they arrived on the shores of the West African colony owned by a British philanthropic organization called the Sierra Leone Company. The Nova Scotia Settlers built houses, established church­es, started families and founded the city of Freetown.
The Settlers would make up part of an ethnic group known as the Krios. Though the Nova Scotians came first, Krios also includes those who arrived later: the Maroons, who were taken directly from the Caribbean, and resettled Africans, who were released from slave ships cap­tured on the high seas before setting foot in the Americas. It was, however, the values brought by the Nova Scotians that would set the dominant tone of the emer­gent Krio society.

“I think we owe the success of this settlement to the Nova Scotians. Because of their background of having gone through so many trials and tribulations, they had the temperament to make a success of the settlement to which they had been sent," said Cassandra Garber, president of an organization called the Krio Descendants Union (spelled Yunion in the Krio language).
“Living as free families was a great achievement for them. They brought with them the good side of what they had learned living in the Western world and developed that as a culture."
In today’s Sierra Leone, those who descended from the Nova Scotia Settlers are a small minority in relation to the country’s indigenous population. In fact, as only about half the original Settlers survived those first hard years estab­lishing the new colony; there are very few who can say with certainty that their ancestors are among those who arrived 220 years ago.
One of the surviving aspects of the Nova Scotia Settlers’ legacy is that they were largely responsible for bringing Christian­ity to Sierra Leone.Among the first churches to be estab­lished was the Zion Methodist Chapel, created the same month as the Settlers’ arrival in 1792. The church was founded as an obscure evangelical denomination called the Countess of Huntingdon’s Connexion, brought from a congregation in Birchtown, N.S., and existed only in England, Canada and Sierra Leone. The denomination was created in 1784, just eight years before arriving in Freetown.
Though the chapel is located in the heart of Freetown’s downtown commer­cial centre, the number of regular wor­shippers has been declining. Looking out at an average Sunday church service, the disproportionate number of heads with greying hair suggests many of today’s members of Zion Methodist are elderly.
On March 4, Zion Methodist held a special service to commemorate their 220th anniversary. Like every Sunday, hymns were sung, sermons were deliver­ed, and Communion was celebrated. But unlike most Sundays, the church was filled with worshippers, commemorating this historic event in Sierra Leone’s histo­ry.
“I think if those who arrived 220 years ago were here today, they would be very pleased by what they see," said Rev. Sa­lieu Kamara, chairman of the Countess of Huntingdon Connexion in Sierra Leone, during his sermon. “You might have gone through a lot of difficulties, yet you have gathered yourselves and set this day apart for celebration."
This service is part of a series of events hosted by Zion Methodist that attempt to rekindle the public’s interest in this old Settler church, and plan a way forward that will ensure the congregation’s sur­vival into the future.

Wayn Hamilton is trying to revive an awareness of this shared history by con­necting church congregations in Nova Scotia with those in Sierra Leone through his work as CEO of the Office for African-Nova Scotian Affairs. He says this is part of a larger effort to act as a facilitator between black Nova Scotians and those in the diaspora from other parts of Canada, the United States, or West Africa. In the next two years he says he will be working to establish an interpretive centre for Black Loyalists in Nova Scotia, which will involve forming a stronger relationship with Krios in Sierra Leone.
Wayn and Plummer Hamilton cannot say for sure who is their shared ancestor. This is due in part to the fact that for a long time Africans in the Americas were not provided with official documents that would help identify family lineage. To compound this problem, many of the already sparse records kept of the Settlers’ history were destroyed during Sierra Leone’s 11-year civil war, which began soon after Wayn and Plummer met.
“We can only go back so far in the records, but in Nova Scotia there are ac­tually two Hamiltons who left Nova Sco­tia on Plummer’s side; though this is a bit of an extrapolation of history," said Wayn Hamilton. “One of the challenges has to do with identifying that family line to determine whether there are genealogy records or birth records, but it’s hard because a lot of it is spotty due to a lack of continuous recording of who were in the family lines."
To Wayn and Plummer, the bond formed between the two families is more important than the details of how they are related. Both say they won’t let this rela­tionship fade any time soon.
“He knows he’s always welcome," said Plummer Hamilton. “It’s been a fulfilling episode in our lives meeting Wayn and other members of the family. He is one of us."
Wayn’s most recent visit to Freetown was in 2011, when he brought his son to Sierra Leone for the first time. As far as Wayn is concerned, Plummer is his uncle, and Sierra Leone is his second home.
“There’s this idea that we’re a family that has only been separated by water and through time," said Wayn Hamilton.
“We’ve bonded with each other as if we are long-lost relatives."
Damon van der Linde is a Canadian journalist living in Sierra Leone.