Free speech becomes a talking point in Sierra Leone as WhatsApp storm rages

The Guardian

The arrest and detainment of a student for sharing a message on social media has become a focal point for unrest about expressive freedom in Sierra Leone

Demonstrators in Sierra Leone show their support for Theresa Mbomaya, a student detained for disseminating a social media message. A volunteer coalition of 32 lawyers secured her release. Photograph: Cooper Inveen

Amid the hustle and bustle of Freetown, they instantly caught the eye. A group of about 100 college students stopped outside the courthouse, formed a line and began to protest.

Public dissent can be a hazardous business in Sierra Leone, even when expressed in a peaceful manner, and the mood reflected as much. While some smiled and held their picket signs high, others were noticeably tense, heads down and eyes darting between the dozens of police that had been weaving in and out of the crowd since the demonstration began.

They knew they weren’t supposed to come. They hadn’t requested police authorisation and, even if they had, it wouldn’t have mattered. That’s why they had to protest.

“We have a sister, a first-year sociology student at our university who has been arrested for sharing a post on social media calling on us to protest [against] the rising petrol prices,” said AS Kamara, a law student at Freetown’s Fourah Bay College. He held a sign reading “Free Expression” in one hand, and a smaller one with “Free Teresa” in the other.

“She was exercising her civil rights, which the democratic process, our own constitution, guarantees her,” he continued, passionately. “We’re here today to stand in solidarity with Teresa and make our voices heard, so we can let the world know the true state of things in our country. It is our right to do so.”

Theresa Mbomaya, 20, was arrested on 16 November for forwarding a message in a student WhatsApp group that, while promoting a forthcoming demonstration, also implied that any vehicle trying to disrupt it could be set on fire. She was detained for five days before, in the hour preceding the solidarity demonstration, a volunteer coalition of 32 lawyers successfully negotiated her release.

Mbomaya has been charged with incitement and the government has released a statement calling for social media forum moderators to be held criminally responsible for content posted to their pages, regardless of authorship. The students say their protest, which was allowed to continue unimpeded, is just the beginning of a larger movement to protect free expression in Sierra Leone.

In the past two years, the country’s ruling party has shown a worsening, often violent intolerance for public criticism, and with an 11-year civil war in the rear-view mirror, a culture of silence often deters would-be protesters from publicly airing their grievances. But in the past week, Mbomaya’s case has quickly evolved into a cause célèbre that, bolstered by the country’s grim economic conditions, has become the epicentre of a growing social movement calling for unobstructed freedom of expression. Whichever way the court rules in Mbomaya’s case, civil society and human rights groups expect profound implications for the future of expressive freedom in Sierra Leone – for better or for worse.

Since the height of the Ebola outbreak, opposition members, protesters, activists and journalists have been jailed, beaten, teargassed or shot for publishing material or staging demonstrations deemed critical of government policy. Groups thought to oppose the ruling party are routinely denied applications to conduct their programmes, while pro-government groups are permitted to carry out similar business. Even some who have obtained prior permission for events from the police have been subjected to raids.

“There is a justifiable culture of fear in this country, because people know that if you come out to protest, you’re going to be intimidated in one way or another and it’s unlikely anyone will stand up for you,” said Emmanuel Saffa Abdulai, head of the Society for Democratic Initiatives, a civil society group and the main organiser for the Renaissance, a group of politically active professionals who recently applied to protest against a 62% hike in fuel prices. Police denied their request, but that denial sparked what is being called the #BlackMonday movement, with supporters wearing black every Monday to express their discontent for the national state of free expression.

It also inspired Mbomaya to promote a student protest four days later, a move which, although having led to her arrest, has quickly propelled both #BlackMonday and the Renaissance into the national spotlight.

“We want to demystify this process,” Abdulai said. “The world is not going to end because the government is annoyed with you for protesting. They can lock you up for a few months or shoot you dead, but life goes on – they can’t do that to everyone.”

Abdulai is among a bipartisan group of 32 lawyers who, as their own form of protest, have agreed to represent Mbomaya pro bono. They say the 1965 Public Order Act (pdf) – the law that paved the way for the arrests of Mbomaya and many others – is too vague and contradicts the expressive rights outlined in the country’s 1991 constitution (pdf). It also was implemented by the former president, Albert Margai, who later tried to reorganise Sierra Leone into a single-party dictatorship.

“The Public Order Act says that you should not publish information that is perceived to cause fear in the population,” said Francis Kaifala, who is leading Mbomaya’s defence team. “At that time Sierra Leone was moving towards a dictatorship and the government wanted to control everything. We were a fledgling democracy then, but it’s 2016 and we’ve had many years to develop. There are many aspects of that law that we don’t believe would hold up against the 1991 constitution because, frankly, they belong to the dark ages.”

Presidential spokesman Abdulai Bayraytay responded that active laws need to be respected as long as they are still in the books, pointing to America’s often sweeping anti-terror policies by way of example. He said demonstration permits are handled exclusively by the police, on a case-by-case basis, independent of any political influence. Bayraytay disagreed with the notion that there is any political bias in granting such permits, adding that protesters have responsibilities as well as rights.

“Even demonstrating at Malcom X Park in Philadelphia, they will tell you you have to operate within particular times,” Bayraytay said. “If you go to the White House, they have a picket line you are not permitted to go beyond. Those are the laws … We should still be able to convey our messages without being confrontational.”