Abubakarr Conteh v Solomon E. Berewa & Another (SC 1 of 2007) [2007] SLSC 9 (3 August 2007)

_ Oe sC1/2007 , IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SIERRA LEONE \ (ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) IN THE MATTER OF AN OBJECTION AGAINST THE NOMINATION OF SOLOMON EKUMA BEREWA FOR THE SIERRA LEONE PEOPLES PARTY. (SLPP) TO CONTEST THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION SCHEDULED FOR 11°" ‘AUGUST, 2007 PURSUANT TO SECTION 30(2) OF THE ELECTORAL LAWS ACT, NO.2 OF 2002 (AS AMENDED) AND SECTION 45 OF THE CONSTITUTION. OF SIERRA LEONE ACT NO.6 OF 1991) ‘2 ND INTHE MATTER BETWEEN: ABUBAKARR CONTEH 2 FOULAH STREET FREETOWN - PLAINTIFF . AND SOLOMON EKUMA BEREWA . VICE PRESIDENT’S LODGE v SPUR ROAD FREETOWN - 15™DEFENDANT AND } ‘THE CHIEF ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER ° 15 INDUSTRIAL ESTATE WELLINGTON x FREETOWN = 2®° DEFENDANT

AND -$C212007 IN UPREME. T OF, E : IN THE MATTER OF AN OBESCTION AGAINST THE NOMINATION OF iT EKEUMA BEREWA - PRESID) L HE i LP z IDE! ELECTION SCHEDULED FOR 11" AUGUST, 2007 PURSUANT TO SECTION 32 y

HE ELECTORAL, LAWS ACT, NO.2 OF 2002 (AS AMENDED) AND. SECTIONS 45 AND 124(1)(A) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SIERRA LEONE. r ACT NO.6 OF 1991 INTHE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION MADE PURSUANT TO THE SUPREME us ICE DIRECTIONS, NO.2 OF 2007 AS CONTAINED IN ; NOTICE NO. 98 OF 2007 DATED 5™ JULY 2007 BETWEEN: | CHARLES FRANCIS MARGAI 20 OLD RAILWAY LINE a SIGNAL HILL iG FREETOWN > PLAINTIFF { AND SOLOMON EKUMA BEREWA VICE PRESIDENT’S LODGE SPUR ROAD FREETOWN - 1" DEFENDANT ? AND THE CHIEF ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER | NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION 15 INDUSTRIAL ESTATE WELLINGTON FREETOWN - 2 DEFENDANT (MATTERS CONSOLIDATED BY ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT DATED 4 THE 26™ JULY 2007) .

Coram

; HON. JUSTICE DR. ADE RENNER-THOMAS - CJ HON. MS. JUSTICE U.H. TEJAN-JALLOH - JSC HON. MR. JUSTICE G. SEMEGA-JANNEH#~ JSC J. KOROMA ESQ for the Plaintiff in SC1/2007; M.P. FOPANAH ESQ and R.B. KOWA for the Plaintiff in SC2/2007; E.A. HALLOWAY ESQ, D.B.QUEE ESQ, E.E.C. SHEARS-MOSES ESQ, ) ) A BREWAH ESQ and E. NGAKUI ESQ for the 1" Defendant in both matters;

a ven ; 40 F.M.CAREW ESQ, Attorney-General, LM. FARMAH ESQ,

0. KANU ESQ and A- SESAY ESQ for the 2"* Defendant both matters. s oo # RULING DELIVERED THE 3 Day OF AUGUST 2007 RENNER-THOMAS C.J. The proceedings herein which ‘were consolidated by an Order of this Court made on the 26" day of July 2007 arose out of the nomination of the 1* Defendant herein, Solomon Ekuma Berewa (hereinafter referred to as “the 1" Defendant”), the incumbent Vice-President of the Republic of Sierra Leone, as the candidate of the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) for the Presidential Elections due to be held on the 11" August

|g Subsection 1 of section 32 of the Electoral Laws Act, No.2 of 2002 (hereinafter referred to ‘ss the Electoral Laws Act 2002) directs the Chairman of the Electoral Commission who is the Returning Officer for the Presidential Election to publish by Government Notice details of the nominations for the said election immediately after the time prescribed by section 30 of the Electoral Laws Act 2002 for delivery of the nomination papers. Subsections 2, 3 and 4 of section 32 of the 2002 Act expressly provide as follows: “(2) The Government Notice referred to in subsection (1) shall direct that any citizen of Sierra Leone may lodge an ‘objection, ifany, against the nomination of a presidential 9 ccrctidete but that such objection shall be lodged with the ‘Supreme Court within seven days ofthe publication of the Government Notice.

(3) An objection against the nomination of any presidential ‘candidate shall be heard by the Supreme Court made up of three Justices whose decision shall be given within thirty days of the lodging of the objection. . 4

(4) Where the Supreme Court uphold an objection against any mination, it shall declare the presidential candidate concerned to be disqualified from contesting te presidential election." yi said provisions and pursuant to Supreme Court Practice Directions No prin iptedseorm Ne 98 of 2007, (hereinafter referred to as “Practice Directions No. 2 of 2007") ‘Abubakar Conteh of 2 Foulah Street Freetown, the Plaintiff in SC 1/2007 (hereinafter referred 10 as “the 1* Plaintif”)who describes himself as a concerned citizen of the Republic of Sierra Leone took out an Originating Notice of Motion on the 16” day of July 2007 by which be sought, inter alla, 8 declaration that the 1" Defendant is ineligible to WD coent he presidential election scheduled for the 11 August 2007.

The grounds relied on by the 1* Plaintiff are that: : ca “(@) the nomination of the I" Respondent is inconsistent with . i section 14(1) of the Political Parties Act No.3 of 2002 as amended, Section 35(4), 41(d) and 76(1(h) of the Constitution, Act No.6 of 1991, and section 29(2)(d) and 30(3) of the Electoral Laws . Act No.2 of 2002 as amended including paragraph 13 of the form contained in the Fourth Scheduled to said section 30(3)”. [and] . , (®) the nomination of the I" Respondent is also inconsistent with | section 76(1)(b) and section 115(2)&(4) of the Constitution, } Act No.6 of 1991". ob the same day, 16% July 2007, Charles Francis Margai of 20 Old Railway Line, Signal Hill, Freetown (hereinafter referred to as “the 2" Plaintiff”) who described himself as a Sierra Leonean and a registered voter also filed an Originating Notice of Motion seeking a declaration that: “the I" Defendant/Respondent herein is disqualified from contesting the Presidential Elections scheduled for 11" August, 2007 on the aaa grounds that his nomination is inconsistent with section 14(1) of the Political parties Act No.3 of 2002 as amended, sections 35(4), 41(d), ' 76(1)(b) & (h), 115(2) & (4) and 171(1) of the Constitution of Sierra Leone, Act No.6 of 1991, and section 29(2)(d) of the . Electoral laws Act, No.2 of 2002 as amended”. required by Practice Direction No. 2of 2007 the Originating Notice of Motions of both the Ia and 2” Plaintiffs were accompanied by a Statement of their respective Case. Unfortunately, instead of advancing legal arguments in support of the several contentions on : tation cited above both Statements merely repeated the said contentions by 4 the face of their Motion cited adopting «in its entirely the Application filed, the reasons preferred and ‘he authorities cited therein, all of which are self-explanatory." : the 1" Defendant filed a Statement of hits Case in both matters. On the 20° day it ae ‘submitted that he was qualified in every respect to contest the Briefly put, the FP tson as be had satisfied all the requirements in sections 41 and 75 ofthe = President vo. 6 of 1991 (hereinafter refered to as “the Constitution”) and that it was . constiton T6(1)() of the Constitution or any of the other provisions which the ois

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.