A study of climate governance in Sierra Leone, a low emitter that is highly exposed to climate harm on the Atlantic coast.
The Anthropocene on the Atlantic: A Juridical and Ecological Analysis of Climate Change Governance in Sierra Leone Executive Summary The Republic of Sierra Leone, situated on the vulnerable Atlantic coastline of West Africa, represents a profound paradox in the global climate discourse. While contributing a statistically negligible fraction to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions—less than 0.01% of the cumulative historical total —the nation stands on the precipice of catastrophic environmental unraveling. The physical geography of the state is being aggressively rewritten by rising sea levels, which are erasing island territories such as Nyangai and Plantain at an accelerated velocity. Simultaneously, the nation’s legal and institutional architecture, designed to manage these existential threats, is caught in a tension between ambitious statutory reform and systemic implementation deficits.
This report offers an exhaustive analysis of the intersection between Sierra Leone’s escalating climate vulnerability and its evolving legal framework. It dissects the physical manifestations of the crisis, ranging from the "cultural extinction" threatening the Sherbro people of the Turtle Islands 4 to the widespread degradation of mangrove ecosystems driven by a complex "rice-mangrove conflict".5 It critically examines the state's adherence to international obligations, specifically the nuances of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Abidjan Convention, while juxtaposing these against the realities of domestic enforcement under the Environmental Protection Agency Act 2022 and the National Protected Area Authority and Conservation Fund Act 2012.
Furthermore, this analysis probes the political economy of natural resource extraction, highlighting the governance failures in the fisheries sector that have sustained an oppressive European Union "Yellow Card" status since 2016 6, and the opacity of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) in the mining sector that has necessitated judicial intervention in landmark cases like MAPO v Koidu Limited.7 The findings suggest that while Sierra Leone possesses the legislative skeleton of a modern environmental state, the connective tissue of enforcement is atrophied by institutional overlap, resource scarcity, and the overpowering dictates of economic survival.
Part I: The Physical and Sociological Manifestations of Climate Change
The environmental crisis in Sierra Leone is not a future projection found in climate models; it is a current, lived reality characterized by rapid territorial loss, ecosystem collapse, and the forced displacement of coastal populations. The physical degradation of the coastline is reshaping the demographic and cultural map of the country.
1.1 The Vanishing Archipelagos: Coastal Erosion and Sea-Level Rise
Sierra Leone’s coastline, stretching approximately 506 km, is low-lying and heavily populated, making it uniquely susceptible to the thermal expansion of oceans and the increased ferocity of storm surges associated with anthropogenic global warming. The most acute manifestation of this crisis is visible in the southern archipelago of the Turtle Islands and the coastal settlements of the Yawri Bay.
1.1.1 Nyangai Island: A Case Study in Territorial Retraction
Nyangai Island serves as the most harrowing empirical evidence of the country's vulnerability. Once a thriving hub for artisanal fisheries with substantial vegetative cover and community infrastructure, the island has undergone a dramatic reduction in landmass. Empirical observations confirm that in less than a decade, Nyangai has lost approximately two-thirds of its surface area. The erosion dynamics here are non-linear; they are driven by the compounding effects of rising mean sea levels and the increasing frequency of high-energy wave events that strip away the island's sandy substrate. Current measurements indicate the island has shrunk to a mere 200 meters in length and 100 meters in width. This rapid geological retreat has decimated the island's social infrastructure; where there was once a large football field and clusters of housing, there is now only open ocean. The residents, often referred to as Sierra Leone's first "climate refugees" or displaced persons, have been forced into a perpetual state of retreat, moving their makeshift dwellings further inland onto a landmass that is disappearing beneath their feet. 1.1.2 Plantain Island: The Mechanics of Displacement A similar trajectory of destruction is evident on Plantain Island, a historically significant settlement that hosts a fishing community of approximately 5,800 people. Unlike the gradual erosion seen in some global contexts, the degradation of Plantain Island is characterized by structural violence against the built environment. Aerial drone surveillance and field assessments conducted by the National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA) and the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) in 2024 revealed that the shoreline has receded to the point of undermining concrete structures. Educational infrastructure has been a primary casualty. Sections of the island's school, including classrooms, have collapsed into the sea due to coastal undercutting. This creates a multidimensional crisis where environmental degradation directly infringes upon the fundamental right to education for the island's youth. The displacement patterns on Plantain Island are particularly complex. While a segment of the population has managed to migrate to the mainland, a significant demographic remains "trapped" within the island's shrinking boundaries. This phenomenon of "internal displacement within a disappearing territory" creates severe overcrowding, exacerbating sanitary risks and resource competition in an already fragile ecosystem.
1.2 The Mangrove Crisis: Deforestation and the Rice-Mangrove Conflict
Mangrove forests are the ecological guardians of the Sierra Leonean coast. They provide a critical buffer against storm surges, serve as nurseries for the fisheries that protein-sustain the nation, and act as potent carbon sinks. However, these ecosystems are facing an onslaught from both anthropogenic pressures and climatic shifts.
1.2.1 Quantitative Assessment of Loss
The rate of mangrove deforestation in Sierra Leone is alarming. Satellite data analysis indicates that between 1990 and 2016, the coastline lost approximately 25% of its mangrove cover. The temporal distribution of this loss is instructive; the lowest coverage was recorded in 2000, coinciding with the nadir of the civil war (1991–2002), a period characterized by the breakdown of governance and the unchecked exploitation of natural resources for survival and conflict financing. More recent localized data points to continued aggression against these wetlands. Reports indicate that in specific high-pressure zones, over 2,000 acres of mangroves have been destroyed in single incidences or short periods, driven by the desperate search for fuel wood and arable land. Table 1: Mangrove Cover Dynamics in Sierra Leone Period Trend Description Primary Drivers Key Source 1990–2000 Sharp Decline (Civil War Era) Conflict-related extraction, governance collapse 2000–2016 Continued Loss (~25% cumulative)
Urbanization, rice farming expansion
2016– Present
Mixed (Localized regeneration vs. destruction)
Restoration projects vs. agricultural pressure
1.2.2 The Political Economy of Rice Farming
A primary driver of this deforestation is what can be termed the "Rice-Mangrove Conflict." In the floodplains of the Great Scarcies and Little Scarcies rivers, communities have historically cleared mangroves to cultivate rice, the national staple crop. This agricultural expansion is driven by the imperative of food security but results in long-term ecological insecurity.
The removal of mangroves strips the riverbanks of their natural cohesion, leading to accelerated erosion and the salinization of freshwater tables. This creates a vicious cycle: as rice yields eventually decline due to soil degradation and salt intrusion (a consequence of the removed mangrove buffer), farmers are forced to clear new areas of mangroves to maintain production, perpetuating the destruction.16 The legal framework, which ostensibly protects these forests under the Forestry Act 1988, often fails to penetrate these remote agricultural zones where customary land tenure systems prioritize immediate subsistence over long-term conservation.
1.3 Extreme Weather and the Urban Heat Island
Beyond the slow violence of erosion, Sierra Leone is increasingly subjected to acute climatic shocks. The atmospheric dynamics of the region are shifting, leading to more frequent and intense heatwaves and precipitation events.
In February 2024, the country experienced an unprecedented heatwave, with temperatures soaring 4°C above the historical climatological average. Attribution studies suggest that such an event, once a rarity, has been made significantly more probable by human-induced global warming. For a population with limited access to cooling infrastructure and a high reliance on outdoor labor, such thermal extremes pose a direct threat to public health and economic productivity.
Simultaneously, the hydrological cycle has become erratic. The capital, Freetown, located on a peninsula with steep topography, faces recurrent flash floods and landslides. The tragic mudslide of August 2017, which killed over 1,000 people, was not merely a natural disaster but a "socio-natural" catastrophe caused by the intersection of extreme rainfall and unregulated urbanization on deforestation-prone slopes. The continued encroachment of housing into the Western Area Peninsula Forest—despite its protected status—demonstrates the lethal consequences of governance failure in the face of changing weather patterns.
1.4 Sociocultural Extinction and the "Culture-Centered" Approach
The impact of climate change in Sierra Leone transcends physical displacement; it threatens the erasure of distinct cultural identities. Researchers utilizing a "culture-centered approach" have documented how the loss of land in the Turtle Islands equates to an "extinction" of the Sherbro way of life. For these maritime communities, the ocean is not merely an economic resource but the central axis of their cosmology and social organization. Displacement to the mainland often necessitates a shift from fishing to agrarian livelihoods, a transition that disrupts intergenerational knowledge transfer and social cohesion. The "climate refugee" in this context loses not just a home, but the geographic anchor of their culture, a loss that current legal frameworks for compensation and resettlement are ill-equipped to quantify or remediate. Part II: The International Legal Architecture Sierra Leone’s domestic environmental governance does not exist in a vacuum. It is deeply embedded in a web of international multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs). These treaties provide the normative foundation for the country's climate actions and offer a platform for its claims to climate justice.
2.1 The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
Sierra Leone is a Non-Annex I party to the UNFCCC, a status that defines its obligations and entitlements under the international climate regime.
2.1.1 Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR)
The cornerstone of Sierra Leone’s engagement with the UNFCCC is the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC), enshrined in Article 3(1) and Article 4(1) of the Convention.19 This principle posits that while the protection of the climate system is a common duty of all states, the burden of should fall primarily on developed nations that are historically responsible for the accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere.
Sierra Leone leverages this principle to argue that its primary obligation is not emission reduction—given its negligible contribution of <0.01% to global emissions —but rather adaptation to the impacts caused by others. In its submissions to international forums, the state emphasizes that its "right to development" must not be curtailed by carbon constraints, and that it is entitled to financial and technological support from Annex I countries to manage the transition to a low-carbon economy. 2.1.2 The Paris Agreement and the Adaptation Imperative Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, Sierra Leone has shifted its focus toward Article 7, which establishes the global goal on adaptation. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, which prioritized mitigation, the Paris Agreement’s Article 7 acknowledges that adaptation is a global challenge with local dimensions.
Sierra Leone’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and its National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA) reflect this priority. The NAPA, launched initially in 2007 and subsequently updated, identifies urgent priorities such as coastal defense, agricultural resilience, and water resource management.18 The legal significance of Article 7 for Sierra Leone lies in its potential to unlock climate finance; by framing adaptation as a legal obligation of the global community, Sierra Leone seeks to transform voluntary aid into obligatory support.21 2.2 The Abidjan Convention: Regional Ocean Governance At the regional level, the Convention for Cooperation in the Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Atlantic Coast of the West, Central and Southern Africa Region, commonly known as the Abidjan Convention, is the primary legal instrument.
2.2.1 Ratification and Geographic Scope
Sierra Leone ratified the Abidjan Convention in 2005, joining a coalition of Atlantic African states committed to managing their shared marine environment. The Convention’s covers the marine environment, coastal zones, and related inland waters, making it directly applicable to the mangrove estuaries and islands currently under threat.
2.2.2 Article 13: The EIA Mandate
A critical, often overlooked, provision of the Abidjan Convention is Article 13, which deals with Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). It mandates that Contracting Parties "shall endeavour to include an assessment of the potential environmental effects in any planning activity entailing projects within its territory, particularly in the coastal areas". This international obligation serves as a "hard hook" for domestic legislation. It reinforces the requirements found in Sierra Leone’s own EPA Act, providing a second layer of legal accountability. If the state fails to enforce EIA requirements for coastal mining or infrastructure projects, it is technically in breach of its treaty obligations under the Abidjan Convention, opening the door for diplomatic pressure or dispute resolution mechanisms within the Convention's framework. 2.3 International Litigation and the ITLOS Advisory Opinion Sierra Leone has emerged as a proactive litigant in the global push to define climate change obligations through international courts.
2.3.1 The Argument: GHGs as Marine Pollution
In the Request for an Advisory Opinion submitted by the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), Sierra Leone submitted a written statement that advanced a novel and aggressive legal argument.1 The state argued that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions should be legally classified as "pollution of the marine environment" under Article 1(1)(4) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). If accepted, this classification triggers stringent obligations for states to "prevent, reduce and control" such pollution. Sierra Leone’s submission contended that major emitters are failing in their due diligence duties to prevent this pollution, thereby causing transboundary harm to vulnerable coastal states. 2.3.2 The Precautionary Principle Furthermore, Sierra Leone invoked the precautionary principle, arguing that scientific uncertainty regarding the exact rate of sea-level rise cannot be used as a for inaction. The submission highlighted the disproportionate burden borne by African coastal states, which have contributed the least to the crisis but face the most immediate existential threats.17 This legal maneuvering represents a strategic attempt to use the "hard law" of the sea to enforce the "soft law" commitments of the climate regime.
Part III: The Domestic Legislative Framework
Sierra Leone has constructed a comprehensive domestic legal framework to manage its environment and natural resources. This framework is a patchwork of post-colonial statutes, modern environmental acts, and sector-specific legislation.
3.1 The Constitution of Sierra Leone 1991
The hierarchy of laws begins with the Constitution of Sierra Leone 1991 (Act No. 6 of 1991). While it provides the bedrock for the legal system, its environmental provisions are somewhat ambivalent, reflecting the developmentalist priorities of the early 1990s.
3.1.1 State Directives vs. Rights
Section 8(3) of the Constitution directs the State to harness natural resources for the "national prosperity and an efficient, dynamic and self-reliant economy".28 This provision essentially constitutionalizes resource extraction as a vehicle for development. In contrast, the Constitution does not contain an explicit, justiciable "right to a healthy environment" in its Chapter III Bill of Rights. This omission is significant; legal scholars argue that it forces citizens to rely on other rights (such as the right to life or property) to litigate environmental grievances, creating a higher .29 3.1.2 Property and the "Public Benefit" Exception Section 21(1) protects citizens from the deprivation of property. However, it contains broad exceptions. The state may acquire property (land) if it is necessary for "town and country planning," "public health," or "development or utilization of any property in such a manner as to promote the public benefit". Historically, this "public benefit" clause has been utilized to facilitate mining concessions and infrastructure projects that displace communities, often with minimal compensation.
Section 18, which guarantees freedom of movement, also contains a claw-back clause allowing restrictions for the "protection of the environment" or "natural resources". This creates a constitutional basis for evacuating populations from disaster-prone areas like Nyangai, but without a corresponding rights-based framework for resettlement, it risks leaving displaced persons in legal limbo.
3.2 The Environmental Protection Agency Act 2022
The Environmental Protection Agency Act 2022 (repealing the 2008 Act) is the primary for environmental governance. It represents a modernization of the legal regime, designed to give the EPA more autonomy and enforcement power.
3.2.1 Section 12: Functions and Powers
Section 12 of the Act outlines the statutory functions of the Agency. These include the mandate to advise the Minister on policy formulation, coordinate with other Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs), and, crucially, to enforce compliance with environmental standards. The Act empowers the EPA to issue environmental licenses, a power that makes it the de facto gatekeeper for all major industrial activity in the country. It also mandates the creation of a National Climate Change Secretariat within the Agency to coordinate climate action, integrating the implementation of the UNFCCC into the EPA's core operations.31 3.2.2 The EIA Regime The Act makes the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) mandatory for a scheduled list of activities, including mining, agriculture, and infrastructure development. The EIA process is legally required to be participatory, involving public consultations with affected communities. However, the Act’s effectiveness is often compromised by the "pay-to-play" nature of the licensing fees, where the EPA is incentivized to grant licenses to generate revenue for its own operations, a conflict of interest noted by external auditors. 3.3 The National Protected Area Authority (NPAA) Act 2012 Parallel to the EPA, the National Protected Area Authority and Conservation Trust Fund Act 2012 governs the country's specific conservation zones.
3.3.1 Section 12: The Conservation Mandate
Section 12 of the NPAA Act establishes the Authority's objective: to exercise oversight over National Parks and Protected Areas to protect fauna and flora in their natural state.34 A critical and progressive subsection is Section 12(2)(x), which explicitly tasks the Authority with "developing policies and strategies for adapting the National Protected Areas system to the impacts of climate change".34 This provision is rare in older conservation laws and reflects a recognition that static conservation (merely drawing a line on a map) is insufficient in a changing climate; active adaptation management is required.
3.3.2 The Conservation Trust Fund
Section 19 establishes the Conservation Trust Fund.34 The legislative intent was to create a sustainable financing mechanism for biodiversity, funded by government appropriations, gifts, and potentially carbon trading revenues (REDD+). However, the operationalization of this fund has been slow, leaving the NPAA dependent on volatile central budget allocations.
3.4 The Fisheries and Aquaculture Act 2018
Enacted in response to the looming crisis of illegal fishing and international sanctions, the Fisheries and Aquaculture Act 2018 is a robust piece of legislation aimed at modernizing the sector.
3.4.1 Section 9: Sustainability Objectives
Section 9 sets out the "Objectives and Purposes" of the Act, which prioritize the "long-term conservation, management, development and sustainable use of fisheries resources".36 It explicitly adopts the Precautionary Approach and the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries, aligning domestic law with international best practices.
3.4.2 Section 48: Combating IUU Fishing
To address Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, Section 48 contains strict prohibitions. It makes it illegal for any person to "take, import, export, land, tranship, transport, sell, receive, acquire or buy any fish or fish product that was caught in contravention of the laws of another State". This "long-arm" jurisdiction is designed to prevent Sierra Leone from being used as a laundering hub for illegal catch from neighboring waters.
Additionally, Section 47 empowers the Minister to declare aquatic animals protected or endangered, providing a legal mechanism to protect species threatened by climate change or overfishing, such as the West African manatee or specific sea turtle populations. Part IV: Sectoral Governance, Crisis, and Implementation Gaps While the legislative texts are comprehensive, the operational reality in Sierra Leone is defined by a "capability trap"—the disconnect between the law as written and the law as practiced. This is most evident in the fisheries and mining sectors.
4.1 The Fisheries Crisis: The EU "Yellow Card" Saga
The fisheries sector is a critical pillar of Sierra Leone's economy, yet it has been plagued by governance failures that have attracted international sanctions.
4.1.1 The "Yellow Card" Sanction (2016–Present)
In April 2016, the European Commission issued a "Yellow Card" to Sierra Leone.6 Under the EU's IUU Regulation, this classifies Sierra Leone as a "non-cooperating third country" in the fight against illegal fishing. Despite the passage of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Act 2018, which was drafted in part to satisfy EU demands, the Yellow Card remains active as of 2025. This makes Sierra Leone the African nation with the longest continuous active Yellow Card status.6 4.1.2 Governance Failures Behind the Sanction The persistence of the sanction indicates deep-rooted structural issues. The EU cited Sierra Leone's lack of control over its fleet, the authorization of vessels without proper verification of their history, and an inadequate sanctioning scheme. Although the 2018 Act increased fines (up to millions of dollars for industrial infractions), enforcement remains inconsistent. There are reports of industrial trawlers operating in the Inshore Exclusion Zone (IEZ) reserved for artisanal fishers, often with impunity or with the tacit complicity of officials.
4.1.3 Economic Implications
The economic toll is staggering. Estimates suggest Sierra Leone loses millions of dollars annually to IUU fishing. The Yellow Card acts as a barrier to trade, preventing Sierra Leonean fish products from entering the EU market directly. This forces the country to export to less regulated markets, often at lower prices, depriving the state of foreign exchange and stifling the development of a value-added processing industry.
4.2 Mining, Corruption, and Environmental Opacity
The mining sector, dominated by iron ore, rutile, and diamonds, is the primary source of foreign exchange but also a major driver of environmental degradation.
4.2.1 The EIA "Black Box"
Transparency International’s 2019 report on mining corruption in Sierra Leone exposed critical flaws in the EIA process. The report found that mining companies are often allowed to pay license fees to the National Revenue Authority (NRA) even when their EIA Licenses are not yet approved or available. This decoupling of revenue collection from regulatory compliance turns the EIA into a bureaucratic formality rather than a safeguard.
Furthermore, the Mining Advisory Board (MAB), tasked with approving licenses, is criticized for being composed of political appointees who may lack the technical expertise to evaluate complex environmental management plans.40 This "political capture" of the licensing process undermines the scientific basis of environmental governance.
4.2.2 MAPO v Koidu Limited: A Judicial Turning Point
The gap between law and practice has pushed communities to the courts. The case of Marginalized Affected Property Owners (MAPO) v Koidu Limited is a watershed moment. Initially, the High Court dismissed the community's claim for damages resulting from blasting and environmental degradation, ruling they lacked . However, the Sierra Leone Court of Appeal overturned this decision, granting the community standing and freezing the company's assets to prevent capital flight before the trial could conclude.7 This ruling is legally significant for two reasons:
Expansion of Standing: It rejects the narrow interpretation of standing that historically barred communities from suing unless they could prove direct, individualized property title, recognizing the collective nature of customary land rights and environmental harm.
Corporate Accountability: It signals that multinational entities can no longer hide behind corporate veils or procedural technicalities to escape liability for environmental damage in Sierra Leone.
Similar litigation has occurred in international venues, such as the African Minerals Limited case in the London High Court, where 142 claimants sued for compensation regarding eviction and violence associated with mining operations.42 These cases demonstrate a growing trend of "transnational environmental litigation" where domestic governance failures are challenged in foreign jurisdictions.
4.3 Institutional Overlap: The EPA vs. NPAA Conflict
A major impediment to effective environmental management is the jurisdictional conflict between the EPA and the NPAA.
4.3.1 The "Wetlands" Void
Both agencies claim mandates that cover aspects of forest and wetland management. The NPAA manages "Protected Areas," while the EPA manages the broader "Environment." In practice, this creates a "gray zone" regarding wetlands that are not 1.
2.
formally gazetted as National Parks but are ecologically sensitive. The NPAA Act 2012 does not explicitly mention "wetlands" in its definitions, leading the NPAA to sometimes disengage from wetland protection, while the EPA may lack the ranger force to police these areas on the ground.43 4.3.2 Revenue Competition The conflict is exacerbated by competition for revenue. Both agencies have the power to levy fees—the EPA for licenses, the NPAA for entry or usage of protected areas. This creates a "double taxation" problem for legitimate businesses, while illegal actors (such as mangrove loggers) exploit the lack of coordination to operate in the seams between the two agencies' jurisdictions. Part V: Displacement, Human Rights, and the Future As the physical landscape of Sierra Leone shifts, so too does its human geography. The legal and policy frameworks are struggling to keep pace with the reality of climate-induced displacement.
5.1 The Definition Gap: "Climate Refugees" vs. IDPs
Current international refugee law (the 1951 Refugee Convention) offers no protection for those displaced by climate change, as they are not fleeing persecution. Consequently, the displaced residents of Nyangai and Plantain are classified as Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs).
This classification internalizes the crisis. The burden of protection falls entirely on the Sierra Leonean state, which is mandated by the Kampala Convention (which Sierra Leone has ratified) to protect IDPs. However, the state’s limited fiscal space means that support for these populations is minimal. There is no specific "Climate Displacement Act" in Sierra Leone, leaving these populations to rely on ad-hoc disaster relief from the NDMA rather than a structured resettlement program.8 5.2 Cultural Extinction and the "Right to Existence"
The loss of territory in the Turtle Islands raises profound human rights questions regarding the "right to culture." Researchers utilizing a "culture-centered approach" argue that for the Sherbro people, the land is not fungible; it cannot simply be swapped for a plot on the mainland. The disappearance of the islands equates to the "extinction" of their specific maritime culture, their sacred groves, and their ancestral burial grounds. Current compensation laws (under the Constitution’s Section 21) focus on the market value of property. They have no mechanism to calculate the value of a lost culture or a vanished way of life. This represents a significant gap in the legal framework—a "protection gap" where the law recognizes the loss of a house but not the loss of a home.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Sierra Leone is a microcosm of the global climate injustice. It is a nation suffering the acute symptoms of a disease it did not cause, armed with a legal pharmacopeia that is theoretically potent but practically diluted by resource constraints and governance failures.
The country has made commendable strides in modernizing its laws. The EPA Act 2022 and the Fisheries Act 2018 are world-class statutes on paper. The state’s aggressive posture in international litigation, particularly at ITLOS, demonstrates a refusal to be a passive victim of the Anthropocene.
However, the "Yellow Card" in fisheries, the "Black Box" of mining EIAs, and the "Gray Zone" of institutional overlaps threaten to undo these gains. As the Atlantic Ocean continues to reclaim the coast, the time for legislative reform is passing; the time for rigorous, unflinching enforcement has arrived.
Key Recommendations for the Way Forward
Harmonize Institutional Mandates: The Parliament must pass a legislative instrument clarifying the jurisdiction of the EPA and NPAA regarding wetlands and revenue collection to eliminate the "governance void."
Operationalize the Climate Change Fund: The mechanisms in the NPAA Act and EPA Act for conservation funding must be fully operationalized and capitalized, potentially through rigorous enforcement of EIA fees, to reduce dependence on donor aid.
Judicial Capacity Building: Building on theMAPOprecedent, the judiciary requires specialized training in environmental law to adjudicate the complex scientific and rights-based claims that will increasingly come before the courts.
Formalize Climate Displacement Policy: The state must move beyond ad-hoc disaster response to develop a comprehensiveNational Climate Resettlement Policythat respects the cultural rights of displaced islanders and provides land-for-land compensation.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Appendix: Comparative Analysis of Key Legal Instruments
Table 2: Legislative Architecture of Environmental Governance in Sierra Leone
Legal Instrument
Primary Objective Key Section/Provision Operational Status & Challenges
EPA Act 2022 Environmental protection & policy coordination
Section 12: Mandates EPA to advise Minister & enforce standards.
Strong Statute/Weak Funding: Revenue generated is often not ring-fenced for
monitoring.33 NPAA Act 2012 Management of Protected Areas & Biodiversity Section 12(2)(x): Explicit mandate for climate change adaptation strategies.
Jurisdictional Conflict: Overlaps with EPA on wetland management; Act lacks explicit "wetland"
definition.43 Fisheries Act 2018 Sustainable use of marine resources Section 48: Prohibits import/landing of IUU catch.Section 9: Ecosystem approach.
Implementation Failure: EU "Yellow Card" remains active since 2016 due to weak fleet
control.6 Constitution 1991 Supreme Law Section 21: Allows property acquisition for "public benefit".
Rights Gap: Lacks an explicit, justiciable "Right to a Healthy Environment" in
the Bill of Rights.29 Abidjan Convention Regional Marine Cooperation Article 13: Mandates EIAs for coastal projects.
International Benchmark: Serves as the binding external obligation reinforcing domestic EIA
laws.24 Appendix: Statistical Indicators of Climate Vulnerability Table 3: Key Environmental Metrics Indicator Value/Description Source Nyangai Island Land Loss ~66% reduction in surface area (<10 years)