get latest news from West Africa

Human rights and good governance activist group the Edward Francis Small Centre for Rights and Justice EFSCR, has expressed concern and reservations about a provision in the Criminal Offences Act which criminalises insults against senior government officials with a jail term of between 1 to 6 months.
The law was contained in the Act passed by the National Assembly and assented to by the president recently.
- Advertisement -
The law stipulates that: “Any person who directs parental insult to the President, Vice President, a Minister, a Member of the National Assembly, a Civil Servant or any other Public Officer in the exercise of his or her functions, shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than D10,000 and not more than D50,000 or a term of imprisonment of not less than one month and not more than six months or to both fine and imprisonment.”
In its reaction in a statement yesterday, the EFSCRJ, headed by Madi Jobarteh, argued that while insults and foul language in general should be shunned and discouraged as required by our cultures and religions, to criminalise parental insult only against public officials from amongst the citizenry is discriminatory.
“Without a clear definition of what constitutes parental insult, this provision is as ambiguous as it is arbitrary”, the EFSCRJ stated. The group added that freedom of expression broadly covers expressions that may be offensive but not unlawful in a democracy.
- Advertisement -
The group argued that the provision did not cater for a situation where public officials would be held accountable if they insult the parents of citizens. “Recent uncouth remarks by both Information Minister Dr Ismaila Ceesay when he sarcastically said “no one’s father owns this country,” and Ambassador Fatoumatta Jahumpa Ceesay who derogatorily described UDP NAMs as “domi haram” are few cases of public officials using foul language against the public. Thus the effect of this provision is to shield public officials from what could be genuine criticisms while unfairly criminalising citizens for their opinion and criticism of public officials who are left unchecked for their own foul language,” the group said.
It called for the removal of the provision in the Criminal Offences Act. “A criminal law must be founded on the pillars of clarity and consistency, constitutionalism, protection of rights, deterrence and checks and balances to ensure justice and maintain social order in a fair and transparent manner,” the EFSCRJ stated.