By Mamajah Jalloh
Four members of the All People’s Congress (APC) from Wards 180 and 181 in Constituency 054, Tonkolili District, have asked the High Court of Sierra Leone to intervene in a dispute surrounding the conduct and outcome of the ward rerun elections.
The plaintiffs—John A. Tholley, Aminata K. Kamara, Lamin Osman Koroma and Femi P. Taylor—filed an Originating Summons before Justice Adrian Fisher on Wednesday, August 19, 2026.
The Political Parties Regulation Commission (PPRC), the National Coordinator of the APC Internal Elections Management Committee, the APC Internal Elections Management Committee and the APC are named as defendants.
Among the reliefs sought, the plaintiffs are asking the court to order the PPRC to issue and publish a written ruling on an appeal they reportedly filed on July 6, 2026, concerning the ward rerun elections in Wards 180 and 181.
They are also asking the court to declare null and void the constituency elections conducted in Constituency 054 in July 2026, together with subsequent proceedings arising from those elections.
The plaintiffs contend that the elections were conducted despite a July 9 directive from the PPRC concerning unresolved disputes, petitions or other matters relating to the electoral process.
They further allege irregularities and non-compliance with the APC Constitution 2022 and the APC Internal Elections Rules and Regulations 2025.
The plaintiffs are also seeking orders compelling the relevant defendants to produce and display the Final Voters Register and Final Results for the disputed ward elections and provide copies to them.
In addition, they want an injunction restraining the APC from recognising or working with the purported winners of the Constituency 054 elections pending the determination of the matter.
They are also seeking interim and interlocutory injunctions to prevent the relevant APC electoral authorities from conducting the Tonkolili District-level elections pending the determination of the substantive matter.
Representing the plaintiffs, S.I. Koroma urged the court to grant the interlocutory injunction, arguing that the disputed electoral process should be halted until the outstanding matter before the PPRC is determined.
Counsel argued that the plaintiffs had filed an appeal with the PPRC but had not received a formal written ruling. He maintained that the absence of such a ruling had left the plaintiffs uncertain about their next legal step and potentially affected their right to pursue an appeal.
He further relied on the PPRC’s July 9 directive, particularly a provision which, according to counsel, directed that elections should not be conducted in a constituency where a dispute, petition or other matter relating to the poll remained unresolved.
Counsel argued that elections proceeded despite the alleged outstanding dispute and submitted that there was a serious issue to be tried.
He also argued that damages would not provide an adequate remedy if the injunction were refused, urging the court to preserve the status quo until the PPRC determines the outstanding appeal.
However, counsel for the respondents, Brima Koroma, opposed the application and argued that the balance of convenience favoured the defendants.
He submitted that granting the reliefs sought could have serious consequences for the respondents and maintained that the plaintiffs had failed to establish sufficient grounds for the court to interfere with the existing electoral position.
The respondents further argued that the plaintiffs had not satisfied the legal requirements for the injunction and urged the court to dismiss the application.
The case is now before the High Court for determination of the competing arguments over the disputed electoral process and the application for injunctive relief.
