By Mohamed Kamara
FREETOWN, Sierra Leone — Sierra Leone’s ongoing constitutional amendment controversy continues to generate intense public debate, with citizens questioning the next steps following Parliament’s decision on the proposed electoral system.
The impasse has also triggered growing discussions about the respective roles of Parliament, the Presidency and the judiciary, particularly over whether the Supreme Court could intervene in the matter and whether any constitutional issues arose from the parliamentary proceedings.
The debate has produced divergent opinions among Sierra Leoneans at home and abroad, with some calling for dialogue and others expressing concern about what they describe as the increasing politicisation of constitutional and electoral issues.
James Obana Kanu, a naturalised Sierra Leonean living in Indiana, United States, described the situation as a significant constitutional challenge for President Julius Maada Bio.
According to Kanu, the President is facing demands from different sections of society over the controversy surrounding the electoral system.
He questioned whether President Bio could reconsider the parliamentary decision in the interest of peace, particularly given that the constitutional amendment process now requires presidential action.
Kanu said the situation had reached a complicated stage, with attention now focused on what the President will do following Parliament’s decision.
Meanwhile, Isata Moseray Fadika, who resides in Sussex, United Kingdom, argued that the debate over the Proportional Representation (PR) system represents only the preliminary stage of the wider constitutional amendment process.
She noted that several other provisions remain to be debated, particularly those relating to the socio-economic wellbeing and sustainability of ordinary Sierra Leoneans.
Fadika questioned why an electoral debate involving elected politicians had generated such prolonged controversy.
She expressed concern that excessive politicisation of national issues was gradually affecting the country’s social and moral fabric.
Back in Sierra Leone, Kelfala Moseray said the controversy had succeeded in making the Proportional Representation system a household term.
He argued that the country’s political landscape would continue to be dominated by the two major political parties, the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) and the All People’s Congress (APC), partly because there is no strong third political force capable of offering voters a credible alternative.
According to him, the dominance of the two major parties frequently shifts public attention towards political competition between the SLPP and APC rather than broader national issues.
As the constitutional amendment debate continues, public attention remains focused on the next steps by the country’s constitutional institutions and political leadership, amid calls for dialogue, peace and consensus.
The controversy has also renewed questions about the future of Sierra Leone’s electoral system and whether the ongoing debate can be resolved without further deepening political divisions.
