By Mohamed Kamara
A heated national debate is underway over a controversial recommendation from the Tripartite Committee that many believe could erode the constitutional powers of the President of Sierra Leone. At the center of public scrutiny is Recommendation 34, which proposes constitutional amendments to fix the dates for presidential and parliamentary elections.
According to the recommendation, Section 43 and 87 of the 1991 Constitution should be amended to set general elections on the last Saturday of March, April, or May every five years. Critics argue this measure undermines the President’s constitutional authority to declare an election date—traditionally done after due assessment of national stability, such as the absence of public health emergencies, political unrest, or serious security concerns.
“The President’s authority to determine the timing of national elections is rooted in the need to ensure the country is stable and secure,” a political analyst told The Watch. “If the proposed fixed election calendar becomes law, it will significantly reduce the President’s discretionary powers in this area.”
Citizens are also concerned that the fixed date proposal could potentially shorten the tenure of elected officials, including the President and Members of Parliament. Furthermore, the recommendation makes no mention of local council or municipal elections, leaving ambiguity about how those would be handled under the new framework.
Many argue that the issue of election scheduling was never part of the political crisis that prompted the Unity Agreement. Instead, the national dialogue was meant to address allegations of electoral malpractice and to strengthen institutional accountability—not to alter the election calendar.
Recommendation 33 of the Tripartite Report has also raised eyebrows. It proposes that the Political Parties Regulation Commission (PPRC) enforce Section 9 of the Political Parties Code of Conduct, which addresses the prohibition of political militias and violence. But some citizens say this enforcement proposal is inadequate without holding the PPRC itself accountable.
“The PPRC has in the past failed to mediate longstanding internal conflicts within parties, such as the unresolved leadership dispute in the People’s Democratic Party (PDP-Sobeh) since 2012,” one civil society activist noted. “There’s a fear that empowering such institutions without robust oversight might lead to selective justice and further political imbalance.”
Critics caution that while the recommendations are framed as reforms, they may inadvertently transfer key presidential powers to the public or institutions with questionable impartiality.
As consultations continue ahead of a national dialogue, public concern is mounting. Citizens are calling for clarity, transparency, and a careful balance between reform and the preservation of executive authority as outlined in the national constitution.
