Lansana Kotor- Kamara Esq
Introduction
A recent social media discourse has spotlighted the troubling reality of abandoned and unclaimed bodies in Freetown. Some attribute these deaths to drugs, particularly Kush, while others point to broader structural failures: neglect, poverty, and insufficient protection for vulnerable populations. The issue transcends mere administrative inconvenience; it engages fundamental legal, ethical, and constitutional questions. The management of such bodies touches upon statutory compliance, procedural integrity, and the constitutional guarantee of human dignity.
Although the Coroners Act, 1907 (Cap 9) has been formally repealed and replaced by the Medical Examiners Act, 2021 (Act 4 of 2021), historical jurisprudence under Cap 9 remains indispensable in understanding the evolution of death investigation, inquests, and lawful disposal of human remains. Comparative jurisprudence from Commonwealth jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom and Australia, further illuminates standards for procedural integrity, investigatory oversight, and public confidence. This article situates contemporary practice within these historical and comparative frameworks, exposing institutional gaps, and examining the implications for judicial oversight, municipal authorities, and policy reform.
Historical Foundations: The Coroners Act, 1907 (Cap 9)
Cap 9 established the coroner system and required inquests into deaths that were suspicious, violent, or accidental. Judicial decisions under Cap 9 emphasized thorough investigation, preservation of evidence, and the protection of public confidence. Although the statute did not specifically regulate the collection or disposal of abandoned bodies, it established enduring legal principles: procedural propriety, chain-of-custody integrity, and administrative accountability. These principles remain authoritative in interpreting the Medical Examiners Act, particularly regarding unclaimed or unidentified bodies.
Modern Statutory Framework: The Medical Examiners Act, 2021
The Medical Examiners Act, 2021 repealed Cap 9 and created a comprehensive framework for death investigation and certification. Sections 1, 8, 12, and 25 vest exclusive authority in the Chief Medical Examiner to investigate reportable deaths, conduct post-mortem examinations, certify causes of death, and control the release of bodies. Reportable deaths include unknown, violent, unnatural, or custody-related deaths, as delineated in section 8(3).
Section 12 prohibits movement or disposal of a body without the express authorization of the Chief Medical Examiner or an authorized police officer, except to prevent destruction or contamination of evidence. Section 25 vests custody of the body in the Chief Medical Examiner until a lawful release order for burial, cremation, or transport is issued. Section 17 mandates meticulous record-keeping to safeguard evidentiary integrity and transparency.
Despite this statutory framework, operational challenges remain, particularly concerning abandoned bodies in public spaces, which municipal authorities, such as the Freetown City Council, frequently collect. Such actions may conflict with statutory obligations under the Act.
Institutional Ambiguity and Procedural Challenges
The absence of explicit statutory authority for municipal collection of abandoned bodies creates institutional ambiguity. Historical jurisprudence under Cap 9 emphasized that coroners must ensure unexplained deaths are thoroughly investigated. Unauthorized municipal collection risks circumventing procedural safeguards, undermining chain-of-custody, and compromising evidentiary integrity.
Premature disposal of bodies contravenes sections 12 and 25 of the Medical Examiners Act and can vitiate evidence in civil or criminal proceedings. Certification prior to burial or cremation is legally mandated, and failure to comply undermines public confidence, impedes accurate vital statistics, and may violate constitutional protections related to human dignity and procedural fairness.
Comparative Commonwealth Jurisprudence
Commonwealth jurisprudence underscores that investigatory oversight must precede disposal of human remains. In the United Kingdom, under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, coroners are empowered to investigate deaths that are violent, unnatural, or unknown. Disposal of a body without coroner authorization constitutes obstruction of justice. Section 23 permits exhumation for inquests or criminal proceedings, demonstrating that disposal or alteration of remains without investigation is impermissible.
In New South Wales, Australia, the Coroners Act 1980 mandates that human remains may not be buried or cremated without coroner authorization, even in cases of unclaimed bodies. Municipal authorities may only act under coroner direction. These comparative frameworks reinforce the principle codified in Sierra Leone’s Medical Examiners Act: statutory investigation and certification must precede disposal. Any deviation undermines the statutory scheme, compromises justice, and erodes public confidence.
Implications for the City Council and Local Government Authorities
Municipal authorities, including the Freetown City Council, often act as first responders to abandoned bodies. While motivated by public health and welfare concerns, their actions intersect with statutory obligations under the Medical Examiners Act. Unauthorized removal or disposal may constitute a statutory violation under sections 12 and 25, potentially amounting to obstruction of lawful death investigation
The City Council’s involvement raises significant legal and administrative considerations. Absence of statutory authority exposes municipal officials to potential liability. Failure to coordinate with the Chief Medical Examiner risks compromising the chain-of-custody and the integrity of forensic evidence, with serious implications in criminal proceedings. Premature disposal or burial without certification undermines vital statistics, public health planning, and governance.
Municipal authorities must operate within a defined legal protocol: reporting all discovered bodies to the Chief Medical Examiner, refraining from disposal until lawful authorization is obtained, and maintaining accurate documentation. Alignment with statutory mandates ensures that public health objectives do not conflict with legal and constitutional obligations.
Dignity, Human Rights, and Constitutional Imperatives
The management of abandoned bodies engages constitutional protections of human dignity. Judicial oversight is required to ensure procedural safeguards are respected, investigative processes are thorough, and deceased persons are treated with respect. Historical jurisprudence under Cap 9 provides guidance, while the Medical Examiners Act codifies contemporary standards. Compliance prevents arbitrary municipal action, protects families’ rights, and sustains public confidence in the rule of law.
Judicial Oversight and Institutional Accountability
The judiciary’s role extends beyond adjudication to ensuring statutory and procedural compliance. Courts may be called upon to assess municipal or institutional actions concerning abandoned bodies. Historical inquests under Cap 9 reinforce principles of procedural propriety, chain-of-custody, and investigatory thoroughness. Judicial scrutiny ensures that statutory processes under the Medical Examiners Act are respected, evidentiary integrity is preserved, and public trust is maintained.
Recommendations for Reform
Legal clarity regarding municipal responsibilities in collecting abandoned bodies is urgently required to align local authority actions with Chief Medical Examiner oversight. All unidentified bodies should be treated as potentially reportable until assessed. Disposal must occur only after lawful certification and release. Investment in forensic and investigative capacity is essential to ensure timely post-mortem examinations, accurate death registration, and procedural compliance. Transparency, diligent record-keeping, and judicial oversight are key to consolidating institutional accountability and procedural integrity.
Conclusion
The management of abandoned and unclaimed bodies in Freetown exemplifies the intersection of historical jurisprudence, modern statutory frameworks, and comparative Commonwealth standards. While Cap 9 provides foundational guidance, the Medical Examiners Act, 2021 establishes modern statutory standards for investigation, certification, and lawful disposal. Comparative jurisprudence confirms that investigatory oversight, procedural safeguards, and judicial scrutiny are indispensable. Municipal authorities play a vital role but must operate strictly within the legal framework to preserve justice, evidentiary integrity, and public confidence. The judiciary must assert its oversight function to ensure statutory compliance, uphold procedural propriety, and champion reform. Justice transcends life; it requires the lawful, dignified, and transparent treatment of every human body.
