By Kabs Kanu
Sierra Leone, hailed in the early 2000s as one of West Africa’s democratic success stories after a brutal civil war, now faces a perilous crossroads. Once celebrated for peaceful transfers of power and relatively stable governance, the country is increasingly described by critics, civil society activists, opposition figures, and independent observers as sliding into democratic erosion — a reality that should alarm citizens at home and partners abroad.
Sierra Leone is battling a troubled electoral legacy under President Julius Maada Bio. The June 2023 general elections — which re-elected President Bio and secured a majority for the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) — marked a turning point in Sierra Leone’s democratic trajectory. While President Bio’s victory was officially recognized, the process was allegedly marred by serious concerns over transparency and credibility. Independent observers, including the European Union Election Observation Mission, highlighted shortcomings in the electoral process and called for greater transparency in publishing results.
The opposition All People’s Congress (APC) responded with deep distrust. It has repeatedly questioned the integrity of the 2023 results and, at times, opted out of national governance structures entirely, alleging that results were manipulated to bolster the SLPP’s dominance. These bitter disputes undermine the very foundation of competitive politics, eroding public confidence in elections as a vehicle for expressing the popular will.
As if the disputed 2023 election was not enough, President Bio and the SLPP have now turned the heat on full blast for political repression and intimidation. In recent years, the government’s approach toward dissent has alarmed rights advocates. Opposition leaders and critics have reported intimidation and legal harassment. For example, the APC’s Secretary-General, Lawyer Lansana Dumbuya, was summoned by police for questioning after issuing a statement criticizing the government’s treatment of former President Ernest Bai Koroma and the alleged stealing of the 2023 election — a gesture that should be normal in democratic contestation, but in Sierra Leone’s charged climate risks punitive consequences.
Journalists and media voices critical of the government have also felt the pressure. Independent media editors, such as the NightWatch editor, faced arrest under circumstances many see as politically motivated — in an apparent attempt to discourage critical reporting and weaken press freedom. When media practitioners fear reprisal for investigative reporting, the watchdog role of the press is severely compromised.
As the opposition fights to reinvent itself, state capture of institutions and accountability mechanisms continue unabated in Sierra Leone. A healthy democracy depends on strong, independent institutions — from courts to anti-corruption bodies to regulatory commissions. Suspicions that these institutions are being co-opted by the ruling party have grown. For instance, the appointment process for members of key institutions such as the Electoral Commission of Sierra Leone (ECSL) has sparked outrage from opposition parties, who argue that procedural norms and ongoing reform agreements are being ignored.
Similarly, while the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) exists as an institution intended to challenge corruption, its independence is constitutionally constrained — the president appoints and can remove its leadership. When the executive branch holds overwhelming sway over bodies meant to check power, the balance essential to democratic accountability weakens dramatically.
As a result, President Bio and the SLPP have seriously weakened democratic pluralism in Sierra Leone. Beyond elections and institutions, Sierra Leone’s democratic ecosystem includes civil society organisations, independent advocacy groups, and opposition political parties. These actors play a critical role in representing diverse voices, holding leaders accountable, and mobilizing citizens around issues of public concern.
However, as political polarization intensifies, civic space has contracted. Some opposition legislators have threatened to boycott parliamentary participation, citing a lack of faith in the system — a self-reinforcing cycle that further diminishes meaningful opposition within formal governance structures.
Moreover, concerns about ethnic and regional tensions influencing politics have compounded governance challenges, suggesting that democratic decline is not just institutional but social.
The broader democratic landscape is Sierra Leone is very sick and on life support. Despite these alarming trends, it would be inaccurate to depict Sierra Leone as uniformly bereft of democratic currents. Many citizens continue to express aspirations for accountable governance and peaceful pluralism. Surveys suggest that large majorities favour cross-party collaboration and tolerance among political groups, even as institutional trust erodes. International partners, including diplomatic missions, have also advocated for dialogue and reform, emphasizing the importance of inclusive processes, especially ahead of future censuses and elections. But President Bio and the SLPP are deaf to all these cries like a puff adder.
This has put Sierra Leone at dangerous crossroads. The phrase “democracy on life support” may sound dramatic, but in Sierra Leone’s current political climate it captures a palpable reality: democratic norms and institutions are being tested — not just in narrow electoral contests but in everyday governance, civic freedoms, and the separation of powers. True democratic resilience will require more than rhetoric. It demands the following: transparent, credible elections that build trust rather than deepen suspicions; independent institutions capable of acting without fear or favour; protection for opposition voices, journalists, and civil society; meaningful power sharing, and dialogue across political divides.
Sierra Leone’s future depends on renewing the social contract between the state and its citizens — affirming that power is not an entitlement but a public trust.
Without decisive action by leaders and citizens alike, the promise of Sierra Leone’s democracy risks slipping further from reach — leaving behind a shell of democratic forms without the substance of democratic life, and further plunging the country into the abyss.
People want us to stop talking, to stop writing. They cuss us, chide us, belittle us, threaten us and play all kinds of mind games, but we will not relent to speak out.
This SLPP government will give us democracy or death!
