The Centre for Human Rights and Development International (CHRDI) has sharply criticized the judiciary for its ongoing failure to comply with the Right to Access to Information Act of 2013, a law designed to ensure transparency and accountability in government institutions.
CHRDI’s recent call for accountability is centered on the judiciary’s inability to fulfill a formal request for crucial case data, raising serious concerns about the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the laws of Sierra Leone.
Since October 2024, CHRDI has requested detailed information on the volume of cases assigned to magistrates and judges from January to October 2024. This request, made under the Right to Access to Information Act, was intended to shed light on the functioning of the judiciary and to promote greater transparency.
However, despite the legal obligation to provide such information, the judiciary has failed to respond in full, drawing criticism for non-compliance.The Right to Access to Information Act, enacted in 2013, guarantees citizens the right to request and receive information from public authorities, reinforcing the government’s commitment to transparency.
CHRDI has emphasized that the judiciary, as a critical branch of government, is required to adhere to these laws, as they play a central role in ensuring accountability within public institutions.
CHRDI points to Section 120 (3) of the Constitution of Sierra Leone, which stipulates that the judiciary is bound only by the Constitution and other laws, and must operate without external interference.
The failure to honor transparency requests represents not only a disregard for the Right to Access to Information Act but also an undermining of the integrity of Sierra Leone’s legal system.In response to the request, the judiciary issued a letter on January 27, 2025, acknowledging CHRDI’s concerns and promising compliance with the law.
The letter explained that the delay was due to a transition period following a change in the administration of the judiciary. However, despite the judiciary’s commitment to resolve the issue promptly, CHRDI has yet to receive any further updates or the requested data.
The judiciary’s lack of action and failure to keep its promises have raised alarms about its commitment to legal reforms and transparency.
According to their response, the judiciary’s Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers is still only available in hard copy and will be uploaded to their website once it is operational.
They also assured CHRDI that the requested data would be provided “within the shortest possible time,” yet no follow-up has been made.
