Hypothesis Testing on Oath-Taking and Justice Systems in Sierra Leone: A Critical Discourse Analysis

This article examines the role of oath-taking in Sierra Leone’s justice systems through a mixedmethods study grounded in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), Symbolic Interactionist Theory (SIT), and Critical Legal Theory (CLT). The research tests three hypotheses: first, whether social profiles predict participation in oath-taking; second, whether different oath types vary in perceived effectiveness; and third, whether social profiles influence perceptions of justice. Chisquare tests and one-way ANOVA provide statistical grounding, while focus group discussions and interviews supply qualitative depth. Triangulated findings demonstrate that gender and education do not significantly predict oath participation, that traditional oaths are perceived as more effective than statutory or religious ones, and that community activity and cultural embeddedness strongly shape perceptions of justice. The study concludes by highlighting the necessity of hybrid legal reforms that integrate culturally resonant oath-taking into statutory law.