Sierra Leone's Constitutional Crossroads: When Political Convenience Confronts the Supreme Law

This commentary examines the constitutional controversy arising from the passage of the Constitution of Sierra Leone (Amendment) Bill, 2025. It considers the disagreement between the Speaker of Parliament, the governing Sierra Leone People’s Party, and the opposition All People’s Congress concerning the voting threshold required to amend the 1991 Constitution. Particular attention is given to the relationship between Sections 91 and 108, the distinction between entrenched and non-entrenched constitutional provisions, earlier constitutional amendment practices, and the Supreme Court’s constitutional jurisdiction. The commentary also places the dispute within Sierra Leone’s political history, including the Public Order Act of 1965, the restoration of multiparty democracy under the 1991 Constitution, and politically consequential judicial decisions. It argues that constitutional amendments must satisfy the procedures established by the Constitution, regardless of which political party controls Parliament. It concludes that constitutional reform should rest on legality, transparency, political consensus, and public legitimacy rather than temporary parliamentary advantage. Status note: The legislative, judicial, and political developments discussed in this commentary are current as of 19 August 2026. As of that date, Parliament had passed the Constitution of Sierra Leone (Amendment) Bill, 2025, although the validity of the voting threshold remained disputed. The Speaker had announced the referral of the constitutional question to the Supreme Court, and the Bill had not received presidential assent. Subsequent judicial, legislative, or executive developments are outside the scope of this commentary.