ABSTRACT
This study investigates the Sierra Leonean Civil War that broke out in 1991 and lasted until 2002. The study traces the causes of the war, its effect on the country and the efforts that have been made so far to practice democracy in the post-war era. The methodology that was applied in this study comprised the use of qualitative research approaches to review secondary data on the subject matter as well as the analysis of primary data obtained through interviews. The findings show that the causes of the war can be directly and indirectly linked to pre-colonial factors including development disparities between the capital, Freetown, which the British treated as a Colony and the other regions which they treated as a Protectorate. This chasm deepened into the post-independence years and divided the country along ethnic lines. Coupled with the malaise that bedeviled the country’s economy, the war inevitably broke out soon after its neighbor, Liberia, went up in flames. The study established, as per the conclusions of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), that women, children and the youth were most affected by the war. The study also found that the country has made great strides in deepening democracy after the war period. And, finally, the study concludes with some recommendations including the need for the country to strengthen its pro-democracy institutions, starting with the National Electoral Commission of Sierra Leone (NECSL).
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Background to the research problem
The West African State of Sierra Leone, between the years 1991 and 2002, was involved in one of the most protracted conflicts on the continent of Africa. This conflict claimed the lives of over fifty thousand people.1 The warring factions perpetrated all sorts of violence and violated the human rights of the citizens with acts of rape, murder, torture, maiming, recruitment of child soldiers and other atrocities.2These acts of impunity led to efforts by the international community to intervene in the crisis due to its protracted nature and human rights violations. Efforts were made by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) through the ECOWAS Monitoring Ceasefire Group (ECOMOG) to bring the conflict under control. Subsequent to that, various diplomatic endeavours ensued which led to the signing of internationally recognized accords like the Lomé Peace Accord in 1999 until the end of the war in 2002.3
This study focuses on Sierra Leone’s peace through democracy, post-war. It seeks to look at efforts made by the state itself after the interventions to ensure that its adoption of democracy helped it to stabilize. The analysis also includes efforts by the international community to ensure that Sierra Leone maintained its peace through the practice of democracy. Using the post-war period of as a reference point, this study seeks to assess how the pursuit of democracy after the war has stabilized the country.
Statement of the Problem
The Mano River region comprising Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia witnessed scores of political conflicts in the 1990s. The states in this sub-region within West Africa were unable to effectively manage their domestic politics, resulting in violent conflicts in Liberia (starting from December 24, 1989) and Sierra Leone (starting from March 23, 1991). This consequently created instabilities in other states such as Guinea and neighbouring Cote d’Ivoire.4These issues, thus, compelled some regional and world leaders through ECOWAS and other international organizations to push for an intervention in Sierra Leone to deal with the crisis.
The conflict in Sierra Leone was fueled by dissatisfaction among the youth who felt that the country’ diamond resources were not benefiting them. Led by Foday Sankoh, they accused the government of corruption, marginalization of the youth, among others, and thus wanted a change in leadership.5At the early stages of the conflict, it was viewed by the international community as an internal issue per the principle of sovereignty as enshrined in the UN Charter, where Articles 2(4) and 2(7) mandate all states to protect their citizens and manage their internal conflicts without interference from other states. However, as time went by and efforts by the state failed to resolve the crisis, it became apparent that the international community needed to intervene to prevent more humanitarian disasters.
This prompted the African Union (AU) and ECOWAS through ECOMOG to intervene. In fact, efforts were made both militarily and diplomatically, like the ECOMOG forces pushing the rebel forces out of the cities and through the Lomé and Abidjan accords. All these efforts, however, did not end the conflict. This then prompted the UN Security Council to establish the United
Nations Mission on Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) to intervene.6 Britain also sent in their troops before the conflict finally ended in 2002. As a matter of fact, after the conflict ended, some troops still remained for a while before they left like UNAMSIL which left in 2006.7
Asangna attributes the conflict to political reasons such as indirect rule reliant on traditional authority and paternalism; the abolishment of a multi-party system in 1978, the absence of a strong central government, failed development strategies, the misuse of state resources and flawed post-independent political structure.8 These assertions, thus, raise questions about how leaders emerged in the country and what they did with the power they acquired.
Several scholars have written about the causes of the conflict in Sierra Leone and the parties that helped in resolving it. However, there is a huge literature gap on how the state is doing post-war, especially on its road to peace through a return to democracy. This study therefore seeks to add on to the literature on how Sierra Leone is doing with the return to democracy as a means of ensuring peace, post-war. What is significant about this study is that it combines both primary and secondary data to analyze the current situation in the country.
Objectives of the Study
The specific objectives of this study are:
- To examine the causes of the Sierra Leonean Civil War.
- To examine the effects of the Sierra Leonean Civil War.
- To examine how Sierra Leone returned to democracy after the Civil War.
- To examine how Sierra Leone is consolidating democracy after the Civil War.
Research questions
- What were the causes of the Sierra Leonean Civil War?
- What were the effects of the Sierra Leonean Civil War?
- How did Sierra Leone return to democracy after the Civil War?
- How is Sierra Leone consolidating democracy after the Civil War?
Scope of the Research
This study focuses on two important epochs in the recent history of Sierra Leone, that is, the period between 1991 and 2002 when the Civil War was fought and 2002 and 2018 when the country experienced two electoral turnovers. It particularly discusses the causes and effects of the war and how the country has stabilized, after the war, through democracy.
Rationale of the Study
This study seeks to add on to the body of existing literature on how Sierra Leone is doing upon its adoption of democracy in the aftermath of the war. It also seeks to provide basis for further research in this area as not much research already exists on it.
Theoretical Framework
The theory undergirding this study is the theory of liberal democracy. This theory is used because of the focus on the democratic processes that have taken place in Sierra Leone after the war. According to Adrian Oldfield in an article titled “Liberal Democratic Theory: Some Reflections on Its History and Its Present” the theory first emerged in 17th Century England. Back then, it provided explanations for why medieval Christendom declined and gave way for
the Reformation Age.9 The theory basically talks about the need for states to observe principles of liberty, human rights and freedoms.10 John Locke is generally regarded as the father of liberal democratic theory. Other political thinkers of his era who subscribed to liberalism included Montesquieu, the French philosopher.11
