Write 4 Right – I Must Tell You This About The Libel Law

When recently a journalist – Jonathan Leigh – was made to sleep in the smelly cells of the country’s central maximum prison for alleged criminal defamatory libel, I was left without no option but soliloquized, ‘so our judiciary wants all ‘to shut up’ not say anything of public concern at all.’

I have myself kept behind bars just as Jonathan for what was conjectured ‘criminal defamatory libel;’ to them (the judiciary and the law of libel), ‘justification’ otherwise known as ‘TRUTH’ is no defence to libel at all.

In fact, there is a catchphrase which has survived decades in the interpretation of the law of libel in our law books: ‘the more the truth the more libel.’

And must my respectful opinion, comment next – which to me, ‘to wish is to hope and to hope is to expect,’ be accepted, it is my spot on expectations that as society awaits outcome of the already launched constitutional review committee, the talked about law of libel must be discussed forefront nonetheless.

My straightforward belief, if not immovable answer, on the subject of the libel law articulate characters of mischievous sprites; bad, crazy, undomesticated, uncalled for, uncivilized, suppressive of free speech anyhow.

The meditation in writing for the rights of society- I mean the ‘Write 4 Right’ column- came shortly after Magistrate Bankole Shyllon refused me (Ibrahim Samura) bail for criminal defamatory libel, caused me spend days at the central maximum prison, giving a picture that a certain journalist turned minister once blackmailed him.

Of course, as a journalist, no qualm go to jail at all, but a complete uneasiness in situations where the judiciary has had field days imprisoning journalists under the umbrella of a bad, dreadful and horrific law- libel.

See oh my people! In the 1991 constitution, it is stated nonetheless that the press, radio and television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in the constitution and highlighted under section 25, which respectfully states that ‘no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, and for the purpose of this section, the said freedom includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.’

I am, of course, not at all a lawyer, but I do know for certain that there are overriding objectives for the existence of a constitution.

And as far as a state is concerned, its constitution stands tall; no law is bigger than those enshrined in it.

A big thank you to President Koroma, who until his launching of the constitutional review committee Tuesday 30^th cautioned the 80 man committee to remove their opinions, but rather go by the people’s will as they examine the 1991 constitution in the form of a review though.

To this, must I say to compatriots appointed committee members, that they should respectfully look into the much talked about and argued freedom of speech as in the constitution thus making way for the deletion of some of society’s deadly and archaic laws- to wit portion of the libel law.

I do agree the law of libel exists to protect individuals from unjustified attacks. But in doing so the law should portray a complete evenhandedness; ‘decriminalize’ the criminal libel law and make ‘justification’ a surviving and continuing defence to libel.

Will say more next publication.

Stay with Sierra Express Media, for your trusted place in news!