Sierra Leone’s Cybercrime Bill Raises Concerns Over Free Speech and Privacy

A proposed cybercrime bill in Sierra Leone has sparked widespread concern over its potential impact on free speech and privacy, with critics arguing that it could criminalize legitimate online activities and infringe upon citizens’ rights.

Definition of “Insult” and “Ill-Will”

The bill defines “insult” and “ill-will” as crimes punishable by imprisonment. This has raised fears of a slippery slope towards censorship, particularly given the country’s history of using vague laws to silence critics.

Chilling Example

The case of freelance journalist Mahmud Tim Kargbo, who was arrested for sharing content deemed “insulting” about a senior police officer, is seen as a chilling example of how such laws can be used to stifle dissent.

Concerns Over National Security and Investigative Journalism

Critics also argue that the bill’s definition of national security is too broad and could be used to target investigative journalists and whistleblowers. The bill criminalizes the possession of sensitive information, even if it has not been published, which raises concerns about the ability of journalists to protect their sources.

Lack of Clarity on “Public Interest”

The bill also fails to provide clear guidelines on what constitutes “public interest” and allows the President to remove members of a proposed National Cybersecurity Advisory Council without due process. The council does not include representatives from the media or legal profession, despite their critical role in ensuring that fundamental rights are protected in the digital age.

Minister’s Response

The Minister of Information and Communications has expressed excitement about the debate surrounding the bill, but critics argue that this is an attempt to downplay concerns about its potential impact on human rights.

Call for Re-Examination

“We urge the Sierra Leonean authorities to take a step back and re-examine the bill in light of international best practices and human rights principles,” said a statement from the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA). “The views of civil society, human rights defenders, digital rights experts, academia, internet service providers, and other stakeholders must be given serious consideration to ensure that the bill is rewritten to protect, rather than restrict, online freedoms.”

Calls for Withdrawal

The MFWA has joined calls from its partner organization, the Media Rights Coalition Group (MRCG), and other stakeholders for the bill to be withdrawn from parliament and reviewed in a more transparent and inclusive process.

• Key concerns:
  • Definition of “insult” and “ill-will” could lead to censorship
  • Broad definition of national security could target investigative journalists and whistleblowers
  • Lack of clarity on “public interest”
  • Council members not representative of media or legal profession
• Calls for re-examination and withdrawal from parliament
• Urgent need for transparent and inclusive review process