Access to
Security and Justice Programme
(ASJP):
A Citizens’ Perception
Survey of Security and
Justice
Report Submitted by Dalan Development Consultants
September 2013
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dalan Consultants are extremely grateful to a number of stakeholders and individuals for their invaluable input into this study.
Firstly, gratitude is extended to ASJP, for providing Dalan with valuable leadership, timely reviews and inputs to strengthen the report overall.
Tribute also goes to the Dalan technical and field teams, along with data entry operators, whose tireless efforts contributed significantly to the success of this study.
We would also like to thank community leaders throughout the four regions of Sierra Leone for granting permission for Dalan to collect data within their communities.
Finally, we would like to extend our sincere gratitude to all of the survey and focus group respondents for their generous contribution of time and input in interviews and/or discussions.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ...... ii List of Figures ...... iii List of Annexes ...... iii ACRONYMS ...... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Survey Objectives ...... 2 Key Concepts/Themes of the Survey ...... 2 2.0 METHODOLOGY ...... 3 2. 1 The Household Survey- Quantitative Component ...... 3 2.2 Focus Group Discussions- Qualitative Component ...... 4 3.0 CHALLENGES, UNFORESEEN DEVELOPMENTS AND MITIGANTS ...... 5 3.1 Challenges ...... 6 3.2 Unforeseen Developments ...... 7 4.0 FINDINGS ...... 8 Presentation of the findings ...... 8 4.1 Respondent Demographics ...... 8 4.2 Citizens’ Perceptions of Personal Safety and Security ...... 11 4.3 Citizens’ Perceptions and Experiences of the Justice Sector ...... 21 4.3.1 Public perceptions and experience of traditional/informal justice: Chiefs/Headmen’s administration of justice- Enabling factors & barriers to access ...... 21 4.3.2 Public perceptions and experience of formal justice: Local and Magistrate Courts- Enabling factors& barriers to access...... 29 Reported Response to Local Courts ...... 36 Magistrate Courts ...... 38 4.3.3 Public knowledge and perception of mediation services ...... 42 4.4 Citizens’ Perceptions and Experience of the Security Sector ...... 49 4.4.1 The Police (SLP) ...... 49 Reported Response to the Police...... 51 i
4.4.2 Chiefdom &Metropolitan Police ...... 57 5.0 CONCLUSION ...... 60 ANNEXES ...... 61 Annex 1-Summary – From Focus Group Discussion Proceedings ...... 61 Annex 2: Final Survey Questionnaire ...... 79 Annex 3: FGD Topic Guide ...... 96 Annex 4 Survey Sampling ...... 102 Annex 5: Sample Size ...... 104 Annex 6: FGD Sampling ...... 105 Annex 7: Number of respondents who view local leader’s dispute resolution as fair, by Chiefdom ...... 106
List of Tables Table 1: Measures taken to mitigate risk during fieldwork ...... 5 Table 2: Marital status of the sampled population ...... 8 Table 3: Monthly income of respondent ...... 9 Table 4: Reported ownership of personal assets ...... 10 Table 5: Reported usage of radio ...... 10 Table 6: Perceptions of personal safety and security within the community, by community type ...... 12 Table 7: Perceptions of personal safety and security within the community, by district ...... 13 Table 8: Breaches of security that respondents are most worried about, by district* ...... 13 Table 9: First mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member, by community type* ...... 17 Table 10: Choice mediation authority, by district ...... 18 Table 11: Females first mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow household member ...... 19 Table 12: Advice provided by females if a woman was being beaten by her husband ...... 20 Table 13: Profile of the respondents with experience with Local leaders* ...... 21 Table 14: Reported dispute requiring local leader's action ...... 21 Table 15: Percentage of respondents who regard dispute resolution by Local Leaders as fair, by district ...... 23 Table 16: Reasoning for the reported dissatisfaction with Local leaders ...... 24 Table 17: Confidence level in Local Chiefs, by age group ...... 26 Table 18: Traditional/informal justice authority's sensitivity to gender difference, by age group ...... 28 Table 19: Respondent role during interaction with Local Courts ...... 31 ii
Table 20: Respondent’s experience with Local Courts* ...... 31 Table 21: Reported satisfaction in Local Courts, from experience with these authorities; by gender ...... 32 Table 22: Gender ratings of Local Court administration of justice ...... 33 Table 23: Ratings of Local Court administration of justice, by community type ...... 34 Table 24: Ratings of Local Court administration of justice, by employment status ...... 34 Table 25: Reported gender equality of the Local Court, by gender and age group ...... 34 Table 26: Key reasons the Local Court is not used* ...... 36 Table 27: Reasoning for disuse of the Magistrate’s Court* ...... 39 Table 28: Types of cases taken to Magistrate Courts ...... 40 Table 29: Reported dissatisfaction with the Magistrate’s Court* ...... 41 Table 30: Access to better justice at Magistrate Courts, by age group ...... 42 Table 31: Awareness of nearest FSU, by district ...... 45 Table 32: Reported reasoning for dissatisfaction with the FSU* ...... 45 Table 33: Reported issue causing use of paralegal/mediation services ...... 46 Table 34: Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities, by district ...... 47 Table 35: Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities, by gender ...... 48 Table 36: Key issues within a community that mediation authorities/paralegals can assist with* ...... 49 Table 37: Responsiveness of the police to calls for assistance from citizens and community leaders, by gender ...... 50 Table 38: Response to the SLP’s treatment of men and women, by age group ...... 53 Table 39: Experience with the Police* ...... 55 Table 40: Cases reported to the Police, by district and gender...... 55 Table 41: Reported cases involving the police where an individual has been charged to court ..... 57 Table 42: Awareness of the LPPB* ...... 58 Table 43: Response to the local police Complaints Board and Chiefdom Police ...... 58 Table 44: Reported gender equality of the Chiefdom Police, by age ...... 60
List of Figures Figure 1: Age of sampled population ...... 8 Figure 2: Working Status of sampled population ...... 9 Figure 3: Ownership of personal radio and mobile phones ...... 10 Figure 4: Ownership of other assets by other household/house members ...... 11 Figure 5: Perceptions of personal safety and security within the home and community ...... 12 Figure 6: Serious dispute with another community member* ...... 15 Figure 7: Minor dispute with another community member* ...... 16 Figure 8: Mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member* ...... 17 Figure 9: Mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow household member ...... 19 iii
Figure 10: Advice provided/actor of choice if a woman was being beaten by her husband ...... 20 Figure 11: Mediation authority of choice ...... 22 Figure 12: Fairness of traditional/informal justice authorities ...... 22 Figure 13: Reported satisfaction with Local Leaders ...... 24 Figure 14: Confidence level in Local Chiefs ...... 25 Figure 15: Confidence level in Local Chiefs, by gender ...... 25 Figure 16: Trust level in Paramount Chiefs ...... 26 Figure 17: Trust level in traditional leaders ...... 27 Figure 18: Traditional/informal justice authority's sensitivity to gender difference, by gender ..... 27 Figure 19: Reported legal issues taken to Local Court* ...... 30 Figure 20: Reported confidence in Local Courts ...... 30 Figure 21: Respondent experience with Local Courts ...... 31 Figure 22: Reported satisfaction in Local Courts, from experience with these authorities ...... 32 Figure 23: Reported confidence in Local Courts, from experience with these authorities...... 33 Figure 24: Perception of corruption in Local Courts, by community type ...... 35 Figure 25: Preferred mediation authority ...... 35 Figure 26: Rationale for preference in mediation authority* ...... 36 Figure 27: Methods pursued to access the Magistrate’s Court ...... 39 Figure 28: Satisfaction levels of Magistrate Court decisions ...... 40 Figure 29: Access to better justice at Magistrate Courts, by gender ...... 41 Figure 30: Awareness of the Human Rights Commission* ...... 42 Figure 31: Understanding of the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone* ...... 43 Figure 32: Supportive authority turned to in the event of sexual assault* ...... 43 Figure 33: Awareness of the FSU* ...... 44 Figure 34: Authority experienced: Within a case involving Paralegal services ...... 46 Figure 35: Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities by community type ...... 47 Figure 36: Reported awareness of mediation authorities/paralegal services* ...... 48 Figure 37: General perceptions on the service provided by the SLP ...... 49 Figure 38: Improvement of the Police to calls for assistance by the Local community in the past two years ...... 50 Figure 39: Respondent satisfaction with how Police officer’s treat the public ...... 51 Figure 40: Response to the SLP’s treatment of men and women, by gender ...... 53 Figure 41: Tasks requiring payment to the Police ...... 54 Figure 42: Respondent satisfaction with how the Police dealt with a specific crime ...... 56 Figure 43: Respondent satisfaction with how the Police dealt with a specific crime, by community type ...... 56 Figure 44: Awareness of the LPPB, by gender ...... 57 Figure 45: Reported satisfaction with the Chiefdom Police ...... 59 Figure 46: Reported gender equality of the Chiefdom Police, by gender ...... 59
iv
List of Annexes Annex 1: Summary of focus group proceedings Annex 2: Final survey questionnaire Annex 3: Focus group discussion topic guide Annex 4: Survey sampling procedure for household survey Annex 5: Sample size and distribution for household survey Annex 6: Focus group discussion sampling procedure Annex 7: Number of respondents who view local leaders dispute resolution as fair by chiefdom
v
ACRONYMS
ASJP Access to Security and Justice Programme
CPESJ Citizens’ Perceptions and Experiences in Security and Justice
CPO ChiefPolice Officer
DfID Department for International Development
EA Enumeration Area
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FSU Family Support Unit
GoSL Government of Sierra Leone
HH Household
HRCSL Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone
JSCO Justice Sector Coordination Office
JSDP Justice Sector Development Programme
LPPB LocalPolice Partnership Board
LUC LocalUnit Commander (Police)
MDG Millennium Development Goal
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
PC Paramount Chief
SLP Sierra Leone Police
vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Government of Sierra Leone, with the support of civil society and donors, aims to improve access to justice by bringing justice closer to the door of Sierra Leoneans, expediting justice to resolve cases speedily, and ensuring that rights and accountability are respected. The Department for International Development (DfID) is funding the Access to Justice and Security Programme (ASJP) to support the Government of Sierra Leone and civil society to implement these initiatives.
Dalan Development Consultants were contracted by ASJP to conduct a nationwide survey examining Citizens’ Perceptions and Experiences in Security and Justice (CPESJ), to collect data on the understanding of community security and safety concerns, along with the perceived changes in these over the last five years. In total, 5878 survey interviews and 78 Focus Group Discussions were conducted in all 14 districts of Sierra Leone, comprising of both urban and rural areas.
The data gathered from this survey highlights the security and justice perceptions and concerns of Sierra Leoneans. The results help identify areas of security and justice which local citizens have confidence in, as well as identifying areas of potential improvement. A follow up study is planned in 2015, to track changes in perceptions over time.
The survey invited citizen’s views on justice and security services delivered by:
The police Traditional leaders (informal justice sector) Mediation and paralegal services Local courts Magistrate courts Family Support Unit
Summary of Survey Results:
(i) Perception of personal safety and security within the home and community
We found that survey respondents generally reported feeling safe within their homes (62.7% always, 23.4% usually),and to a lesser degree in their community also (49.1% always, 28.6% usually). Acts of crime most cited to threaten this perceived state of safety included robbery and youth aggravation. Differences were found between city dwellers and village residents, as village residents were more likely (71%) to seek the support of their local chief/headman when in a dispute with a fellow member of their community. City dwellers on the other hand consider two options. Some (42%) look up vii
to local chiefs and others (23%) would turn to the police for assistance to settle community level disputes.
(ii) Local and Magistrate courts: Around half (49.2%) of the sampled population reported to have full confidence in their local court’s ability to administer justice fairly. one in two (48.2%) of those who reported full confidence in the fairness of local court system, are females. A significant proportion (21.9%) assessed judgement pace as very fast and fair and about one quarter (24.6%) of respondents rated their local court as acceptable (i.e. neither fast nor slow), with a higher proportion of village to city dwellers citing satisfaction with the service they provide. However, another quarter of respondents ( 24.2%), said that even though justice is by local courts is viewed as fair, the pace at which cases are processed to reach a final conclusion is rather slow. Corruption within local courts was also reported to be a greater concern by city interviewees (72.1%), compared to village occupants (53.8%). The absence of uniformity in customary laws, problems of nepotism, along with the cost and timely delays within local courts were cited by focus group participants to be issues negatively affecting their perception of these authorities.
Around half (57.7%) of surveyed individuals stated that they would take a dispute to a magistrate’s court. Difficulty in access was cited to be a key deterrent for those respondents who stated they would not attempt to access the services of a magistrate’s court. Approximately one third of respondents (37.8%) reported concerns about corruption related to the magistrate’s courts.
(iii) Traditional/Informal justice: Over half (58.9%) of respondents reported that they were fully confident in their local informal/traditional justice leaders. Explored further, 57.8% of the sampled population cited their town/village chief or headman to be the justice leader, which they trusted the most. However, focus group discussions also revealed that the youth particularly feel marginalised within traditional/informal justice systems, due to bias or perceptions of bias. The absence of a uniform system was also reported to cause nepotism and unfair treatment throughout traditional/informal justice sectors.
(1v) Other state service providers Approximately three-quarters (74.9%) of the sampled population had heard of the Human Rights Commission; and a high proportion of those aware of this organisation could accurately provide information on what this organisation aims to achieve. Approximately one quarter (23.4%) of the sampled population cited the FSU as the authority of choice to seek help from if a woman is sexually assaulted. A high proportion (85.9%) of respondents reported to be happy with the service the FSU provides. Those individuals who reported to be dissatisfied with FSU services cited problems in access
viii
(location) and cost as key factors, which negatively affect their perception of this organisation.
(v) Paralegal and mediation service providers A small proportion (12.5%) of the sampled population reported to have heard of a paralegal/mediation service provider within their community. Only 8.6% of respondents had used these authorities’ services, with the majority rating their experience with such organisations favourably (86.2%).
(vi) Security Sector The responses to gauge confidence levels in the police were consistent. One in three respondents trust the police are responsive to calls for assistance, and believe the level of police responsiveness has improved consistently in the two years prior to the survey Over half ( 55.8%) of the survey population, cited the police as the key authority to effectively manage sexual assault cases. But then again, opinions were divided about the relationship between the public and the police. 45.2% of the sampled population stated they were partially satisfied with the manner in which the police treat the public. While over half (57.7%) of the survey respondents who had been a victim of crime reported that they had to pay money to a policeman/woman in the last year in order for them to do their job. The family support unit ( FSU) set up by the police to assist families and communities solve domestic and other problems is well known and popular.77.2% of the sampled population stated that they were aware of where the nearest FSU to their household is. 85.9%of survey respondents reported that they believe the local community was happy with the services which the FSU provides.
Vii Conclusion
The results of this perception survey are mixed. There are a number of promising results, which offer opportunity to improve on the safety and security situation in Sierra Leone. Other results bring out aspects, which need further attention. Citizens in both urban and rural locations generally feel safe and secure in their homes and communities. The high level of perceived safety may be attributed to the security measures put in place following the decade long turbulent and unstable political situation. People trust local and informal justice systems. The preference of the informal justice system over the formal justice system is largely due to access and cost considerations and perceptions that formal justice systems are too slow in their response. Several findings in the report suggest that women and men are receiving equal service from the justice and security sectors, which remove concerns about possible discrimination against individuals because of gender. To build trust, security and justice providers should work to change perceptions about corruption and demonstrate that the sectors are committed to serving the interest of everyone, regardless of gender, ethnic background or socio economic status. ix
1.0 INTRODUCTION Experiences and perceptions of safety and security are a fundamental concern influencing an individual’s livelihood. Issues of this nature can in turn have a significant impact on poverty reduction strategies within communities, and on a broader scale; the possibility of countries achieving their Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Vulnerable groups (including women and children) often suffer disproportionately from bad policing and a weak, corrupt justice system; increasing problems of crime, insecurity and fear. Such groups are consequently less likely to access government services, invest in improving their own security and escape poverty1.
Insecurity encourages the international flight of skilled labour and alarms (potential) investors; weakening the economy in regions of low security. Citizens of countries with weakened state security and regulation authorities are often forced to seek alternative measures in search of justice, including gangs and militias2. On-going violence and feelings of insecurity are therefore common characteristics of fragile states3.
Although Sierra Leone is still classified as a fragile state following the decade long civil conflict; more recently, the country has made a significant commitment to fulfil their MDGs. Policies embarked upon have included reducing maternal and child mortality, increasing opportunities for external investment, and strengthening governance/security structures. The United Kingdom (UK) remains one of Sierra Leone’s most significant development partners. The UK’s Department for International Development (DfID) one of the largest donors working in the justice and security sector, with a relationship continuing since the end of Sierra Leone’s civil war.
In 2005, DfID established a comprehensive justice sector development programme (JSDP) and in 2007, the Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) published a justice sector reform strategy, which details how the operations of the justice system can be reformed. This strategy, which is currently coordinated by the Justice Sector Coordination Office (JSCO), recognises that the formal justice system is very difficult to access for the majority of Sierra Leone’s population. A 2006 nationwide perception survey of the Sierra Leone Police found that police discrimination was strong against the poor (70.6%), convicted persons (40.0%), and protesters (36.8%)4. A key emphasis on justice reforms is therefore focused on strengthening the primary justice system, with an aim of meeting the needs of the poor5 and expanding justice services to reach people in local areas.
In conjunction with the Justice Sector Coordination Office (JSCO) and Access to Security and Justice Programme (ASJP), Dalan Development Consultants were contracted to conduct a nationwide survey examining Citizens’ Perceptions and Experiences in Security and Justice (CPESJ). The overall objective of this assessment was to establish baseline information on the
1OECD DAC Handbook on security system Reform 2 IDRC—Governance, Security and Justice (2011) 3 Ross, Julia (2010) MDG Summit: Day 1 Wrap-Up” World Bank Meetings Centre 4 Sierra Leone Police Perception Survey – May 2006 5Building Accountable Justice in Sierra Leone . Working paper 76 – 2009 – By Care Castillego 1 | P a g e
understanding of community security and safety concerns, along with the perceived changes that have occurred within these fields over the last five years; following the implementation of the GoSL’s justice sector reforms.
Survey Objectives More specifically, this assessment aimed to:
Find out which security and justice actors people trust and approach, and how they regard their work. Assess the security and safety concerns citizens have in their communities, and the measures taken to address them. Assess the improvement made in the security and justice sectors- most notably within the past two years. Determine the challenges individuals encounter when approaching security and justice actors (including difficulties experienced by gender specific and further marginalised groups). Assess a citizens’ perception of security and personal safety; taking into account daily safety and security concerns.
Key Concepts/Themes of the Survey This survey sought citizens’ perception of the services delivered by key security and justice authorities, including:
The police Traditional leaders (informal justice sector) Mediation and paralegal services Local courts Magistrate courts Family Support Unit
In particular, the degree of trust respondents have within these institutions was measured. Any preference in security and justice institutions held by respondents was also recorded, alongside their rationale for this inclination. Additionally, the survey endeavoured to determine citizen’s perceptions of the level of quality, accessibility, and availability of these security and justice services.
This report presents the findings of these previously mentioned themes (chapter 4). A brief review of the study’s methodology is summarised in chapter 2; whilst the challenges experienced during the data collection process (chapter 3) situate the context in which the assessment was conducted.
2 | P a g e
2.0 METHODOLOGY
Dalan adopted a combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies to collect the relevant information for the study. Through analysis of these data sources, comprehensive and reliable information was collected in order to address the study’s objectives.
Data was collected at two levels: a) A nationwide household (quantitative) survey, used to gain an understanding of individual perspectives and experiences of security and justice. b) Focus Group Discussions (qualitative) conducted in each district. This provides a deeper understanding of answers provided in the household survey and addressed issues that needed further clarification from the questionnaire.
2. 1 The Household Survey- Quantitative Component a) Household Survey Instrument ASJP provided a draft tool to use for the household survey. This survey questionnaire was piloted twice; firstly by the Dalan technical team, and secondly in pre-testing during enumerator training. This ensured that any difficulties in translation, understanding and delivery were eliminated. Extensive role-play and discussions into the understanding (and implications) of each question were carried out during training, to provide enumerators with the knowledge needed to deliver the instrument’s questions accurately. Minor changes were made to the survey instrument to account for the experience from the pilot testing, all suggested modifications were communicated with ASJP. The finalised survey tool is attached as Annex 2. b)The Household Survey sample A two-stage sampling technique was used for this study: Stage 1: Selection of Enumeration Area (EA)/Clusters Stage 2: Selection of Households and respondents.
Appropriate sampling techniques were applied to select enumeration areas, households and respondents. For the purposes of this survey, there were 30 EAs selected in each of the fourteen districts. In each EA, 7 households (HH) were targeted and in each HH, two respondents were interviewed. Based on this methodology, 420 questionnaires were to be administered in each district, creating a total sample size of 5880 respondents. A detailed description of the sampling process is provided in annex 4, whilst the sample distribution is summarised in annex 5.
3 | P a g e
2.2Focus Group Discussions- Qualitative Component Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were conducted in each district, to complement data collected in the household survey. The focus group discussion topic guide (see annex 3) was piloted twice; firstly by the Dalan technical team, and secondly in pre-testing during enumerator training. Focus groups consisted of the following:
Three FGDs (one youth- mixed group, one adult male and one adult female group in an urban EA). Three FGDs (one youth-mixed group, one male and one adult female group in a rural EA).
A systematic process was used for the selection of enumeration areas to conduct FGDs in order to avoid bias. A complete list of the EAs targeted for FGDs is listed in annex 6.
Field Work
Fieldwork was conducted from the 30th April to 23rd May 2013. A team of 42 enumerators, divided into teams of three to six persons, collected data. Each team covered two districts (with the exception of Koinadugu and Kailahun, which consisted of teams of three- due to the rural nature of some locations). Each team was assigned a supervisor, who also collected data and thoroughly screened/reviewed completed questionnaires on a daily basis. Additionally, supervisors were responsible for the facilitation of focus group discussions. All FGDs were tape-recorded. One technical team member was assigned to each region to conduct fieldwork oversight. The oversight team member observed enumerators’ conduct during interviews/FGDs, and gave constructive feedback to the team during debriefing sessions (primarily to address lapses in their methodological approach). This helped to ensure that the overall quality of fieldwork was high.
Data Management
Quantitative data from the household surveys were entered and analysed using SPSS. Key findings have been categorised and are presented in the form of descriptive statistics, cross-tabulations and charts in report format. The FGD proceedings were transcribed into English, verbatim, after the fieldwork. Following this, the Dalan technical team prepared regional reports that were synthesised and integrated into this final report.
4 | P a g e
3.0 CHALLENGES, UNFORESEEN DEVELOPMENTS AND MITIGANTS
Dalan implemented a number of measures to mitigate risk during the data collection process; summarised in table 1.
Table 1: Measures taken to mitigate risk during fieldwork Risk Measures used To Mitigate Risk Refusal by Dalan provided team members with a letter addressed to community leaders/Chief (and community for further notable leaders within specific communities), explaining the purpose of the study, teams to enter which also sought approval to work in specified communities. Dalan also provided ID cards or collect data for all enumerators/supervisors to avoid scenarios where their identities could be in community misjudged. Show of A customised version of the approval letter was also presented to local police authorities aggression by a in/around surveyed communities, before contact was made with target communities. Cell member or phone numbers of a Police contact were also taken, to use if a community member members of the became physically or verbally violent and cannot be calmed by the team supervisor. community Motorbike In certain rural communities, it was more feasible for each team member to hire Accident motorbikes due to the lack of vehicles in the area. The risk of motorbike accident can be high. Team members were advised to carefully screen motorbike riders, and hire drivers on a weekly basis.
Despite this effort, enumerators naturally encountered a series of challenges which evolved during fieldwork, detailed below.
5 | P a g e
3.1 Challenges
Enumerators faced a number of issues during the fieldwork period, summarised below: Poor Road Network: Some enumerators struggled to access a small number of rural Localities/isolated respondents due to the poor road and transport networks nationally. At times, this resulted in unexpectedly costly journeys; however, energy and commitment to the research survey ensured that all designated areas were reached. Difficulty to Locate Respondents/Streets: Teams in the Western and Eastern regions also experienced challenges in finding the appropriate respondents within specified Localities; for example, in some allocated areas, specific (allocated) streets did not exist/did not contain dwellings for interview or villages were difficult to locate as they had changed their name. In these instances, the enumerators had to ballot again and administer the tool in areas, which existed on the EA list. Language Barrier: Within the Northern region, it was reported that language barriers occurred in certain cases as respondents in Tonkolili, Kambia and Koinadugu districts could only speak Limba, Susu or Koranko—dialects which the enumerators could not conduct interviews in. In order to overcome this linguistic barrier, interviewers employed translators to effectively administer questionnaires. Vacant Rural Communities: There were also instances of enumerators finding rural communities vacant, as residents had gone to work on their farms. Enumerators subsequently had to trace respondents to their farm sites, which were often a considerable distance from the community. Meanwhile within urban areas (particularly Freetown), many respondents were not willing to be interviewed by enumerators due to their demanding lifestyle. In such cases, enumerators used their interpersonal skills to persuade respondents (amidst their busy schedule) to complete the survey, hence the large turnout of completed questionnaires. Enumerator Abandoning Task: One enumerator within the Eastern district abandoned the field without official communication. Promptly, the contract of this employee was terminated and a trained backup was sent immediately to the field to replace the absentee. Respondent Refusals: In the Kolosogoia Chiefdom (Northern region), two women refused to consent to the survey as traditional laws forbid a woman to entertain a stranger in the absence of her husband. In Western urban, a female refused to participate in the survey because of survey fatigue. She said there had been several surveys in her community but no corresponding improvement. Four more refusals were recorded in the Western rural district for reasons ranging from the prospective respondents leaving for work, to a mother taking her sick child to hospital. One lady refused on the grounds that her husband had already been interviewed, and that she did not think there would be any fundamental difference between what she would say and her husband’s, in spite of the enumerator’s efforts to persuade her otherwise.
6 | P a g e
3.2 Unforeseen Developments
Enumerators faced a number of unexpected issues during the data collection process, detailed below: Paramount Chief’s Permission: Work was delayed in Gbangbatoke (Moyamba district), as the Paramount Chief (PC) was away at the time of the team’s entry into the town. The Chiefdom speaker withdrew his initial permission for the team to continue with their work, instructing them to instead wait to gain permission from the PC, which was subsequently granted. Similarly, delays were also experienced in Moyamba town (Southern Region), due to the celebration of Red Cross’ 150th Anniversary, attended by all PC’s in the area. This (alongside issues of communication), delayed receiving permission to conduct FGDs within the district.
7 | P a g e
4.0 FINDINGS
Presentation of the findings Results from the survey are presented in aggregate of all responses, and further disaggregated where relevant and appropriate by district, community type, gender, age group and employment/education profile.
4.1 Respondent Demographics The coverage rate was high: A total of 5878 interviews (99%, 5878 of a targeted 5880) were conducted during baseline field work, with a marginally higher share of male (50.9%) to female (49.1%) respondents. Figure 1 below shows that the highest proportion (22.6%) of the survey population was aged 50 years and above.
Figure 1: Age of sampled population Age of the Sampled Population N = 5760
50 yrs and above 22.6% 45-49 yrs 10.7% 40-44 yrs 11.2% 35-39 yrs 14.6% 30-34 yrs 11.2% 25-29 yrs 13.7% 18-24 yrs 16.0%
Almost seven in ten respondents (69.6%) were married, and 17.6% reported to be single. Only 8.3% of the sampled population, which were married had their marriage registered.
Table 2: Marital status of the sampled population What is your marital status? % N = 5033 Single 17.6% Married 69.6% Cohabiting/Living as married 3.2% Separated/Divorced 3.9% Widowed 5.6%
Shown in figure 2, approximately four in ten (40.4%) of respondents were not employed, and more than half (52.4%) reported to be self-employed.
8 | P a g e
Figure 2: Working Status of sampled population What is your working status? N = 5839
52.4%
40.4%
4.9% 2.2%
Employed Full Employed Part Self Employed Not Employed Time Time
Respondents reported to have attended school for an average of 8.9 years.
50.4% of the sampled population reported to be the head of the household. Female head of households constituted 13% of the sampled population. Almost half (46.8%) of respondents stated that they made the financial decisions within their household; with 31.7% reporting their spouse to be the decision-maker on such issues (whilst 20.3% cited another family member). Shown in table 3 below; the majority (60.7%) of respondents were not aware of their total monthly income of the household from all sources, before tax.
Table 3: Monthly income of respondent What is the total monthly income of your household from % all sources before tax? N = 1726 100,000 Leones or less 8.3% 100,001-300,000 Leones 10.6% 300,0001-500,000 Leones 6.2% 500,001-1,000,000 Leones 2.7% 1,000,001-5,000,000 Leones 0.9% 5,000,001 Leones or more 0.9% Refused 9.7% Don’t Know 60.7%
Approximately three-quarters (75.8%) of respondents were Islamic, whilst the remaining one- quarter of the sampled population reported to be Christian.
As shown in table 4, respondents have invested in mobile phones to be able to connect with family, friends, and others outside their community. They have also invested in radios to stay connected with what is going on in country and with the outside world. Males are more likely to own these assets compared to females. Over half of all males (56.6%) interviewed reported owning a radio and 46.7% a mobile phone, whereas 42.1% of females reported owning a radio and 40.1% of females reported owning a mobile phone.
9 | P a g e
Table 4: Reported ownership of personal assets
Male Female
Mobile Phone N= 2968 N= 2858 1385 (46.7%) 1147 (40.1%) Radio Male Female N= 2970 N= 2858 1681 (56.6%) 1201 (42.1%)
The corresponding proportion of females who reported having their own radio and mobile phone are 42.1% and 40.1% respectively. The distribution by locality displayed in figure 3 confirms that respondents living in urban areas are more likely to own a mobile phone or radio compared to those living in rural areas.
Figure 3: Ownership of personal radio and mobile phones
Ownership of personal radio and mobile phones by location (N=5862)
Village Town City
56.3% No 44.7% 32.10%
Radio 43.70% Yes 55.30% 67.90% 66.90% No 43.30% 25.70% 33.10% Yes 56.70%
MobilePhone 74.30%
When questioned of how often the sampled population listen to the radio; 44.1% were fairly regular listeners, while a slightly higher proportion (45.3%) stated not very often (see table 5 below).
Table 5: Reported usage of radio How often do you listen to the radio? % N = 5849 Never 10.6% Not very often 45.3% Regularly 18% Very often 12.1% Always 14%
All respondents were also asked whether other family or non-family members living in the same housing structure owned any of the following assets: car, motorbike, bicycle or a TV. The majority of respondents do not have access to these types of assets. Television was the most common (12.3%) among the four assets.
10 | P a g e
Figure 4: Ownership of other assets by other household/house members Ownership of other assets in household or house
No Yes
95% Bicycle 5%
93.40%
Motor Bike 6.60%
Assets 77.70% Television 12.30%
96.50% Car 3.50%
% of respondents
4.2 Citizens’ Perceptions of Personal Safety and Security
The sampled population’s perception of personal safety and security both within the home and in the community was initially assessed. On the whole, most respondents, do not seem to have concerns over safety, Over 75% reported that they always or usually feel safe in their homes and communities. When the analysis was restricted to those reporting to be fully confident about their safety, the data shows that over 60% (62.7%) of respondents reported to always feel safe in the home, compared to almost half (49.1%) of the surveyed individuals who reported to always feel safe within their community. Very few respondents stated to never feel safe either in the home (2.4%) or community (4.4%).
11 | P a g e
Figure 5: Perceptions of personal safety and security within the home and community Do you feel safe in your home and community? N = 5861/N = 5855
Home Community
62.7%
49.1%
28.6% 23.4% 18.0% 11.4%
2.4% 4.4%
Always Usually Usually Not Never
By exploring respondents’ perception of safety and security within their communities further by locality, table 6 shows us that the majority ( 84.8%) of village dwelling respondents reported always or usually feeling safe in their community, compared to a relatively smaller proportion of respondents living either within a city (60.9%) or town (67.1%).
Table 6: Perceptions of personal safety and security within the community, by community type Do you feel safe in your community? N = 5802 Always Usually Usually Never Not City 46.5% 14.4% 27.3% 11.7% Town 42.3% 24.8% 27.3% 5.6% Village 52% 32.4% 13% 2.7%
Perceptions of safety and security within the community are further disaggregated by district in table7. Here we can see that respondents in Koinadugu reported to feel most safe, as approximately seven in ten (71.2%) stated that they always felt safe within their community. Conversely, respondents in Kono district were more likely to feel unsafe. Over half (52.7%), of respondents sampled in Kono district reported not feeling safe for most of the time. 16.2% of respondents living within the Western Urban district claimed to never feel safe within the community; a substantial difference to those living in Pujehun and Kambia, where only 0.2% of respondents reported to never feel safe.
12 | P a g e
Table 7: Perceptions of personal safety and security within the community, by district Do you feel safe in your community? N = 5855 Always Usually Usually Never Not Bo 26.6% 47.5% 23% 2.9% Bonthe 45.7% 27% 17.8% 9.5% Moyamba 63.6% 21.9% 9.4% 5.1% Pujehun 41.1% 52.4% 6.2% 0.2% Kailahun 65.6% 31.7% 2.1% 0.5% Kenema 36.6% 26.2% 36.4% 0.9% Kono 21.7% 21.1% 52.7% 4.5% Bombali 70.8% 17.9% 8.6% 2.7% Kambia 40.3% 49.2% 10.3% 0.2% Koinadugu 71.2% 12.2% 13.4% 3.2% Port Loko 35.4% 45.8% 18.5% 0.3% Tonkolili 63.8% 18.8% 15.8% 1.6% Western Urban 58.4% 11.1% 14.3% 16.2% Western Rural 51.1% 17.2% 16.9% 14.8%
Older people are more likely to feel unsafe. About 30% saying that they “usually not” or “never” feel safe in their homes and communities, are 40 years and above. Surprisingly, more males (50.6%) reported feeling unsafe in their homes compared to females (40.4%). On the other hand, the proportion of females and males saying they usually or never feel safe in their communities was about equal (48.4% females and 51.6% males).
For those respondents who usually do not or never feel safe within the home or community, in total, 51.9% reported to be most worried about being robbed. Approximately one fifth (20.7%) also suggested being aggravated and hassled by youths is a key concern influencing a respondent’s perception of safety within the home and community. By disaggregating the data by district, we can see in table 8 that approximately three quarters (76.2%) of respondents in Bo worried about robbery; a significantly higher proportion than in Koinadugu (8.8%). Problems of youth aggravation were most cited in Tonkolili (59.7%) and Koinadugu (45.6%); whereas in Bo, Kenema, Koinadugu and Kono, fear from being robbed is the main issue of concern. Worries of being attacked were most reported in Bonthe (20.6%), Kailahun (14.3%) and Koinadugu (14.7%) districts.
Table 8: Breaches of security that respondents are most worried about, by district* Breaches of security that respondents are most worried about, by district. N= 1148 Being aggravated Being robbed Being attacked People breaking Rape/sexual Being kidnapped Domestic Others by youths into the house violence violence % and Totals 238(20.7%) 595(51.9%) 79(6.9%) 56(4.9%) 20(1.7%) 6(0.5%) 56(4.9%) 95( 8.5%) *Multiple responses possible
13 | P a g e
The FGDs revealed that the majority of respondents cited safety and security to exist in a situation where there are no fears or external threats to either individuals or communities, illustrated by one respondent in the Eastern region:
“Well, in my own opinion, when I say the community is secure when you go to bed and woke up the following morning without hindrance during night, from thieves, or no disturbance from anyone whatsoever, that is what I referred to as safety my area”(Male respondent, Eastern region).
A number of factors were subsequently identified by respondents which threaten such safe and secure conditions (either within the home or community), listed below:
Drug addiction: Within the Southern region, discussions revealed that youths have taken to drug addiction, increasing the presence of crime within specific areas. This includes violent fights/assault, insulting community elders and the raping of teenage girls.
Arson: In Pujehun, respondents cited arson as their greatest security and safety issue in the district. Within the last year, many villages have been set ablaze by unknown assailants.
Robbery: Similar to the findings presented in table 7, across all districts robbery was reported to be a major security issue. FGDs in every district reported theft, including that of livestock, house break-ins, and further valuable assets. Suggested by one respondent in the Eastern region, such incidents significantly affect feelings of security both within the home and community:
“You know Levuma is presently a bad community for us the business people, because this is a place when you are under attack by the thieves at night and you shout for help no person will dare come out to help you or to rescue you from them. For now this community is not secure as you can hear a news of thieves breaking into one house here, tomorrow there is a break into another shop, this kind of activities is tormenting to us the people”(Female respondent, Levuma, Kenema District).
Murder: Reports of murder, cannibalism and ritual killings were also cited in FGDs. For example in Bumpewo (Southern region), a commercial bike rider was reportedly killed, which has dissuaded other bike riders to work at night.
Land Tenure: Issues over land tenure were also cited by several respondents within FGDs to be a major security issue. For example in the Pujehun district, this has led to a serious conflict between two Chiefdoms. Land disputes were also particularly reported in the East, where the noticeable presence of mining companies has been linked to a number of conflicts over land acquisitions.
14 | P a g e
Teenage Pregnancy: Most communities also cited the high presence of teenage pregnancy to be a security threat. Parents of the impregnated child may blame. The father of the unborn child and his family, which could lead to further acrimony between families.
Water Shortages: Within Western region FGDs, water shortages were also cited as a security issue, as this forces women and children to wake late in the night or very early in the morning to fetch water, during which times incidents of rape or the theft of water vessels have been reported.
Reported Response to Disputes within the Community Respondents were also asked a series of questions on what they considered to be both a serious and minor dispute with another person living within the same community. Figure 6 below reveals that in total almost one quarter (23.3%) of the sampled population considered aggression/violence to be a serious dispute with a fellow community member. Land disputes were also popularly cited by approximately one fifth (20.5%) of respondents, whereas few considered inheritance disputes (2.5%) or fraud/swindling (3%) to be a serious disagreement between community members.
Figure 6: Serious dispute with another community member* What would you consider to be a serious dispute with another person living in the same community? N = 5854 23.3% 20.5%
13.2% 10.0% 7.5% 5.8% 2.5% 3.0%
*Multiple responses possible
In discussing minor disputes, approximately four in ten (40.1%) of the sampled population considered verbal abuse by a fellow community member to be a trivial disagreement (see figure 7). Petty theft was also popularly cited by 22.7% of respondents to be a minor dispute, whereas abuse by the Police/authorities (0.3%), licenses/registration (0.4%) or sexual abuse (0.7%) were less frequently considered to be a negligible problem between community members.
15 | P a g e
Figure 7: Minor dispute with another community member* What would you consider to be a minor dispute with another person living in the same community? N = 5844 40.1%
22.7%
12.2% 6.8% 2.7% 1.3% 1.4% 0.4% 0.7% 0.3% 0.7%
*Multiple responses possible
Data was also collected on the authorities a respondent would consider going to for support, if the individual (or a family member) enters into a serious dispute with another person living within the same community.
When asked which mediation authority a respondent would first turn to, overwhelmingly 68.5% of respondents would use the Chief/Headman of their Locality to seek support from during a conflict with another community member (see figure 8 below). 6.2% also cited the Police as an authority to gain support from during disputes with fellow community members. Alternatively, it was then asked which authority the respondent would go to next, should they not be satisfied with the service provided from their first choice option. In this case, one-third (33.3%) of the sampled population reported to seek support from the section Chief, whilst the proportion of respondents choosing to seek support from the Police as a second choice increased to 22.3%.
16 | P a g e
Figure 8: Mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member* Who would you seek support from if entering into a serious dispute with a person living in the same community? N = 5832/N = 5825 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% First 10% Second 0%
*Multiple responses possible
Table 9 below shows the first mediation authority of choice (in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member), disaggregated by community type. Of significance in this case, approximately four in ten (42%) of city dwelling respondents reported to firstly seek support from their Local Chief/Headman, compared to over three-quarters (75.1%) of respondents living in village settings. This is potentially due to the influence and authority held by chiefs/headmen in villages, compared to city dwellings throughout Sierra Leone. Conversely, almost one quarter (23.7%) of the sampled population residing in cities reported to seek support from the Police in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member, compared to only 2.1% of respondents living within a village.
Table 9: First mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member, by community type* First mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member, by community type N = 5778
Chief/ Section The Mammy A Local The Local Mediation Human Chiefdom Head Chief Paramount Queen Religious Police Teacher / Rights NGO Police man Chief Leader Paralegal Services
City 42% 4.2% 0.2% 0.2% 2.4% 23.7 0% 4.7% 1.5% 0% % Town 63.1 8.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.8% 8.7% 0% 0.6% 0.3% 0.1% % Village 75.1 6.3% 1.2% 1.4% 0.5% 2.1% 0.1% 0.5% 0.2% 0% % *Multiple responses possible 17 | P a g e
Table 10 below shows the frequency of respondents ‘first choice mediation authority in the event of a dispute with a fellow community member, by district. Again, from this we can see that a greater number of respondents chose to turn to their Chief/Headman for support across all districts.
Table 10: Choice mediation authority, by district DISTRICT Chief/ Section Paramount Mammy Local The Local Local Human Head Chief Chief Queen Religious Police Mediation/ Police Rights man Leader Paralegal Partnership NGO Service Board Bo 47 1 2 5 5 Bonthe 89 25 11 4 5 Moyamba 118 25 7 2 5 3 Pujehun 54 11 2 1 1 1 Kailahun 92 13 2 2 2 1 Kenema 100 15 1 4 3 14 Kono 142 8 1 5 6 3 6 Bombali 56 7 1 4 5 Kambia 102 3 1 1 2 Koinadugu 43 7 27 9 1 2 1 Port Loko 78 14 4 2 1 Tonkolil 50 3 5 W/A Urban 39 2 2 4 1 W/A Rural 75 1 1 6
Respondents were also questioned on their choice mediation authority, if experiencing a serious problem or dispute with a person within their household. The figure below shows us that 24.5% of respondents would seek the support of their Local Chief/Headman when in dispute with an individual living within the same household. Of the respondents who cited other, family members (43.2%), neighbours or friends (4.0%) and landlords (7.4%) were mentioned as key individuals to turn to in the event of a serious dispute with a person within the household.
18 | P a g e
Figure 9: Mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow household member
Who would you seek support from if entering into a serious dispute with a person living within the same household? N = 5656
55.4%
24.5%
3.7% 2.8% 2.8% 4.4% 3.0% 0.9% 1.7% 0.6%
The data was further analysed to examine preferred choice mediation authority for females. The distribution is shown in table 11.
Table 11: Females first mediation authority of choice, in the event of a dispute with a fellow household member Females mediation authority of choice % N = 2786 Family members 1323 (47.5%) Village/Town/Chief or headman 621 (22.3%) Landlord Caretaker 216 (7.7%) Local Religious leader 108 (3.9%) The Police (SLP) 98 (3.5%) Neighbours/ Friends 97 (3.5%) Section Chief 87 (3.1%) Mammy Queen 72 (2.6%) Paramount chief 61 (2.2%) A local mediation and or paralegal services NGO 40 (1.4%) Local teacher 22 (0.8%) Human rights NGO 13 (0.5%) Handle myself 14 (0.5%) Local Magistrate Court 7 (0.3%) Advise to be patient 5(0.2%) Chiefdom police 0 Don’t Know 2 (0.07%)
Females tend to rely more on family members to solve a dispute with another household member. Over half (47.5%) will consult a member of the family to intervene in order to resolve internal household disputes. Other females look up to local chiefs (22.3%) and landlords (7.7%), to facilitate reconciliation.
The sampled population were also questioned on the advice they would provide, if they knew a woman within their community was being beaten by her husband. The figure below reveals that
19 | P a g e
about one in four (26.7%) respondents recommends that the victim reports the matter to the police. Surprisingly, 15% of respondent’s preference is to do nothing.
Figure 10: Advice provided/actor of choice if a woman was being beaten by her husband What advice would you provide/who would you turn to if a woman within your community was being beaten by her husband? N = 5679
Settled by family members 11.6%
Do nothing 15.4%
Another justice provider 12.2%
Local Mediation service 14.3%
Human Rights NGO 4.8%
Mammy Queen 9.6%
Police 26.7%
Table 12: Advice provided by females if a woman was being beaten by her husband Females mediation authority of choice % N = 2803 Go to police 704 (25.1%) Do nothing 474 (16.9%) Go to local mediation provider 384 (14.7%) Settled by family members 360 (12.8% Go to another justice provider 302 (10.8%) Go to mammy queen 281(10%) Go to human rights NGO 124 (4.4%) Family support unit 45 (1.6%) Divorce 29 (0.9%) Apologize to each other 7 (0.2%) Friends and/or Neighbours 5 (0.2%) Husband 2(0.1%) Magistrate /Local court 1 (0.04%) Don’t Know 13 (0.5%)
When the pattern of responses was examined exclusively for females, the results were similar to the pattern of response obtained for the total population. One in 4 females (25.1%) would advise another female who was been beaten by her husband, to request for help from the police. About 13% (12.8%) of the 2803 women who responded to this question, mentioned seeking help from a family member to intercede.
20 | P a g e
4.3 Citizens’ Perceptions and Experiences of the Justice Sector
4.3.1 Public perceptions and experience of traditional/informal justice: Chiefs/Headmen’s administration of justice- Enabling factors & barriers to access
The informal justice sector, for the purpose of this survey, includes the Section Chief, Town/Village Chief or Headman, Mammy Queen and the Paramount Chief. Data on the confidence citizens have in local leaders was collected, to gauge the perceived capability of such authorities in administering justice. About one quarter (26.2%) of the sampled population had experienced a dispute or problem within the past two years, which was resolved by a local leader.
48.6% of the sampled population who reported to have experience in a dispute resolved by a local leader within the past two years were directly involved in the case (shown in table 13).
Table 13: Profile of the respondents with experience with Local leaders* Profile of the respondents with experience with local % leaders N = 1533 The respondent 48.6% Female family member (under 25) 9.4% Male family member (under 25) 8.8% Female family member (over 25) 15.1% Male family member (over 25) 18.1% *Multiple responses possible
In general, the majority of disputes taken to local leaders were cases of domestic violence (15.6%), aggression and general violence (14.2%), along with reported cases of issues with neighbours (13.3%). Other issues cited included the failure to repay loans/debt, damage of livestock or further personal property and problems with business contracts.
Table 14: Reported dispute requiring local leader's action Main reason for the dispute % N = 1539 Marriage breakdown 10.1% Land dispute 13.1% Inheritance dispute 2.7% Aggression/violence (general) 14.2% Domestic violence 15.6% Sexual attack 5.5% Robbery/burglary 4% Problems with neighbours 13.3% Fraud/swindling 6.9% Employment dispute 0.7% Damage resulting from services provided (litigation) 0.3% Environmental problems/damage 1.4% Abuse by Police/authorities/security personnel 0.4% Other 16.8%
21 | P a g e
With the hope of resolving such conflicts, respondents predominantly reported to take the dispute firstly to their village/town Chief or Headman (71.1%). Shown in figure 11; of the cases that were then taken further, in approximately one fifth (21.6%) of occasions, the services of the Section Chief were then used.
Figure 11: Mediation authority of choice Where was the dispute taken to? N = 1538 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% First 0.00% Second
Of the reported cases in which respondents were directly involved, 67.9% of the sampled population suggested that the issue was dealt with fairly by local leaders. Similarly, of the surveyed sample reporting a case involving a family member, 67% stated that it was dealt with fairly.
Figure 12: Fairness of traditional/informal justice authorities
22 | P a g e
Do you think that the issue/matter was dealt with fairly? N = 1038/N = 772
Case was dealth with fairly Case was dealt with unfairly Don't Know
67.9% 67.0%
26.5% 21.1% 11.9% 5.6%
Case respondent was directly involved in Case respondent was indirectly involved in
Disaggregated by district, table 15below shows us that the highest proportion of respondents directly involved in a case resolved by local leaders who regarded dispute resolution to be fair existed in Kambia (85.5%). Meanwhile, surveyed individuals in Pujehun District reported the lowest levels of satisfaction with local leaders(58%).
Table 15: Percentage of respondents who regard dispute resolution by Local Leaders as fair, by district District No of % of respondents % of Chiefdoms in who reported the respondents which issue was dealt who reported respondents with fairly: the issue was were Directly involved dealt with surveyed in case fairly: Indirectly involved in case Bo 15 59.5% ( N=42) 82.1% ( N=28) Bonthe 11 79.1% ( N=115) 64.2% (N=67) Moyamba 13 73.9% ( N=119) 65.5% (N=55) Pujehun 11 58.8% (N=51) 56.6% ( N=53) Kailahun 14 52.9% (N=68) 63.6% (N=44) Kenema 14 74% (N= 73) 73.7% (N=76) Kono 16 71.2% (N=125) 82.2% ( N=73) Bombali 13 69.4% ( N=62) 90.4% (N= 52) Kambia 11 85.5% (N=76) 91.7% ( N=48) Koinadugu 7 84.1% (N=44) 74.6% (N=59) Port Loko 11 76.1% (N= 67) 90.7% ( N=43)
Tonkolili 11 76.1% (N= 55) 83.3% (N=36) Western 9 65.5% (N=29) 65.4% (N=26) Urban Western 13 63% (N= 54) 70.4% ( N=27) Rural
23 | P a g e
AVERAGED 169 71.8% (N=980) 75.1%( 687) TOTAL
Respondents (who suggested that local leaders did not deal with their case fairly) primarily reasoned this to bias existing within their decision-making (39%) and the outcome decision being unfair due to corruption (23.2%).Annex 7 gives a breakdown of respondents’ views by chiefdom.
Table 16: Reasoning for the reported dissatisfaction with Local leaders Key reasoning for dissatisfaction with the service % provided by Local leaders N = 405 The justice was biased in his/her decision 39% The justice provider did not obtain all the relevant 19.5% information in order to make a proper judgement Compliant was pressured into dropping the compliant 9.1% The sentence/punishment was too light 1.5% The decision was not fair due to corruption 23.2% Other 7.7%
In total,67.3% of respondents reported to be satisfied with the manner in which the case was handled by Local leaders, even if the result was not in their/their family’s favour. Meanwhile, a very similar proportion (63.7%) of the sampled population stated that the work of local chiefs in dispute resolution has changed for the better over the past two years.
Figure 13: Reported satisfaction with Local Leaders Were you satisfied with the manner in which Over the past two years, how do you think the case was handles by Local leaders? the quality of work of Local Chief's in N = 1501 resolving disputes has changed? N = 1524 Yes Partially No Better Worse No Change Don't Know
5.0%
23.9% 25.5% 8.7% 67.3% 63.7% 5.8%
Citizens’ perception of trust in informal justice (traditional leaders) was also assessed within the household survey, with the findings presented below. Nearly six in ten (58.9%) of respondents reported to be ‘fully confident’ in their local Section Chief or town/village Headman or Mammy Queen to administer justice fairly (i.e. resolve problems/disputes between people), whilst only 8.7% said they were not confident.
24 | P a g e
Figure 14: Confidence level in Local Chiefs How confident are you that your local Section Chief or Town/Village Chief or Headman or Mammy Queen ‘administers justice’ (resolves problems/disputes between people) fairly? N = 5837
4.1% 8.7% Fully confident Partially confident 28.2% 58.9% Not confident Not sure
Disaggregated by gender, the figure below shows us that very little difference exists between male and female reported levels of confidence in local/traditional leaders to administer justice (i.e. resolve problems/disputes between people) fairly.
Figure 15: Confidence level in Local Chiefs, by gender How confident are you that your local Section Chief or Town/Village Chief or Headman or Mammy Queen ‘administers justice’ (resolves problems/disputes between people) fairly? N = 5837
Female Male
5.0% Not sure 3.3%
8.4% Not confident 9.0%
27.7% Partially confident 28.7%
58.9% Fully confident 59.1%
Table 17below reveals little significant difference between the respondents reporting that they were fully confident in their local chief to administer justice fairly, when disaggregated by age. Most notable in this case is the lower proportion of younger respondents aged 18-24 years reporting to be partially confident in their local chief to secure justice fairly (25.3%); compared to elder respondents aged 40-44 years (31.6%).
25 | P a g e
Table 17: Confidence level in Local Chiefs, by age group N = 1297 Fully Partially Not Not sure confident confident confident 18-24 years 60.4% 25.3% 8% 6.4% 25-29 years 61.2% 26% 9.4% 3.4% 30-34 years 54.2% 29.8% 10.7% 5.3% 35-39 years 60.9% 28.6% 7.2% 3.3% 40-44 years 55.4% 31.6% 9.6% 3.4% 45-49 years 58.9% 31.5% 7.7% 1.9% 50 years and 59.6% 27.3% 8.6% 4.5% above
Figure 16 below reveals that Paramount Chiefs also received high ratings of confidence by respondents. When questioned how confident respondents were that their Paramount Chief ‘administers justice’ (i.e. resolves problems/disputes between people) fairly, just over half (53.8%)reported to be fully confident. Only 5.9% of the sampled population stated they were ‘not confident’ in their PC’s administration of justice.
Figure 16: Trust level in Paramount Chiefs How confident are you that your local Paramount Chief ‘administers justice’ (resolves problems/disputes between people) fairly? N = 5686
Not Applicable 13.0%
Not sure 4.1%
Not confident 5.9%
Partially confident 23.1%
Fully confident 53.8%
The household survey also found that the confidence level in the town/village Chiefs/Headman remained unwavering. This trust and confidence could be because these particular types of Chiefs reside in the same localities as their subjects, unlike section and Paramount Chiefs who reside over dozens of communities. This one-to-one relationship between the village/town Chiefs and their subjects could be an important factor in the level of trust individuals have in their local leaders. Figure 17showsthat nearly six in ten (57.8%) of the sampled population trust the town/village Chief or Headman most in administering justice. Their coexistence could send fear in the Chiefs and minimise or eliminate bias. Only 3.3% of respondents reported to trust the Mammy Queen most. However, it must be noted that not all communities have active Mammy Queens.
26 | P a g e
Figure 17: Trust level in traditional leaders
Which of the following type of traditional leaders do you trust the most in administering justice? N = 5800
Town/Village Chief or 9.1% Headman 3.3% Section Chief
20.4% Paramount Chief
57.8% Mammy Queen 9.4% None
The survey considered equity issues from a number of different angles. Asked if the town/village Chiefs or Headmen are sensitive to the problems and needs of women when performing their roles as justice administrators, over seven in ten male (72.2%) and female (70.7%)respondents stated ‘yes’, whilst a similar proportion of men (12.3%) and women (12%) suggested that local leaders are not gender-sensitive.
Figure 18: Traditional/informal justice authority's sensitivity to gender difference, by gender Do you think that the local Town/Village Chiefs/Headmen understand and are sensitive to the problems and needs of women and girls when they mediate or decide on cases brought to them? N = 5683
Male Female
72.2% 70.7%
15.5% 17.3% 12.3% 12.0%
Yes No Don't Know
From exploring this further by age group, table 18shows that a marginal difference exists between the younger respondents (aged 18-24) reporting that local leaders are not sensitive to the problems/needs to women and girls, compared to respondents aged 40-49 years. The household
27 | P a g e
level data suggests that youths do not feel local leaders can be biased in their judgement because of age.
Table 18: Traditional/informal justice authority's sensitivity to gender difference, by age group N = 5756 Yes No Not Sure 18-24 years 70.5% 11.1% 18.4% 25-29 years 70.9% 11.9% 17.2% 30-34 years 71.3% 11.6% 17% 35-39 years 73.2% 11.2% 15.6% 40-44 years 68.2% 15% 16.8% 45-49 years 74.2% 14% 11.7% 50 years and 71.9% 11.5% 16.6% above
However FGDs with male, female and youth groups across the districts of Sierra Leone revealed that youths particularly feel unfairly treated by traditional leaders, as most rulings are judged against them; whilst adolescents also reported to be heavily (and perhaps unfairly) fined.
One strong advantage of traditional leaders is that they mostly live in the same communities as the people between whom they arbitrate. This automatically eliminates (or at least reduces) costs of transportation to access justice. Proximity also means that because these chiefs live in the same community as their subjects, they may be cautious in passing unfair judgements as this could breed bad blood between not only the Chief, but also his family and the aggrieved family members.
Nevertheless, respondents in FGDs raised a number of noteworthy concerns, listed below:
Lack of Uniform Fine system: FGD respondents complained that the traditional justice system does not postulate a uniform fining system. This limitation provides chiefs with too much discretion that may expose them to accusations of bias and favouritism.
Weak Monitoring system: Furthermore, FGD respondents reported concern that there are only a few monitoring mechanisms in place to regulate the excesses of these Chiefs. This may allow the economically better off to influence a chief’s decision-making during issues of justice and security, even though this weakness is not unique to traditional leaders.
Customary laws not universal: Again, FGD respondents expressed concern that customary laws (used by traditional leaders and Local Courts) are not universal. Thus, laws are dependent on several variables, which include culture, region and tribe. An action could subsequently be classified as criminal in one region and normal in another.
Nepotism/Favouritism/youth injustice: From discussions throughout FGDs, it was frequently reported that traditional leaders rarely pass guilty judgements against their relatives. Youths particularly complained of not getting fair judgements against non-youths, illustrated below:
“…I am one of the youths in this town. We the youths are really suffering in the hands of the Chiefs, whenever there is a conflict between us and anyone in this town, the Chiefs will delay that 28 | P a g e
case, and at the end, extort money from us and end up giving us wrong, even though in most of the cases we are right. There is no justice for the youths in there courts in this town” (Youth respondent, Southern region).
Gender bias: Unlike survey findings, which found that 71.6% of respondents reported that town/village Chiefs or Headmen are sensitive to the problems and needs of women when performing their roles as justice administrators; a number of FGDs suggest that women experience disproportionate treatment from traditional leaders. Exemplified in the quote below, females may be targeted due to their disempowerment within communities:
“The Chiefs are using the sour relationship they have with us as a weapon to hit the women folks. Very heavy fines are being levied on the women; it does not matter if they are the complainant or defendant in a case”(Adult male respondent, Kailahun).
In the Western FGDs, it was revealed that general traditions exist whereby the wife does not have any rights over her husband in Local court, even when her husband is at fault.
4.3.2 Public perceptions and experience of formal justice: Local and Magistrate Courts- Enabling factors& barriers to access The sampled population’s perceptions and experiences with both Local and Magistrate Courts were also elicited, with the findings detailed below.
Local Courts Local courts administer justice at Chiefdom and section town levels. Although the courts have chairpersons, the Paramount Chiefs wield a lot of power in them. The PC is the highest-ranking traditional and political leader of the Chiefdom with lifetime tenure of office.
When questioned on the types of legal issues/disputes respondents would take to a local court, respondents most frequently cited incidences of assault (44%), domestic violence (33.8%) and land disputes (31.7%).
29 | P a g e
Figure 19: Reported legal issues taken to Local Court* What types of legal issues/disputes would you take to Local Court? N = 5845
Licenses/registration 0.4% House/land purchase 1.8% Mining and environmental issues 1.8% Employment contract issues 3.3% Inheritance issues 6.8% Sexual assault/rape cases 21.8% Assault cases 44.0% Paternity/maintenance issues 2.3% Business contract issues 21.5% Land disputes 31.7% Domestic violence 33.8% Separation/divorce 15.8%
*Multiple responses possible
Overall, 53.4% of the sampled population reported to be fully confident that their local court administers justice (resolving problems/disputes between people) fairly.
Figure 20: Reported confidence in Local Courts How confident are you that your Local Court administers justice fairly? N = 5758
Fully Confident Partially Confident Not Confident 8.0%
38.5% 53.4%
In total, 20.9% of male respondents and 14.1% of female respondents had personally or remotely (through family/close friends) been involved in a case in a local court within the last two years (see figure 21).
30 | P a g e
Figure 21: Respondent experience with Local Courts Have you or any of your close family or friends been involved in a case in the Local Court in the last two years? N = 5839
Yes No
85.8% 79.0%
20.9% 14.1%
Male Female
Primarily, a respondent’s reported involvement with local courts was in the role of a complainant (52.7%); shown in table 19 below.
Table 19: Respondent role during interaction with Local Courts Respondent role during interaction with Local Courts % N = 1030 Complainant 52.7% Defendant 34.2% Witness 10.1% Other 2.2%
Shown in table 20, respondents’ experience with local courts generally existed due to reports of assault cases (20.9%) and land disputes (20.6%).
Table 20: Respondent’s experience with Local Courts* Respondent’s experience with Local courts % N = 1031 Separation/divorce 10.9% Domestic violence 26.1% Land disputes 20.6% Business contract issues 21.4% Assault cases 20.9% Sexual assault/rape cases 7% Inheritance issues 2.5% Employment contract issues 1.8% Mining and environmental issues 0.7% House/land purchase 0.7% Licenses/registration 0.3% *Multiple responses possible
The figure below reveals the percentage of respondents reporting to be satisfied with their local court, having either directly or indirectly experienced the justice process within this institution. 31 | P a g e
From this we can see that in the majority of occasions where the sampled population are either directly involved (58.6%) or indirectly involved (60.3%) in a case, the respondent reported that the decision made on the outcome of proceedings was fair.
Figure 22: Reported satisfaction in Local Courts, from experience with these authorities Do you believe that the decision was fair? N = 640 / 546
Directly Involved in case Indirectly involved in case
58.6% 60.3%
23.3% 18.9% 15.6% 17.8%
2.5% 3.1%
Yes Partially No Not Sure
Explored further by gender, table 21 reveals that a greater proportion of male respondents directly involved within a local court case (37%) reported that the final outcome/decision was fair, compared to 21.6% of surveyed females. This significance also existed for local court cases in which respondents were indirectly involved in, as here 35.8% of males compared to 24.6% of females reported that the outcome was fair.
Table 21: Reported satisfaction in Local Courts, from experience with these authorities; by gender For the case the respondent was directly involved in For the case the respondent was indirectly N = 640 involved in N = 545 Yes Partially No Not Yes Partially No Not Sure Sure Male 37% 7.6% 13.9% 1.6% 35.8% 10.3% 10.3% 1.7% Female 21.6% 7.8% 8.9% 1.6% 24.6% 7.2% 8.3% 1.5%
Meanwhile in total, figure 23 shows that approximately half (51.2%) of the sampled population who had experience with local courts reported to be fully confident in their ability to deliver justice fairly.
32 | P a g e
Figure 23: Reported confidence in Local Courts, from experience with these authorities Respondents with experience with Local Courts: How confident are you that your Local Court(s) delivered justice fairly? N = 1231
51.2%
28.4%
15.4%
4.8%
Fully confident Partially confident Not confident Not sure
Table 22 shows respondents’ perception of Local Courts and their ability to administer justice, disaggregated by gender. In total respondents rated the Local Courts and their decisions averagely, as the majority (24.6%) reported their Local Court to be ‘Acceptable’ (i.e. neither fast nor slow, but fair). A similar share of the sampled population (24.2%) cited their Local Court to ‘Very slow but fair’. Disaggregated by gender, there are no significant differences between male and female ratings.
Table 22: Gender ratings of Local Court administration of justice
Gender ratings of Local court administration of justice N = 5802 Very fast and very Very fast but Acceptable (neither fast Very slow Very slow fair unfair nor slow, but fair) but fair and unfair
Male 23.2% 8.8% 22.9% 23.7% 21.3% Female 20.5% 8.3% 26.3% 24.7% 20.2% AVERAGED 21.9% 8.6% 24.6% 24.2% 20.7% TOTAL
Explored further by community type, reported opinions vary considerably, particularly between cities and villages. Mostly, local courts exist within village set ups, which could be the differing factor between these opinions. While 30.2% of city residents reported local courts to be ‘very slow and unfair’, only 18.1% of village residents support this opinion. Similarly, whilst almost one quarter (24%) of villagers reported local courts to be ‘very fast and very fair’, 16.8% of the city dwelling respondents concurred. Studied closely, opinions waned from villages to cities, especially regarding the effectiveness/fairness of the courts. While the cities gave low ratings, their village counterparts rated the courts comparatively high.
33 | P a g e
Table 23: Ratings of Local Court administration of justice, by community type
Ratings of Local court administration of justice, by community type N = 5682 Very fast and Very fast but Acceptable Very slow Very slow very fair unfair (neither fast but fair and unfair nor slow, but fair) City 16.8% 10.1% 18.4% 24.6% 30.2% Town 17.9% 7.3% 22.9% 27.9% 23.9% Village 24.0% 8.7% 26.0% 23.2% 18.1%
Disaggregated by employment type, a small minority (7%) of the sampled population that were employed full time rated the local court to be very slow and unfair, a smaller proportion to those self-employed (19.1%) or not employed (21.5%).
Table 24: Ratings of Local Court administration of justice, by employment status Ratings of Local Court administration of justice, by employment status N = 5682 Very fast Very fast Acceptable Very Very and very but (neither slow but slow fair unfair fast nor fair and slow, but unfair fair) Employed full time 20.9% 4.7% 44.2% 23.3% 7% Employed part time 24% 16% 24% 12% 24% Self employed 21.8% 12.1% 25.2% 21.9% 19.1% Not employed 19% 13.5% 22.9% 23.1% 21.5%
In total, about half (50.6%) of respondents believed that local courts do not treat women as fairly as they treat men. Explored further by gender, table 25 shows us that a similar proportion of both male and female respondents believed that local courts do not treat women as fairly as men. When further disaggregated by age, again, we see little variance between age groups reporting whether local courts treat men and women fairly.
Table 25: Reported gender equality of the Local Court, by gender and age group Reported gender equality of the Local court, by gender and age group
SEX Yes No Don’t Know N = 5353 Male ( N= 2747) 52.8% 26.5% 20.7% Female (N= 2606) 48.4% 24.6% 27% Total 50.6% 25.6% 23.9% AGE N= 3830 18-24 years ( N= 640) 53.9% 23.9% 22.2% 25-29 years( N=544) 51.5% 28.9% 19.6% 30-34 years (N=432) 51.2% 23.4% 25.4% 35-39 years(N=583) 55.6% 23.0% 21.4% 34 | P a g e
40-44 years(N=414) 50.5% 27.3% 22.2% 45-49 years (N=403) 51.9% 30.3% 17.8% 50 years and above(N=814) 49.4% 25.1% 25.5%
Significant difference in opinion does exist regarding the level of corruption within local courts, particularly between cities and villages (see Figure 24).Whilst almost three quarters (72.1%) of city respondents reported that corruption is an issue in local courts; only 53.8% of village respondents hold the same view. Despite this variance, both village and city dwellers did report that corruption is an issue in local courts.
Figure 24: Perception of corruption in Local Courts, by community type What are your views about corruption in the functioning of the Local Courts? N = 5567
Corruption Not an Issue Corrupton an Issue
72.1% 64.6% 46.2% 53.8% 27.8% 35.4%
City Town Village
To gain comparative data on choice mediation authorities, respondents were then asked whether they would prefer to have a case decided by a local chief/traditional leader or local court. In total, almost three-quarters (71.5%) reported to rather have a local chief decide a case, when in a conflict/problem with another person, compared to only 17.4% of respondents who would prefer to use the local court.
Figure 25: Preferred mediation authority If you were involved in a conflict or a problem with another person, would you rather have the case decided by a Local Chief/headman or by the Local Court? N = 5806
Chief/Headman Local Court Mammy Queen Don't Know
4.0% 7.1%
17.4%
71.5%
35 | P a g e
In general, respondents reported this was because they were more likely to receive a fair judgement (52.2%) and due to the lower cost (31.5%) of their preferred mediation authority.
Figure 26: Rationale for preference in mediation authority* Rational for preference in mediation authority N = 5393
Less stress/disturbance 15.5%
Punishment more reasonable if you lose the case 8.9%
Cheaper 31.5%
More likely to get a fair judgement 52.2%
Quicker 47.7%
*Multiple responses possible
Of the respondents who stated that they would not use the local court, the majority reported this was because the court costs too much money (49.9%), the process is too lengthy (31.8%) and local courts are located too far away (35.5%).
Table 26: Key reasons the Local Court is not used* Key reasons the Local Court is not used % N = 4940 The court is too far away 35.5% The court costs too much money 49.9% Cases can only be brought by certain types of people 5% Local court Local courts do not treat respondents with 6.4% respect Process is too lengthy 31.8% Need to hire a lawyer 3.3% *Multiple responses possible
Reported Response to Local Courts FGDs with male, female and youth groups across the districts of Sierra Leone raised a number of issues involving the Local Courts, detailed below.
Customary laws not universal: Similar to traditional leaders, local courts also operate using customary laws. These laws are not universal, meaning the different interpretation of laws/action taken against the same crime regularly occurs.
36 | P a g e
‘Money-extortion institutions’: Local courts, like the other formal justice systems, came under immense criticism from FGD respondents for being extortionist and exploitative. The majority of group discussions accused local courts of levying disproportionate fines for trivial offences:
“In the NA court, you cannot get your right if you are not rich. The NA court officials do not have sympathy for people because they are looking for hand-to-mouth. Therefore, fines at the NA courts are very heavy”(Female respondent, Lawana, Southern district).
Indeed, one youth group discussion at Gobaru (Pujehun District) revealed that because these courts have a cap/limitation to how much they fine6 per person/offence, the court chairpersons now underestimate figures on the receipts. For example, if a culprit pays Le. 500,000 as fine, the court administrators would only issue a receipt of fifty thousand or less. This is to prevent any possibility of an auditor uncovering their exploitations. Similar to findings in the survey, FGDs respondents accused the local courts of corruption.
Nepotism and Favouritism: Similar to traditional justice authorities, many group discussions across the country revealed accusations of nepotism exhibited by local court administrators. This can include the court’s affiliation with either the complainant or defendant influencing the outcome of local court cases, and being influenced by Paramount Chiefs (who oversee the workings of local court Local courts).
Injustice and youth marginalisation: Some communities reported injustice meted out to certain groups of people, mostly the youth and the poor. Youth respondents claim that most times cases are wrongly judged against them and that disproportionate fines are levied. When youths cannot pay these fines, they are usually banished from their communities. The Pujehun (urban) youth FGD included two participants who were victims of banishment from other communities within the district. According to youth groups, the local authorities do not investigate cases involving them thoroughly and hastily hand down prejudicial verdicts against them. These, according to the Pujehun youths, could lead to disgruntlement and subsequent rebellion:
“R4: Before answering your question, the last speaker spoke about being driven from this town R3: Yes, I said so—it is a practice here in Mende land; it is common M: Okay… R3: In other communities, when you are found guilty of wrongdoing, you will be fined for it; but here it is different. That is what brings rebellion in communities especially when people are driven out of their settlements. They will never harbour positive thoughts for the community, but revenge. M: Do you know of anyone that was driven from this community or from another town? R3: I am one of the victims of that act…” M: Do you have any other thing to say concerning this issue? R2: Yes, I am going to start with my own village, GiemaKpaka. This town has many youths. Whenever the youths are reported to the Chiefs and are summoned, they will fine them in such a way that they cannot pay the fine. That is why we have many youths from GiemaKpaka in other villages. If, for example, you fine someone thirty thousand Leones for a five thousand Leones debt,
6 One youth suggested that it’s maximum Le. 50, 000 (Fifty Thousand Leones) 37 | P a g e
how would you expect him to raise thirty thousand when he could not raise five thousand to pay off the debt? (Youth respondent, Gobaru, Southern District).
This practice of ostracising youths could lead to disgruntlement and threaten security within communities and the country overall.
Unnecessary delays: Additionally, FGDs raised concerns about unnecessary delays in the administration of justice at the local courts. This was attributed to three reasons: (1) either to discourage a disfavoured party to a case, (2) bribery & corruption, or (3) due to the sheer magnitude of the workload. Repeated adjournments of a case may force/urge the involved parties to drop their case:
“Well, for the poor man to seek justice and obtain right is very limited. In our own situation…when it comes to the time for them to give the final verdict, it will be very difficult…because people with money, having noticed that they are wrong in a particular case, they will bribe for the case to be adjourned from one date to another, until the poor man will be tired and fed up…”(Youth respondent, Gobaru, Southern region).
“In the NA court, if you conflict with a well-to-do or rich man, and he spends plenty money in the court, the poor would be deprived of justice” (Female respondent, Lawana, Southern region).
Political Party Allegiance: In the Pujehun district, claims of Chiefs perverting justice and ruling in favour of people belonging to the same party as the Chief were reported. Similarly, in Yamandu, one member (Tribal Authority) of the jury at the local court influenced a ruling against a complainant whom he thought did not vote for him during their local elections. However, Local Courts are easily accessible to citizens: Local court chairpersons reside within their area of operations, providing them with the opportunity to be familiar with local communities. This local residential status may enhance their work because it cuts down on travelling cost and time. Residing within one’s operation also may help one to know the cultures of the people and be better equipped to interact with them both within and without the official precincts. Group discussants expressed concern over the difficulty in accessing the magistrate in certain districts at their times of need:
“Another issue is that we have the Magistrate Court here, but the magistrate comes here once every six months because he alone covers Bonthe, Mattru Jong and Moyamba. So it is like we are not secured as far as the Magistrate Court is concerned”(Male respondent, Mattru, Southern region).
Magistrate Courts
At district level, magistrate courts are the highest judicial body. Unlike local court, trained legal professionals run these courts, and complainants or defendants can hire the services of a lawyer.
38 | P a g e
57.7% of respondents stated that if a person commits an illegal act against them, they would take the matter to the Magistrate’s Court to obtain justice.
Of the 42.3% of respondents who stated they would not, 37.1% reasoned this to a lack of understanding in how to access the Magistrate’s Court/the legal procedure in general. The cost (35.1%) of accessing the court was also a popularly cited factor inhibiting respondents’ access to magistrate courts.
Table 27: Reasoning for disuse of the Magistrate’s Court* Reasoning for disuse of the Magistrate’s Court % N = 2237 Do not understand the procedure/how to access the court 37.1% It would cost too much money 35.1% It would take too long 22.4% Do not know about it 20.5 % Not likely to get a fair judgement 13.2% Other 12.5%
*Multiple responses possible
Respondents were then questioned on how they would access the Magistrate’s Court. In total, the majority (47.9%) of the sampled population would first go to the police, or a local leader (31.8%). Meanwhile, few respondents reported to use a private lawyer (2.7%) or a legal assistance NGO (0.4%). Other sources cited included seeking the advice of a trusted family member, community elder, or a local councillor.
Figure 27: Methods pursued to access the Magistrate’s Court If you have a very serious dispute with someone or they have done something bad against you, your property or your family and you want to take the case to the Magistrate’s Court, what would be your first step? N = 5690
47.9%
31.8%
17.1%
2.7% 0.4%
Go to the Police Go to a private Go to a legal Go to a local leader Other lawyer assistance NGO
Approximately 8.1% of respondents (or their relatives/close friends) had been involved in a case at the Magistrate Court in the last two years. Primarily, this involvement was in the role of a complainant (42.5%), rather than defendant (39.8%) or witness (14.4%).
39 | P a g e
Of the cases taken to the Magistrate Courts, incidents of assault (including sexual assault/rape) were most frequently reported (23.9%), followed by land disputes (16.5%) and domestic violence (16.5%).
Table 28: Types of cases taken to Magistrate Courts
Types of cases taken to Magistrate Courts N =469 Type of Case/issue Total % Separation/Divorce 5.4% Domestic Violence 16.5% Land disputes (including livestock damage) 16.5% Business contract issues 12.6% Paternity/maintenance issues 3.3% Assault cases (including sexual assault/rape) 23.9% Inheritance issues 2.8% Employment contract issues 3.5% Mining and environmental issues 1.1% House/land purchase 5.4% Licenses/registration (e.g. marriages) 0.2% *Multiple responses possible
The survey also sought the sampled population’s perception of satisfaction with cases adjudicated by the Magistrate Courts. Figure 28reveals that the majority of the respondents directly (53.2%) and indirectly (52.2%) involved within court proceedings registered satisfaction with the outcome of the cases. Figure 28: Satisfaction levels of Magistrate Court decisions Were you satisfied that justice was delivered (done) fairly? N = 237/N = 324
For the Case you were involved in For the case your relative/friend was involved in
53.2% 52.2%
27.8% 27% 19.8% 20.1%
Satisfied Partially Satisfied Dissatisfied
Of those respondents either partially satisfied or dissatisfied with the service of magistrate’s courts, 18.7% reported this was because the court was biased in its decision and the decision was not fair due to corruption (18.2%).
40 | P a g e
Table 29: Reported dissatisfaction with the Magistrate’s Court* Reported dissatisfaction with Magistrate’s Court % N = 392 The Magistrate was biased in its decision 18.7% The Magistrate did not obtain all the relevant information 16.8% in order to make a proper judgement The complainant was pressured into dropping the 10.2% complaint The sentence/punishment was too light 9.9% The sentence/punishment was too severe 6.4% The decision was not fair due to corruption 18.2% Other 22.3% *Multiple responses possible
In total,37.8% of respondents reported to believe that the problem of corruption is serious in the functioning of the Magistrate Courts.
The study also endeavoured to seek the surveyed population’s feelings of gender equity issues within the magistrate court. Figure 29shows us that no significant difference in opinion exists between sexes as 29.1% of males, and 27.3% of females believed that women and men received the same level of justice. However, both sexes seemed defensive of their individual genders with men saying that they received worse justice (19.0% against 14.1%), whereas women also hold this opinion (4.4% against 1.8%).
Figure 29: Access to better justice at Magistrate Courts, by gender In your view, how do you think the magistrate courts treat women as compared to men? N = 2786
Male Female
29.1% 27.3% 19.0% 14.1% 1.8% 4.4%
Women get worse justice Men get worse justice Women and men get the same level of justice
Explored further by age group, table 30 reveals that little variance exists between age groups reporting a difference in how magistrate’s courts treat women and men. Again, very few respondents suggested that women received worse justice, whilst a marginally higher proportion (32.5%) of 18-24 year old respondents reported that women and men received the same level of justice, compared to 35-39 year olds (25.8%).
41 | P a g e
Table 30: Access to better justice at Magistrate Courts, by age group N = 2786 Women get worse justice Men get worse justice Women and men get the same level of justice 18-24 years 3.9% 19.7% 32.5% 25-29 years 2.8% 15.6% 27% 30-34 years 2.8% 14.5% 28% 35-39 years 3% 14% 25.8% 40-44 years 2.5% 17.8% 28% 45-49 years 4% 16.6% 30% 50 years and above 2.7% 17.4% 26.7%
Overall, the public’s perception regarding gender equity in justice dispensation was generally high.
Citizens across all districts highlighted some concerns with the Magistrate Court’s dispensation of justice. In addition, few group discussions, (citizens) especially in the eastern region, also expressed that hiring a lawyer at the Magistrate Courts is for the rich or privileged. People would rather drop their case if they had to hire a lawyer, as it is too costly a venture that poor people cannot afford.
4.3.3 Public knowledge and perception of mediation services The study also sought to evaluate the perceptions and experience of citizens with further mediation services (including the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone, Family Support Unit and Paralegals).
4.3.3.1The Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone Almost three-quarters (74.9%) of respondents stated that they had heard of the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone. Of those respondents aware of the Human Rights Commission, approximately three-quarters (75.1%) gained awareness of this authority through media sources (including ratio, TV and newspaper). A high proportion (36.4%) of respondents also cited family, friends and community members as their source of information on the Human Rights Commission (see figure 30).
Figure 30: Awareness of the Human Rights Commission* How/where have you heard about the Human Rights Commission? N = 4399
Family, friends, community members 36.4% Publications, books, reports, leaflets 5.3% Events organised by the HRS SL/District … 5.9% CBOs or NGOs 6.3% College/university 0.9% Primary/secondary school 2.1% Local authorities and/oe local leaders 19.6% Media (radio, TV, newspaper) 75.1%
*Multiple responses possible
42 | P a g e
62.8% of those respondents aware of the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone reported that this authority works to promote human rights (see figure 31). Almost half (49.8%) of the sampled population also stated that the Human Rights Commission works to investigate human rights complaints.
Figure 31: Understanding of the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone* What does the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone do? N = 4386
62.8%
49.8%
27.5%
7.6% 7.7% 1.8% 2.1%
Investigate Promote Conduct Education and Monitor and Advise the Exercise quasi- human rights human rights research and public document Government judicial complaints protection issue reports awareness on human rights and Parliament function with on human human rights violations same powers rights as the High
*Multiple responses possible
4.3.3.2 The Family Support Unit (FSU) Over half (55.8%) of the survey population cited the police as the key authority a respondent or their family would turn to if a girl/woman is sexually assaulted. The Family Support Unit (FSU) was also reported by almost one quarter (23.4%) of respondents; whereas few chose to turn to the Mammy Queen (1.2%), local health clinic (0.6%) or a local NGO (0.5%).
Figure 32: Supportive authority turned to in the event of sexual assault* If a girl or woman is sexually assaulted or raped where can you/the family go for help? N = 5829
A local NGO 0.5%
The Local Health Clinic 0.6%
The Mammy Queen 1.2%
The Local Chief 12.7%
Family Support Unit 23.4%
The Police 55.8%
*Multiple responses possible
43 | P a g e
Those respondents who did not mention the FSU in the foregoing question were then asked whether they had heard of this support body. In total, almost seven in ten (69.3%) respondents reported to be aware of the FSU.
Interviewees aware of the FSU were then questioned on their awareness of what this authority does. In an attempt to ascertain the level of understanding citizens’ have of what the FSU does, the survey then questioned respondents on their awareness of this authority. A series of correct answers were provided in the interviewer’s notes (presented in figure 33);and it was then recorded whether the interviewee correctly identifies any of the predetermined responses. From this, we can see that a substantial number (44.1%) of respondents correctly identified (and were therefore perhaps most aware) that that FSU has social workers and police work together to support families resolve domestic problems.
Figure 33: Awareness of the FSU* If you have heard of the FSU, can you tell me what it does? N = 5378
44.1%
27.7% 26.8% 18.9%
Has social workers and Staff are specifically Specifically trained to Sympathetic and helpful police working trained to help women investigate crimes to victims of sexual and children reported by women and violence children
*Multiple responses possible
77.2% of the sampled population stated that they were aware of where the nearest FSU to their household is. Table 31 illustrates respondents’ awareness of their local FSU by district. Here we can see that fewer respondents in Koinadugu (51.8%) were aware of where their nearest FSU is located, compared to Bo (91.8%) or Pujehun (90.2%).
44 | P a g e
Table 31: Awareness of nearest FSU, by district
Awareness of nearest FSU, by district N = 3776 Aware of nearest Not aware of nearest FSU FSU Bo 91.8% 8.2% Bonthe 73.7% 26.3% Moyamba 77.9% 22.1% Pujehun 90.2% 9.8% Kailahun 88.4% 11.6% Kenema 82.5% 17.5% Kono 76.1% 23.9% Bombali 71.6% 28.4% Kambia 70.6% 29.4% Koinadugu 51.8% 48.2% Port Loko 59.8% 40.2% Tonkolili 79.7% 20.3% Western Urban 67.6% 32.4% Western Rural 77.8% 22.2%
The majority (82.9%) of respondents also stated that any girl or woman who has been sexually assaulted or raped could go and get help from the FSU if they want to.
85.9%of survey respondents reported that they believe the local community was happy with the services which the FSU provides. Of the 7.7% of individuals who are not, 32.4% stated that it costs too much money, whilst over one quarter (26.2%) of respondents also cited that their local FSU is too far away (see table 32).
Table 32: Reported reasoning for dissatisfaction with the FSU* Problem with the FSU Total % N = 5453 FSU is too far away 26.2% It costs too much money 32.4%
It is only open sometimes/people are often 3.5% not there The Police don’t treat you with respect 4.5% They take too long to do everything that 11.8% needs to be done
Similarly, a few FGD respondents also complained of the cost of FSU services, illustrated below: “Even at the Family Support Unit (FSU), except you pay money… a boy stole something from me. I kept paying transportation fare for the Police (FSU) without result, until I became fed-up and dropped the case. I neither received my item nor my expenses back” (Female respondent, Bumpewo, Southern Region).
45 | P a g e
4.3.3.3Paralegals In total, only 8.6% of respondents (or their close family) had experienced a problem or dispute within the past two years which has taken to be resolved by a local organisation providing mediation (conflict resolution) and paralegal services (excluding local chiefs or Mammy Queens).
The majority (37.4%) of these respondents took their case to a religious leader, whilst NGOs providing mediation/paralegal services were popularly cited by 21.7% of respondents.
Figure 34: Authority experienced: Within a case involving Paralegal services Where was this case taken to? N = 489
Other 17.6%
Local Professionals 23.3%
Religious Leader 37.4%
NGO providing mediation/paralegal services 21.7%
The majority of the sampled population using mediation authorities reported incidences of marriage breakdown/separation (12.7%), domestic violence (20.2%) or problems with neighbours (13.9%) to cause them to seek support from such institutes.
Table 33: Reported issue causing use of paralegal/mediation services Reported Issue % N = 490 Marriage breakdown/separation 12.7% Land dispute 8.6% Inheritance dispute 3.7% Aggression/violence (general) 9.2% Domestic violence 20.2% Sexual attack 8.6% Robbery/burglary 3.5% Problems with neighbours 13.9% Fraud/swindling 5.5% Employment dispute 0.4% Damage resulting from services provided (litigation) 0.4% Environmental problems/damage 2.4% Abuse by Police/authorities/security personnel 0.4% Other 10.6%
46 | P a g e
Overall, 86.2% of respondents reported that the case was dealt with fairly- i.e. justice was administered fairly.
Few (12.5%) respondents reported to have heard of a paralegal or local mediation service provider within their community. Disaggregated by community type, figure 35 shows that about a third (31.6%) of city respondents had heard of paralegal or other mediation services, whereas only 7.9% of village residents reported to be aware of these authorities.
Figure 35: Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities by community type Have you ever heard of a) paralegal or b) a local mediation service provider in your area or community? N = 5736
Yes No 92.1% 83.6% 68.4%
31.6% 16.4% 7.9%
City Town Village
Freetown continued to lead in the awareness level of paralegal services, as table 34 shows that about four in ten (42.8%) of the Western Urban sampled population are aware of these authorities. This is sharply contrasted by the proportion in Moyamba District (the least aware) where only 2.3% of the sampled population reported any knowledge of paralegal or other mediation services. This apparent lack of knowledge could be attributed to two things: non- existence of the services in the areas or insufficient publicity of their presence.
Table 34: Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities, by district Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities, by district N = 5788 DISTRICT YES NO Bo 10.9% 89.1% Bonthe 5.5% 94.5%
Moyamba 2.3% 97.7% Pujehun 10.0% 90.0% Kailahun 13.1% 86.9% Kenema 12.5% 87.5% Kono 14.5% 85.5% Bombali 10.6% 89.4%
Kambia 2.7% 97.3%
Koinadugu 4.0% 96.0% Port Loko 4.1% 95.9% Tonkolili 6.0% 94.0% Western Urban 42.8% 57.2% Western Rural 40.2% 59.8%
47 | P a g e
Disaggregated further by gender, table 35 shows us that a marginally greater proportion of male respondents (14%) reported to have heard of either paralegal or local mediation service providers within their community, compared to 11.2% of surveyed females.
Table 35: Awareness of paralegal/mediation services in communities, by gender Have you ever heard of paralegal or local mediation service providers? N = 5853 Yes No Male 14% 86% Female 11.2% 88.8%
For the interviewed individuals aware of paralegal or local mediation service providers in their community, a series of correct answers were provided in the interviewers’ notes (presented in figure 36); and it was then recorded whether the interviewee correctly identified any of the predetermined responses. From this, we can see in the figure below that the majority of respondents (55.3%) are correct in assuming that such authorities exist to provide legal advice, and information (21.7%).
Figure 36: Reported awareness of mediation authorities/paralegal services* Awareness of mediation authorities/paralegal services N = 734
Visit police station or prison 8.8%
Legal awareness or training 9.1%
Negotiations with other parties 14.8%
Helps solve problems 18.5%
Provide legal information 21.7%
Provide legal advice 55.3%
*Multiple responses possible
85.9% of the sampled population stated that paralegal or local mediation service providers in their community would be able to help them if they got involved in a serious conflict with someone.
When questioned on the biggest problems within a respondent’s community that a mediation/paralegal services NGO could assist with, key issues cited included land disputes (21.4%), domestic violence (34.8%) and separate/divorce (17.3%).
48 | P a g e
Table 36: Key issues within a community that mediation authorities/paralegals can assist with* Reported Issue % N = 4718 Separation/divorce 17.3% Domestic violence 34.8% Land disputes 21.4% Business contract issues 4.1% Paternity/maintenance issues 1.5% Assault cases 8.4% Sexual assault/rape cases 2.9% Inheritance issues 0.7% Employment contract issues 0.9% Mining and environmental issues 1.2% Immigration issues 0.1% House/land purchase 0.4% *Multiple responses possible
4.4 Citizens’ Perceptions and Experience of the Security Sector 4.4.1 The Police (SLP) The foregoing discussion has highlighted that a significant share of the sampled population would choose to use the services of the Sierra Leone Police (henceforth SLP) to alleviate community disputes, with the expectation of justice being delivered.
This study therefore attempted to explore citizens’ perceptions and experiences of the Police, in order to accurately gauge whether the sampled population are satisfied with the service provided by this authority.
Figure 37 below depicts the sampled population’s response to a series of questions on the services provided by the SLP. From this, we can see that, approximately, three in ten (30.1%) respondents reported to always have trust in the police to do their job properly. 39.3% of surveyed individuals stated that the local police were responsive to calls for assistance from citizens and community leaders; whilst 31.7% of respondents reported that this responsiveness to requests for police support has improved over the last two years.
Figure 37: General perceptions on the service provided by the SLP
Do you have trust in the police Are the local police responsive to Over the last two years, do you to do its job properly? calls for assistance from citizens think the responsiveness of the N - 5859 and community leaders? SLP to calls for assistance by the N = 5856 local community has improved? Never N = 5853 13.8% Never Never Alway 18.2% 22.3% s Always 30.1% Always 39.3% 31.7% Somet Someti imes mes 46.9% 47.6% Someti mes 50.1%
49 | P a g e
Disaggregated by gender, the table below reveals that a marginally greater proportion of male (40.7%) respondents reported that the local police are responsive to calls for assistance from citizens and community leaders, compared to 37.9% of surveyed females.
Table 37: Responsiveness of the police to calls for assistance from citizens and community leaders, by gender Are the local police responsive to calls for assistance from citizens and community leaders? N = 5820 Always Sometimes Never Male 40.7% 45.3% 14% Female 37.9% 48.5% 13.6%
Meanwhile, the suggested improved responsiveness of the police by 31.7% of survey respondents is further explored by community type in figure 38. This reveals approximately one quarter (25.4%) of city dwellers reported improvement in the responsiveness of police to calls for assistance by the local community; compared to approximately one third (33.4%) of village residents.
Figure 38: Improvement of the Police to calls for assistance by the Local community in the past two years Over the last two years, do you think the responsiveness of the SLP to calls for assistance by the local community has improved? N = 5800
Never Sometimes Always
15.5% Village 51.1% 33.4%
18.5% Town 50.9% 30.6%
31.6% City 43.0% 25.4%
In total, almost half (45.2%) of the sampled population reported to be partially satisfied with the way police officers treat the public (seen in figure 39). Approximately one quarter (25.2%) of respondents claimed to be dissatisfied how police officers handle the public, whilst 29.6% are fully satisfied with their approach to the residents of Sierra Leone.
50 | P a g e
Figure 39: Respondent satisfaction with how Police officer’s treat the public Are you satisfied with the way police officers treat the public? N = 5843
45.2%
29.6% 25.2%
Fully Satisfied Partially Satisfied Dissatisfied
Reported Response to the Police FGDs with male, female and youth groups across the districts of Sierra Leone revealed that some communities perceived the police to be responsible for insecurity, for a number of reasons explored below:
Alliance with renowned criminals
Youth respondents in Mattru Jong (Southern region) suggested that the police connived with criminals to cause disorder within the area. For example, many FGD respondents cited an incident where prisoners and police officers were caught at 1am with stolen property. However, no investigation into this case was pursued, and neither police officer nor prisoner were charged. Additionally, the chief police officer in Yamandu(Southern region) is a rumoured friend to a notorious criminal in the town. A few FGD respondents alleged that this criminal shares his loots with the officer, and is yet to be charged after committing serious offences.
51 | P a g e
Preferential treatment
FDG respondents in the Northern region suggested that women often received preferential treatment by the Police, as they have the potential to build a relationship with an involved officer, illustrated in the quotes below:
“Sometimes if a woman is locked up in a cell she will never sleep in the cell. At night the Police will come and remove her from there to go and sleep with her”.
“The women because sometimes women have a tendency to have a relationship with the Police officer that is handling the case”.
“Women cases do not take long in the hands of the Police because they have a slogan that says ‘woman sababunawase’- that is her influence hinges on her buttocks. They do not need to bribe with money as they already have what the Police want. So men have to be careful not to have a case with a woman” (FGD Youth, Wusu Street, Bombali).
The above quotes reveal that on occasions, the police may be more likely to give preferential treatment to women against their male counterparts in a case, as they are swayed by personal relationships, which in turn can influence how crime incidents are dealt with. Nevertheless, this supposed bias in favour of women must be viewed with extreme caution, as this treatment can also be regarded to be a further exploitation of women (rather than a preferential treatment, as suggested in FGDs).
The differential treatment of male and female respondents by the police was further explored through the study survey. Figure 40 illustrates that the majority of both male (41.5%) and female (40.6%) survey respondents reported that the police treated men and women equally. This contradicted some claims raised in FGDs. Very little difference on the issue of gender equity within the police was found between male and females; nevertheless, a significant share of male (35.5%) and female (34.9%)respondents still reported that they did not believe the police treat men and women equally.
52 | P a g e
Figure 40: Response to the SLP’s treatment of men and women, by gender
Do you think the SLP treats men and women equally? N = 5834
Yes No Not Sure
41.5% 40.6% 35.5% 34.9%
23.0% 24.6%
Male Female
The perceived differential treatment of male and female’s using the police was further disaggregated by age group. From the table below, we can see that in general, little difference in opinion exists between respondents grouped by age. A marginally higher share of 18-24 year olds (38.9%), compared to 35-39 year olds (45%) reported that the SLP treated men and women equally.
Table 38: Response to the SLP’s treatment of men and women, by age group N = 5756 Yes No Not Sure 18-24 years 38.9% 41.5% 19.5% 25-29 years 40.4% 41.4% 18.2% 30-34 years 39.4% 35.5% 25.1% 35-39 years 45% 34% 21% 40-44 years 36.5% 35.6% 27.9% 45-49 years 43.9% 32.3% 23.7% 50 years and 41.7% 28.9% 29.4% above
The majority (57.7%) of the surveyed population stated that they did have to pay money to a Policeman/woman in the last year in order for them to do their job.
Of the respondents who reported to have paid a Policeman/woman in the last year in order for them to do their job, in approximately one third (32.3%) of cases, this was for a crime or incident report to be completed (see figure 41). In 18.5% of cases, respondents reportedly had to pay for a crime to be investigated.
53 | P a g e
Figure 41: Tasks requiring payment to the Police What was it that the policeman/woman required money for? N = 3330
32.3%
20.8% 18.5%
12.9%
To fill out a crime or To investigate a crime To come and resolve a Significant specified incident report problem other: Transport
Further discussions with FGD respondents raised accusations of nepotism prevalent within the Police. Preferential treatment to individuals based on their financial status, sex, personal connection and political affiliations were frequently reported to exist. Closely linked, FGDs across all districts highlighted accusations of the police taking bribes in order for any action to be taken against a reported crime.
This is illustrated below, by an FGD Youth respondent in Bombali:
“They are the most corrupt people in this country. They are always asking for money even if somebody stole your property and you take the person to them, if you do not give them money they will not take any action”(FGD Youth, Wusu Street, Bombali).
In Yamandu (Southern region), FGD participants were of the view that the police were exchanging justice for sex. Apparently, female defendants/accused/suspects offer sex to male Police officers in exchange for justice. The Police in Yamandu were also accused of interfering with local justice institutions by overturning Chiefs’ decisions.
Sampled Population’s Experience with the Police Only 18.8% of survey respondents (or any member of their immediate family) were a victim of crime during the last two years; of which, a total of 87.4% reported the incident to the police.
Approximately one quarter (25.6%) of the surveyed population who had been a victim of crime within the past two years had experienced theft of personal property; whilst almost one third (31.8%) of respondents (or their immediate family) had been a victim of assault).Only 7.9% (88 reported incidences) of all cases were sexual assault cases.
54 | P a g e
Table 39: Experience with the Police* Experience with the Police N = 1097 Crime reported to the Police Assault 31.8% Request for a bribe by a public official 1.3% Sexual assault 7.9% Domestic violence 19.8% Theft of property 25.6% Burglary 2.2% Fraud 11.6% % of cases where the Police carried out an 80.3% investigation of the crime *Multiple responses possible
In total, 87.5% (960 of 1079) of all victims reported their case to the police. Table 40 shows the number of victims who reported their case to the police by gender and by district.
Table 40: Cases reported to the Police, by district and gender District Male Female Total N = 960 Bo 34 27 62 Bonthe 46 20 67 Moyamba 54 25 80 Pujehun 24 18 42 Kailahun 21 10 32 Kenema 72 71 144 Kono 71 66 137 Bombali 19 12 31 Kambia 40 19 59 Koinadugu 42 25 67 Portloko 47 15 62 Tonkolili 41 16 57 W/A Rural 21 18 39 W/A Urban 44 37 81
Most (80%) of the 88 respondents who had directly or indirectly (i.e. through a family member) been a victim of sexual assault mentioned that the case was reported to the police.
Figure 42 below reveals the majority (43.5%) of respondents who have been a victim of crime within the past two years were fully satisfied with the way in which the police dealt with this incidence. Nevertheless, a significant proportion of almost one-third (32.7%) of respondents were dissatisfied with how the police dealt with a specific crime.
55 | P a g e
Figure 42: Respondent satisfaction with how the Police dealt with a specific crime
Were you satisfied with the way the SLP dealt with the crime? N = 1031
Fully Satisfied Partially Satisfied Dissatisfied
32.7% 43.5%
23.9%
Explored further, figure 43 reveals that when disaggregated by community type, a noticeably higher proportion of city dwellers (42.3%) were dissatisfied with the way in which the police dealt with a specific crime, compared to a lesser proportion of respondents residing in villages (29.7%).
Figure 43: Respondent satisfaction with how the Police dealt with a specific crime, by community type
Were you satisfied with the way the SLP dealt with the crime? N = 1031
Dissatisfied Partially satisfied Fully satisfied
29.7% Village 26.1% 44.2%
35.4% Town 20.4% 44.3%
42.3% City 18.9% 38.7%
Overall, 16.8% of the reported cases led to an individual being charged to court (see the table below).
56 | P a g e
Table 41: Reported cases involving the police where an individual has been charged to court Was anyone charged to court? N = 1057 Yes 16.8% No 79.6% Not Applicable 3.6%
4.4.2 Chiefdom &Metropolitan Police In total, 24.8% of the surveyed population reported to be aware of what a Local Partnership Board (LPPB) is. Figure 44 shows that when disaggregated by gender, male respondents (16.2%) were generally more aware of the LPPB compared to female interviewees (8.7%).
Figure 44: Awareness of the LPPB, by gender % of respondents aware of the LPPB, by gender N = 5775 18.00% 16.2% 16.00%
14.00%
12.00%
10.00% 8.7% 8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00% Male Female
Approximately, six in ten (61.7%) respondents who are aware of the existence of LPPB reported to have an LPPB or contactable member of it in their town/Chiefdom. Additionally, almost all (98.8%) of the sampled population aware of the LPPB reported that the board does help the police work to work more effectively. In an attempt to ascertain the level of understanding citizens’ have of what the LPPB does, the survey then questioned respondents on what the LPPB is supposed to work on. A series of correct answers were provided in the interviewers’ notes (presented in table 42); and it was then recorded whether the interviewee correctly identified any of the predetermined responses. From this, we can see that the majority (49.6%) of respondents correctly identified (and were therefore perhaps most aware) that that LPPB works to build a partnership between the community and police.
57 | P a g e
Table 42: Awareness of the LPPB* Awareness of the LPPB N = 1442 Bridge partnership between community and the Police 49.6% Provide the Police with information from Chiefdom and districts 32.5% Help the Police do their job by providing materials or other support 16% Give information to the community, and help mediate cases 14.4% Speak to the Police on 13.2% % of respondents with an LPPB or contactable member of it in their 61.7% town/Chiefdom % of respondents who believe that the LPPB does help the Police work to work 98.8% more effectively *Multiple responses possible
A small minority (9.5%) of the survey sample had heard of the LocalPolice Complaints Board (see table 43). Meanwhile, in discuissing Chiefdom Police, 45.7% of respondents reported that they help to provide security to the population of their town/Chiefdom; whilst a similar proportion (47.4%) reported that Chiefdom Police treat both men and women equally.
Table 43: Response to the local police Complaints Board and Chiefdom Police Response to the local police Complaints Board and Chiefdom Police TOTAL % N = 5812 % of respondent aware of the LocalPolice Complaints Board 9.5%
% of respondents believing that Chiefdom Police help to provide security to the 45.7% population % of respondents believing that the local chiefdom police treat men and women 47.4% equally
A further examination of respondent’s perception of the Chiefdom Police revealed that the majority (44.1%) are satisfied with the way they treat the public, with particular emphasis on the treatment of women and children (see figure 45).
58 | P a g e
Figure 45: Reported satisfaction with the Chiefdom Police Are you satisfied with the way that the local Chiefdom police treat the public (especially women and children)? N = 5556
44.1%
34.1%
21.8%
Satisfied Partially Satisfied Not Satisfied
The reported gender equality of the Chiefdom Police is further explored in figure 46 below. Here we can see that a marginally higher proportion of male respondents (48.3%) reported that the SLP does treat men and women equally; compared to that of female respondents (44.4%).
Figure 46: Reported gender equality of the Chiefdom Police, by gender Does the Chiefdom Police treat men and women equally? N = 5480
Male Female
48.30% 44.4%
30.9% 26.40% 24.80% 24.1%
Yes No Don't Know
59 | P a g e
When disaggregated by age group, we can see that a marginally lower share (46.1%) of younger respondents (aged 18-24 years) reported that the chiefdom police treated men and women equally, compared to almost half (49%) of 45 to 49 year who participated in the survey.
Table 44: Reported gender equality of the Chiefdom Police, by age N = 5441 Yes No Don’t Know 18-24 years 46.1% 26.4% 26.8% 25-29 years 45.2% 27.1% 26.9% 30-34 years 44.4% 23.2% 31.8% 35-39 years 48.1% 24.6% 26.8% 40-44 years 44.9% 25.7% 29.4% 45-49 years 49% 24.7% 26% 50 years and 46.5% 21.4% 31.5% above
5.0 CONCLUSION
The results of this baseline and KAP study are mixed. There are a number of promising results which offer opportunity to improve on the safety and security situation in Sierra Leone. Other results bring out aspects which need further attention. Citizens in both urban and rural locations generally feel safe and secure in their homes and communities. The high level of perceived safety may be attributed to the security measures put in place following the decade long turbulent and unstable political situation. People trust local and informal justice systems. The preference of the informal justice system over the formal justice system is largely due to access and cost considerations and perceptions that formal justice systems are too slow in their response. Several findings in the report suggest that women and men are receiving equal service from the justice and security sectors, which remove concerns about possible discrimination against individuals because of gender. To build trust, security and justice providers should work to change perceptions about corruption and demonstrate that the sectors are committed to serving the interest of everyone, regardless of gender, ethnic background or socio economic status.
60 | P a g e
ANNEXES
Annex 1- Summary – From Focus Group Discussion Proceedings
1.0 Citizens’ Perceptions of Personal Safety and Security
Focus Group discussions across the country revealed varying perceptions and experiences of the security and justice institutions and their personnel. Most group discussions described safety as a condition in which there are no fears of external threats, to either individuals or communities. The majority of the respondents believed that the chiefs and the police are responsible for the safety and security of their respective communities. In the Western Area, people perceive safety and security as the absence of violence at home and in the community, and the presence of the police in the community.
“Well, if you say you are secured in your home, it means no violence occurs at home, you don’t see people fighting each other in the community, you also see policemen and a police station in the community to report an incident that occurs. But in this community we are not…secured because there is no police station around.” FGD Youth, Western Rural
The perception that the police are the principal agency for security runs across the country, especially in the western area. The fear that there is no guaranteed police response to citizens’ calls when there is security threat makes respondents feel insecure.
“R2: …but people do come from distant places with vehicles to steal things like generators and other stuff. So we are not safe at all because thieves come from outside to commit crimes in our community. And the police will not respond to our emergency calls whenever a crime is being committed. Sometime they show up after the crime has been committed and most time they don’t show up at all. R1: If I talk about safety, I mean to be free from trouble, and trouble is free from me. That’s what I mean when I talk of safety. ”FGD Women, Western Rural
At Bumpewo (Bo urban), the youth believe that if a leader transfers every case to higher authorities/courts and incur loss to his subjects, that means they are not secure as they expect the chiefs to protect and secure them. Referring them to the courts or police implies that the chiefs are abandoning or exposing them to the heavy fines the courts and police levy for trivial issues. These youths also believe that when there is no justice there will be no peace or security or safety in the community, as people who suffer injustice would always find an avenue to revenge. At Bumpeh Perri (Pujehun rural), a community/society is deemed safe and secure when there is law and order in operation.
In the Eastern region, some people were of the opinion that an undisturbed night sleep from intruders, like thieves, is a safe and secured community/home. 61 | P a g e
In addition to trouble-free communities and homes, as prerequisites for safety, some people also believe that the continued availability of food in the home guarantees safety and security.
“ R1: Firstly, to think that you are safe you need to have food, secondly you should have peace, thirdly, you should be able to take care of your family on a daily basis, if you are able to get all these I think you will feel save. And also there should not be any conflict in your home or community”. FGD Youth, Bombali Rural
The majority of the FGD respondents across the country believe that they are not safe for various reasons. However, some respondents feel safe, as there have not been any real security issues reported in the community for a long time. In Kailahun, this state of security was attributed to the new paramount chief and the swift reaction of the police to potential security issues.
“R2: Since the war ended followed by the elections of our paramount chief, we have not been experiencing any alarming situation in Segbwema. Also, the police have always reacted swiftly to calls. We are thankful for the collaboration so far. R1: I am always at peace both at home and in the community. I can even choose to sleep in the veranda without any fear in my mind. R3: I should be thankful to God for the peaceful atmosphere in Segbwema. Even though we are living under some harsh economic condition, yet we have not been subjected to any undue harassment by anybody whatsoever, be it criminals or ordinary citizens”. FGD Men, Kailahun Urban
A number of factors were subsequently identified by respondents which threaten safe and secure conditions (either within the home or community), listed below:
Drug Misuse: Within the south and eastern regions, discussions revealed that youths have taken to drug addiction, increasing the presence in crime within specific areas. This includes violent fights/assault, insulting community elders and the raping of teenage girls. Men are also accused of forcing their partners to have sexual intercourse, which usually leads to violent conflicts.
“M: Okay, what kind of disputes will bring these fighting, quarrelling and wounding?
R6: The fighting that always occur here is about money, when people fail to pay back loans, illegal relationship between youths, drug abuse and also when a woman refuses to have sex with her husband will lead to fighting, especially at night. there are many cases that involve fighting that always result in wounding…there are a lot violent activities in this village…In fact, whenever these youths smoke ‘diamba’ (marijuana) they will use all kinds of abusive/insulting languages in this town. There is no law and order as nothing will come out of that. That is how Amadu was stabbed in this town; nothing absolutely came out of it… FGD Male, Moyamba Rural
“R3: Secondly, the youths we have in this community do take marijuana and they sometimes do stab each other; and there are so many thieves in the community, you will not feel safe until you see the next day without being attacked by armed robbers during the night in your sleep. FGD Male, Western Urban
62 | P a g e
In Kono, the group discussants accused the police of smoking marijuana together with lawless youths and eventually engage in robberies, which the police are also accused of aiding and abetting. In Tonkolili, the police are accused of arresting civilians who smoke marijuana, even though they also smoke the same substance. This contradictory double-role played by the police has significantly affected the trust the people have in the institution.
Arson: In Pujehun, respondents cited arson as their greatest security and safety issue in the district. Within the last year, unknown assailants have set many villages ablaze. This was raised as a major security in all the FGDs across the district. Similar fire concerns (fire accidents) were raised in other parts of the country including the Western and Northern provinces. Other natural disasters, like flooding, were flagged as a safety concern. Reasons proffered for these alleged arsons ranged from malice due to inter community/chiefdom land disputes, injustice to marginalisation of youths by community elders.
R2: Secondly, the issue of the lands, any time such arise if they do not stab somebody they will set a house on fire or they beat someone. FGD Youth, Tonkolili Rural
Another problem is flooding, when heavy rains fall, the drainages are full and there is flooding all over this community. Sometimes when we go to sleep we are afraid about fire disaster, houses are being burnt down by fire accident. We are always worried about these things” FGD Men, Western urban
R3: You know here the Chiefs are in the habit of asking people, especially the youths to leave this town, by having many youths from this town in other town and villages will not bring any development but hatred and malice. You know all the havoc that is going on in this community from theft cases to fire incident in other communities is being done by our own brothers that are not happy with the way and manner they were treated by some of the Chiefs and elders of their communities FGD Youth, Pujehun Urban
M: What is the name of the last town that has been burnt?
R1: Blama Massaquoi, Grayahun, Grema Tinkonko…all these towns have been burnt down. The towns are many. They have also burnt down Segbwema Sowa. At times we hear reports of people burning up to seventeen houses” R: The reason why they are burning the villages was because of lack of justice. If there is a dispute between two people and the matter is taken to the chiefs, and if the chiefs do not handle the matter properly, that individual will be so angry, and at night will move out to do things that are bad…by burning the village. The person will think that he has not received justice FGD Male, Pujehun Urban
Robbery: Across all districts, robbery was reported to be a major and most prevalent security issue. FGDs in every district reported theft, including that of livestock, house break-ins, and further valuable assets. Such incidents significantly affect feelings of security, both within the home and community, as illustrated by some group discussions.
63 | P a g e
“You know Levuma is presently a bad community for us the business people, because this is a place when you are under attack by the thieves at night and you shout for help no person will dare come out to help you or to rescue you from them. For now this community is not secure as you can hear a news of thieves breaking into one house here, tomorrow there is a break into another shop, this kind of activities is tormenting to us the people” FGD Female, Kenema rural. R1: The thing that is really common here is theft. This happens in this community every day and night” FGD Youth, Pujehun rural R: Stealing is too rampant in this town” FGD Male, Pujehun Urban
Murder: Reports of murder, cannibalism and ritual killings were also cited in FGDs. For example in Bumpewo (Southern region), a commercial bike rider was reportedly killed, which has dissuaded other bike riders to work at night. In the rural communities of Bonthe, a woman got missing while a child was found in a well. These incidences of mysterious deaths and disappearances were highlighted as major safety concerns for the people of that area.
Cannibalism is becoming very alarming here. We don’t know what has been the outcome of those cannibalism cases. It has happened in Semabu some time ago… After [that] we hear that somebody had been put in a well at Kimbo…But now we walk along that road with fear and frustration since that woman got missing. What has happen to that woman is a cause for concern to all of us because it might be one of us and nothing will come out of it as it happened in the case of that woman…FGD, Bonthe District Another thing is the killing of people. like these days, they killed our fellow woman somewhere behind the river. I don’t know how far they have gone with that case…” FGD Female, Bonthe Urban During Christmas month, people come around with money and give it to some bad people in the community for human beings. So if you are not careful, you may be captured/kidnapped and at anytime and be sold. FGD Male, Bo Urban
Land Tenure: Issues over land tenure were also cited by several respondents within FGDs to be a major security issue. For example in the Pujehun district, this has led to a serious conflict between YKK and Massan Kpaka Chiefdoms. Land disputes are particularly bloody where there are mining activities. Land acquisition also poses a serious security threat in other parts of the country.
R5: …fight will break out and even injuring each other. There was a boundary dispute between Bramaia and Magbema Chiefdoms. That issue caused a lot of problem to the extent that one man was killed and six houses were burnt down. Land and boundary disputes are the frequent cases we have here. FGD Men, Kambia, North
Teenage Pregnancy: Most communities also cited the high presence of teenage pregnancy to be a security threat. Parents of the impregnated teenager may begrudge the father of the unborn child and his family, which could lead to further acrimony between families. The FGDs revealed that teenage pregnancy has led to the increase in girl-child school dropout rate and crimes. Across the south and eastern regions, these were major concerns raised by the group discussants. 64 | P a g e
R3: Well, most of the disputes that occur in this community are about early sex and teenage pregnancy. That is affecting our young girls, both in the primary and secondary schools. This is really a problem to many families. FGD Youth, Pujehun Rural Teenage pregnancy is very common in this community and the report usually comes to the elders and the police on daily basis. The competition between teenage girls in this community is the first to become pregnant. If you hear about pregnancy in this house today, tomorrow it will be in the other home which have made girl child education in this part of the country impossible or very difficult and have made certain families in this community not to talk to each other. FGD Male, Kono Rural
Water Shortages: Within the Western region FGDs, water shortages were also cited as a security issue, as this forces women and children to wake late in the night or very early in the morning to fetch water, during which times incidents of rape or the theft of water vessels have been reported. Water shortage as a security issue is peculiar to the western area.
R: …and also our girls who are underage and in their teenage, they usually go out in the street at 2am in search of water, and some of them are being raped by some of the bad boys around and this makes us to be unsafe.
R: Even if you want to use the toilet, we will use stool or a bucket to defecate and empty it in the morning but you can’t attempt to come out of the house at night because of insecurity. When there is shortage of water, we are afraid to ask our children to go out in search of water because we are afraid that they might be harmed by wicked people. We are always scared. FGD Men, Western Urban
65 | P a g e
2.0 Citizens’ Perceptions and Experiences of the Justice Sector
2.1 Public perceptions and experience of traditional/informal justice: Chiefs/headmen’s administration of justice-
FGDs with male, female and youth groups across the districts of Sierra Leone revealed that youths particularly feel unfairly treated by traditional leaders, as most rulings and disproportionate fines are against them. Generally, group discussants spoke highly of traditional leaders, compared to the courts. Most people would take their cases first to the chiefs/headmen before taking it further to either police or the courts.
One advantage of traditional leaders is that they mostly live in the same communities as the people between whom they arbitrate. This automatically eliminates (or at least reduces) costs of transportation to access justice. Proximity also means that because these chiefs live in the same community as their subjects, they may be cautious in passing unfair judgements as this could breed bad blood between not only the Chief, but also his family and the aggrieved family members. Many FGDs would also prefer taking their cases to the chiefs than to the police as the trust the former more, exemplified in the quote below:
M: Why do you think the chief is the best? Because he doesn’t take bribe or additional money, unlike the police who may take more money than the loan I may be trying to repay. FGD Youth, Bo urban
This shows that traditional justice sector is playing a commendable role in their communities; therefore any support to bolster their work would be enhance the local and justice and security sectors, as the chiefs play both roles. This high level of trust reposed in the chiefs by their people also shows that for the formal security and justice sectors to operate successfully in the local communities, there should be some more coordination and collaboration between them and the local chiefs.
Nevertheless, respondents in FGDs raised a number of noteworthy concerns, listed below:
Lack of Uniform Fine system and Customary Laws: FGDs complained that the traditional justice system does not postulate a uniform fine system. This shortage provides Chiefs with too much discretion that may expose them to accusations of bias and favouritism. FGD respondents expressed concern that customary laws (used by traditional leaders and Local Courts) are not universal. Thus, laws are dependent on several variables, which include culture, region and tribe. An action could subsequently be classified as criminal in one region and normal in another.
Nepotism/Favouritism/youth injustice: From discussions throughout FGDs, it was frequently reported that traditional leaders rarely pass guilty judgements against their relatives. Youths particularly complained of not getting fair judgements against non-youths and accused both the chiefs and the police of prejudice, illustrated below:
66 | P a g e
“R1. Our fear as youths is that people have already seen us as the ones causing the problems in the community. And when we have problems, whether guilty or not guilty, the chiefs or police will not look into the matter because their minds have already been made up about us…” FGD Youth, Kono Urban “…We the youths are really suffering in the hands of the Chiefs. Whenever there is a conflict between us and anyone in this town, the Chiefs will delay that case, and at the end, extort money from us and end up giving us wrong, even though in most of the cases we are right. There is no justice for the youths in there courts in this town” FGD Youth, Pujehun Urban. R6: The Chiefs are making development very slow here, at one time they brought a micro-credit for women in this community, what these Chief did was that they ensure that the micro-credit was only given to their relatives, wives and girlfriends. FGD Youth, Moyamba Rural
The practice of marginalising youths has had devastating consequences on the country before. The TRC report (2004) states that youth marginalisation was one of the major catalysts of the rebel war.
Gender bias: A number of FGDs revealed that women experience disproportionate treatment from traditional leaders. Exemplified in the quotes below, females may be targeted due to their disempowerment within communities. A unique situation exists in Pujehun where women are forced to pay a fee for being unmarried. That is, the chiefs fine women because they are not married. This could force women to enter into loveless relationships/marriages, which could create multiple social issues for them and society.
“The chiefs are using the sour relationship they have with us as a weapon to hit the women folks. Very heavy fines are being levied on the women; it does not matter if they are the complainant or defendant in a case” FGD Male, Kailahun.
R4: Here also they have a law that if a woman is staying here and is not married you must give money to the Chiefs or else they will ask you to leave; if you don’t want to leave you must choose a man to marry you. FGD Youth, Pujehun Urban
R5: Well, cases that are brought forward to the chiefs are not handled well. Women are deprived of their right because of lack of money. I am disturbed by this. We have continued to endure this type of treatment because we are under their control.FGD Youth, Kailahun Rural
Suppressing women would only fester discord in communities, which is counterproductive to peace and security in the country.
2.2 Public perceptions and experience of formal justice: Local and Magistrate Courts-
The sampled population’s perceptions and experiences with both local and magistrate courts were also elicited, with the findings detailed below.
In Western FGDs, it was revealed that general traditions exist whereby the wife does not have any rights over her husband in Local Court, even when her husband is at fault.
67 | P a g e
FGDs with male, female and youth groups across the districts of Sierra Leone raised a number of issues involving the courts, detailed below.
Customary laws not universal: Similar to traditional leaders, local courts also operate using customary laws. These laws are not universal, meaning that different interpretations of laws/action taken against the same crime regularly occur.
‘Money-extortion institutions’: Local courts, like the other formal justice systems, came under immense criticism from FGD respondents for being extortionist and exploitative. The majority of group discussions accused local and magistrate courts of levying disproportionate fines for trivial offences:
“In the NA court, you cannot get your right if you are not rich. The NA court officials do not have sympathy for people because they are looking for hand-to-mouth. Therefore, fines at the NA courts are very heavy”. (FGD Female, Bonthe Rural). The magistrate court is worse…if you don’t have money, they will keep adjourning the case until you are fed up. FGD Male, Bonthe Rural. We attended the magistrate court every week until they took all the money from us; my husband was sick lying in the room taking a drip when two police officers came to arrest him. Our right was turned to wrong in the magistrate court. FGD Female, Pujehun Urban Our NA court needs to be closely watched because there is no justice [there]. There is a lot of thieving going on at the NA court. Presently, court chairpersons are politically appointed. Formerly, the community people elect chairmen…The authorities appoint party members to these positions as is the case in Moyamba FGD Male, Moyamba Urban R4: “The NA court is another mess in this place” FGD youth, Moyamba Rural I can rate the magistrate court as low as zero point six five percent simply because if you don’t have money consider yourself out and avoid instantly. There will never be justice for you. There are too many procedures in the magistrate court. That is why I rate them like this. FGD Youth, Western Rural
I want to talk about the fines the court imposes…sometimes the fines they impose are so much that the people will not be able to pay. People are grumbling so much about that.FGD Male, Bonthe Urban
The Pujehun youths accused their authorities of high-handedness, which usually leads to youths self-exiling themselves into other chiefdoms. There were particular accusations of chiefs referring trivial cases involving youths to the magistrate courts, knowing that the affected youths could not afford the heavy fines.
We are living in a community where in people are afraid of going to court as most of the damages caused by the war were as a result of the way the youth in different communities were handled. You cannot take someone to court for trivial issues, as this will drive the youths from the community. If you are taken to the magistrate court and you don’t have money, you have no option but to abandon your homeland and go into exile. At times, it might be their right but because they don’t have money to pay for their witness… FGD Youth, Pujehun Urban
The Pujehun youths, however, are reportedly satisfied with the current magistrate, unlike the previous ones, although they say he is not resident in the district.
Nepotism and Favouritism: Similar to traditional justice authorities, many group discussions across the country revealed accusations of nepotism exhibited by local and magistrate court administrators. This can include the courts’ affiliation with either the complainant or defendant influencing the outcome of courts’ cases, and being influenced by Paramount Chief’s (who oversee the workings of local courts).
68 | P a g e
My brother was…caught stealing together with other non-indigenes. They were asked to dance naked…, as it is a law that anyone caught stealing must dance naked. They danced around [transecting] Gobaru town. After that, people [indigenes] have been caught on site stealing. And no one dare ask them to pay the stipulated fine of one hundred thousand Leones or dance around this town [naked]; because all those that are caught are citizens of Gobaru. If there is a law that when you fight, you have to pay fifty thousand Leones, it must be enforced across the board, whether you are a citizen or not. FGD Youth, Pujehun Urban Some barriers to justice are political influence, finance, favouritism and tribalism FGD Youth, Moyamba urban What usually happens in this community is that the Chiefs with their relatives, including their children, are not under the law. Whatever wrong they do in the township nothing absolutely will happen to them. FGD Male, Kenema Rural R5: The other thing again is if I am bringing someone to court and that person is a relative to the magistrate, automatically that case has a problem. That is why most times you will hear people saying let us go to court then we will know who is who. FGD Youth, Tonkolili Rural
Injustice and youth marginalisation: Some communities reported injustice meted out to certain groups of people, mostly the youth and the poor. Youth respondents claim that most times cases are wrongly judged against them and that disproportionate fines are levied. When youths cannot pay these fines, they are usually banished from their communities. The Pujehun (urban) youth FGD included two participants who were victims of banishment from other communities within the district. According to youth groups, the local authorities do not investigate cases involving them thoroughly and hastily hand down prejudicial verdicts against them. These, according to the Pujehun youths, could lead to disgruntlement and subsequent rebellion:
“R4: Before answering your question, the last speaker spoke about being driven from this town R3: Yes, I said so—it is a practice here in Mende land; it is common M: Okay… R3: In other communities, when you are found guilty of wrongdoing, you will be fined for it; but here it is different. That is what brings rebellion in communities especially when people are driven out of their settlements. They will never harbour positive thoughts for the community, but revenge. M: Do you know of anyone that was driven from this community or from another town? R3: I am one of the victims of that act…” M: Do you have any other thing to say concerning this issue? R2: Yes, I am going to start with my own village, Giema Kpaka. This town has many youths. Whenever the youths are reported to the Chiefs and are summoned, they will fine them in such a way that they cannot pay the fine. That is why we have many youths from Giema Kpaka in other villages. If, for example, you fine someone thirty thousand Leones for a five thousand Leones debt, how would you expect him to raise thirty thousand when he could not raise five thousand to pay off the debt? FGD Youth, Pujehun Rural.
69 | P a g e
This practice of ostracising youths could lead to disgruntlement and threaten security within communities and the country overall.
Unnecessary delays: Additionally, FGDs raised concerns about unnecessary delays in the administration of justice at the courts. This was attributed to three reasons: (1) either to discourage a disfavoured party to a case, (2) bribery & corruption, or (3) due to the sheer magnitude of the workload. Repeated adjournments of a case may persuade the involved parties to drop their case:
“Well, for the poor man to seek justice and obtain right is very limited. In our own situation…when it comes to the time for them to give the final verdict, it will be very difficult…because people with money, having noticed that they are wrong in a particular case, they will bribe for the case to be adjourned from one date to another, until the poor man will be tired and fed up…”FGD Youth, Pujehun Urban. “In the NA court, if you conflict with a well-to-do or rich man, and he spends plenty money in the court, the poor would be deprived of justice” FGD Female, Bonthe Rural. R3-The overall assessment of the magistrate is the adjournment of cases, it is really trying but it’s been overburdened. This is the only magistrate within its wisdom said he would have court seating’s on Saturday. Formerly when JSDP was here, there was a circuit court helping out with cases. But now he is the only one who presides over cases in the magistrate in several chiefdoms. FGD Male, Moyamba Urban
Political Influence: In the Pujehun district, claims of chiefs perverting justice and ruling in favour of people belonging to the same party as the chief were reported. Similarly, in Yamandu, one member (Tribal Authority) of the jury at the local court influenced a ruling against a complainant whom he thought did not vote for him during their local elections. In the western area, the youths believe that there is too much political influence in the administration of justice at the magistrate courts. One is reportedly pronounced guilty or innocent depending one’s party affiliations.
R6 – there is no justice at the magistrate court. If we look at the country where we find ourselves today, we have been overpowered by political influence. Somebody’s right can be covered simply because he or she does not belong to party red or green. So there is absolutely no justice in the magistrate court because of political influence. Cases are adjourned until you get fed-up; sometimes cases are called when you are not around. FGD Youth, Western Rural.
The judiciary should be seen to be independent and impartial. It would be a misnomer if their independence is influenced by politics. This would derail general citizens’ trust in the judiciary, hence hinging on the safety and security of the people.
In spite of the concerns raised by FGD participants, respondents also highlighted some of the advantages of the court. Local Court chairpersons reside within their area of operations, providing them with the
70 | P a g e
opportunity to be familiar with local communities. This local residential status may enhance their work because it cuts down on travelling cost and time. Residing within one’s operational zone may also help one to know the cultures of the people and be better equipped to interact with them both within and without the official precincts. Group discussants expressed concern over the difficulty in accessing the magistrate in certain districts at their times of need:
“Another issue is that we have the Magistrate Court here, but the magistrate comes here once every six months because he alone covers Bonthe, Mattru Jong and Moyamba. So it is like we are not secured as far as the Magistrate Court is concerned” FGD Male, Bonthe Urban.
One youth discussant volunteered to compare the two courts and rated the local court as the better one.
The magistrate court is even worst than the local court. The local court can be fair in some cases by the way you present your case; but not the magistrate court where you are…to argue for your right, you are at their command. …But the local… [court] is a bit better because even if you don’t have money, as long as you know your right and are able to argue your point out, you will bulldoze them. But this is not possible in the magistrate court. Even to consult a lawyer is a great deal. You have to pay consultation fee of Le 500,000/00(Five Hundred Thousand Leones) and some of us that engage in agricultural work cannot afford such money because there are a lot of commitment like paying our children’s’ school fee so it is not easy to confront such cases. FGD Youth, Western Rural
71 | P a g e
3.0 Public knowledge and perception of mediation services
The study also sought to evaluate the perceptions and experience of citizens with further mediation services (including the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone, Family Support Unit and Paralegals).
3.1 The Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone
The Human Rights Commission, like other mediation services, apart from the FSU, was less discussed during the interviews as many people showed either less interest or less knowledge in either their existence or work. Only very few actually knew about the commission itself but some more people knew about the protection of human rights and the organisations that work in that sector. Some people, especially the urban group discussions, expressed knowledge of both existence and their roles. No particular group spoke anything negative about the commission or similar organisations.
R1: If the Family support cannot handle the matter, I will take it to the Human Right and when they fail, we have an NGO called Timap for Justice. They do fight for people who have cases but do not have money. FGD Youth, Bombali Urban P3: Lest I forget, the government have certain institution in place if you don’t to make use of the police, the local court of the chiefs in the community. We have human right organisations in this country that do assist people when their rights are trampled upon. FGD Male, Kono Rural R6: When you have problem with your wife the FSU will ask for money if you don't pay they will refer you to another place like a Human Right NGO. FGD Youth, Bo urban M: If you knew of a woman who is always beaten by her husband – what would you tell such woman to do? R5: I will advise both parties to calm down. R6: I will advice the women to report the matter to a Human Rights Organisation. FGD Male, Kailahun Urban
72 | P a g e
3.2 Family Support Unit (FSU)
Among the mediation service providers, the FSU was more prominent in the discussions. Many discussants lauded their role in protecting especially vulnerable people in relationships.
M: What is the work of the Family Support Unit? R4- The major function of the FSU is counselling. For example if a husband and a wife have a conflict; if the matter reaches them they will try to know the one whose temper is high and they will not release him/her may be until after three or four days. When they confirm that his/her temper is down, then they will release him/her. FGD Youth, Tonkolili Rural
Whether detaining or holding on the one who is supposedly agitated for some days is another human right abuse depends on the analyst. Some FGDs expressed total ignorance of the existence of FSU. A unit as critical as the FSU, should make their presence/existence known to all communities across the country, using every channel available. In Kambia and Kailahun, some discussants manifested the same ignorance of the FSU—either ignorance of their existence at all or their presence in the respective community as illustrated below
M: You the women, do you know any division in the police that is called the Family Support Unit? R8: No, I don’t know there. FGD Youth, Kambia Rural M: do you have an idea of the FSU in Segbwema? R1: I don’t know anything about the FSU in Segbwema R5: I don’t know them R4: I know something about the FSU in Segbwema. They are responsible to look into cases involving children, women and husbands who have been maltreated. The FSU is in Segbwema and they are relating very well with us. FGD WOMEN, KAILAHUN URBAN
In spite of some issues raised regarding attitude and corruption, many discussants are satisfied with the services rendered by the FSU to their communities.
M- But are you normally satisfied with the way they are handling your cases? R4- Yes we are very much satisfied with the way the FSU is handling our cases here. FGD Youth, Tonkolili Rural
Compared to the SLP, the Kailahun youths would however prefer the FSU to handle their cases as they say the SLP (uniformed police) always demand for money while the FSU treat cases fairly without any expectations from the complainant or defendant Wwhen you critically look into the activities of the two, you will realise that the FSU are police officers in some ways, but the way they do things is quite different from the way numbered [uniformed] police do things. FSU fairly decide cases while the numbered police are only interested in making money. Whenever the numbered police arrive in the village, they will demand for money. FGD Youth, Kailahun Rural
73 | P a g e
However, the FSU in Kono, like the general police (SLP), were also accused of taking bribes in the form of transportation fare. People reportedly do not take their cases to them because of the fear that they may be asked to pay money. A few FGD respondents also complained of the cost of FSU services and raised other issues, illustrated below:
“Even at the Family Support Unit (FSU), except you pay money… a boy stole something from me. I kept paying transportation fare for the Police (FSU) without result, until I became fed-up and dropped the case. I neither received my item nor my expenses back “FGD Female, Bo Urban
P4: If you have an issue to deal with FSU, you will have to pay transport for those involved to Koidu town or Tombodu and back. Not all people in this community can afford that and as a result, most people do not take their burning issues to the FSU. FGD Male, Kono Rural
This may have the potential to encourage the increase of domestic violence and other family related cases, as perpetrators may be aware of the victims’ economic position. Being that women are economically disadvantaged in many traditional homes, such practice may increase gender inequality and male dominance, as the women lack the necessary financial capacity to seek redress, hence will suffer in silence.
Allegations that are more serious were levied against the FSU in the Moyamba District. Group discussants accused the unit’s officials of condoning heinous crimes like rape and even champion moves to let the alleged perpetrators off the hook. If the police are seen involved in aiding or abetting perpetrators, this can only encourage the commission of more rapes.
R4- A rape case occurred recently at Sawanneh Street axis. The FSU official dealing with this case went to Auntie’s house and reported that the culprit is suffering in police cell, ‘please madam I want you to withdraw this matter and settle it as a family matter at home. My Aunt replied that she is going to consult his brother in respect of the matter, and the police officer asked who this brother was. He quickly found his way to Salina looking for the father of this girl but was not at home. FGD Youth, Moyamba Urban
Even though many people appreciate the services the FSU renders, some are of the opinion that they can do more to discourage impunity by imposing fines that are more proportionate. These people believe that the FSU can at times be too lenient in imposing fines for offences. For example, in the Northern Province, many parents view penalties levied by the FSU to curb teenage pregnancy to be very lenient. Teenage pregnancy, which could increase school dropout rate for girls, is a major social security concern for parents. It should be treated with all the stringency it deserves.
74 | P a g e
3.3 Paralegals
Like the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone, the concept of paralegals is not well known in the provinces. Some people either know their roles but not the specific nomenclature of ‘paralegal’, while others actually do not know anything about paralegal services.
M: Do you know the meaning of Paralegal? R3: I have been hearing the word but I do not know the meaning of paralegal. FGD Youth, Tonkolili Rural R-3-The word paralegal is new to me this is a new word for today in this meeting. R-5-We do not have such people in this community. FGD Male, Koinadugu Urban
M: Have you ever heard of the word paralegal? Paralegals are people who mediate and help the public in criminal cases and common matters; do you have any group at the sort in this community? R6: Yes, I have heard about it in a radio talk show. R2: they said they help to deal with cases of criminal acts, serious offenses M: Are they in Kambia at this moment? R6: Yes they are M: what is the name of their organisation? R8: I have forgotten the name but they are here in Kambia. I heard them in the medium talking about how they intervenes in cases FGD Youth, Kambia
There are organisations in some districts and local communities that have trained paralegal personnel. Some people are aware of these organisations even though they may have slight variation in their understanding of the role of paralegals. There is also a confusion of roles, on the part of some community people, between Human Rights Commission, Human Rights organisations and paralegals.
R1: If the Family support cannot handle the matter, I will take it to the Human Right and when they fail we have an NGO called Timap for Justice. They do fight for people who have cases but do not have money. M2: What is the work of Timap for justice? R1: They fight for people’s rights, especially the poor. FGD Youth, Bombali Urban
75 | P a g e
4.0 Citizens’ Perceptions and Experience of the Security Sector
4.1 The Police (SLP)
The study elicited people’s perceptions and experiences, during the focus group discussions, of the security sector, especially the police. Interestingly, respondents across the country gave more police-related responses than the other issues. Majority of the group discussions nationwide stated that the police are the major institution responsible for national and community security and safety issues. Even though in rural communities people also cited the chiefs/traditional leaders as those responsible for security and safety at local levels, the discussions revealed that the police ranked highest among possible bodies/institutions communities think are responsible. A considerable number of group discussants would take their cases, especially serious issues, to the police for redress.
Among the issues that people would normally take to the police for redress are rape, assault, break-in and larceny, wounding, and few other state crimes. These cases are not normally within the jurisdiction of the traditional authorities, like the local chiefs.
In as much as some group discussions perceive the police to be responsible for security and safety of people and property; some others believe that the police (SLP) are also responsible for insecurity. The youths at Mattru Jong believe that the police connive with criminals to cause havoc in the area, citing an infamous incident where prisoners and some police officers were caught at 1am with stolen property. This alleged connivance has put fear in the people and they now feel insecure, as their supposed protectors have become their hunters. Other groups across the country levied similar accusations of police connivance with criminals to cause havoc directly, or just condoning their commission.
R4: In terms of security, we are all aware that the police are contributing to stealing. Thieves are using police outfit to go and steal and sometimes when they are arrested and taken to the police, they are released within a short time. FGD Youth, Bombali Urban Like the police and issue of thieves, they sometimes lie that it is the youths that engage in all these activities not knowing that it is the police that commit these crimes at Kania…FGD Youth, Kono Urban R2- We expect the police to secure lives and properties but we heard that the police connived with prisoners to break our houses at night, and cart away our properties. At Goba Town, Mattru Jong, neighbours unexpectedly met prisoners in uniform at 01:00 GMT in the early hours of the morning. FGD Youth, Bonthe Urban
Neither the police nor any other body ever initiated any investigations into this allegation, even after it was made public. Additionally, the Chief Police Officer in Yamandu (Southern region) is a rumoured friend to a notorious criminal in the town. A few FGD respondents alleged that this criminal shares his loots with the officer, and is yet to be charged, even after committing serious offences.
The Operational Support Division—OSD (armed branch of the police) also came under serious criticism from the group discussions. These criticisms range from their recruitment process to their unprofessional conduct.
76 | P a g e
Some OSD personnel are hard-core criminals; I know some of them very well that are hard-core criminals. The police does not screen people’s criminal background before enlisting them into the force. That is why you have all kinds of people in the force today. Some are thieves and government has given them weapons to secure life and property. We’ve caught thieves on two occasions and one of them…died in Pademba Road [maximum prison]. Their weapons were registered with the OSD branch, so who are they protecting? FGD Youth, Western rural
Similarly, the women at Yamandu do not feel safe because people dressed in police fatigue had once looted a popular pharmacy in the town—leading to the pharmacy’s closure. The incident was reported to the local police and no investigation was initiated. This and some other factors have strained the relationship between the police and the community. The police is said to be unresponsive to community calls to alert them of security issues.
The lack of coordination between the community leaders and the police has become a cause for concern for the Yamandu people. There seem to be a very tense relationship between the community and the people which has made them feel insecure and unsafe.
FDG respondents in the Northern region suggested that women often receive preferential treatment by the Police, as they have the potential to build a relationship with an involved officer, illustrated in the quotes below:
“Sometimes if a woman is locked up in a cell she will never sleep in the cell. At night the Police will come and remove her from there to go and sleep with her”.
“The women because sometimes women have a tendency to have a relationship with the police officer that is handling the case”.
“Women cases do not take long in the hands of the police because they have a slogan that says ‘woman sababunawase’- that is her influence hinges on her buttocks. They do not need to bribe with money as they already have what the police want. So men have to be careful not to have a case with a woman”. FGD Youth, Bombali Urban
The above quotes reveal that on occasions, the Police may be more likely to give preferential treatment to women against their male counterparts in a case, as they are swayed by personal relationships, which in turn can influence how crime incidents are dealt with. Nevertheless, this supposed bias in favour of women must be viewed with extreme caution, as this treatment can also be regarded to be a further exploitation of women (rather than a preferential treatment, as suggested in FGDs).
Some women are accused of bragging that they would trade sex for the police to judge cases in their favour. If the cases are then decided in their favour, it would become more difficult to determine whether this is a preferential treatment given to the women or sexual exploitation by the police. Some police are also accused of actually requesting sex for freedom for potential female prison candidates.
R4: Some police officers get flattered by young women when matters are reported to them to be settled. Some women even say they will sleep
77 | P a g e
with police officers for them to pervert justice. So, these are just some of the immoral acts…some of the police engage in …; therefore a women’s influence can turn your right to wrong.
R1: A typical example is when police officers arrest young men and women, let say for loitering; the men are taken to the cells and are charged to court. But whenever young girls are arrested, they will be freed immediately as long as they are ready to make themselves sexually available to the police... So the police are not trustworthy at all. I am one of the people and many more who do not trust the police to render impartial services, the police will risk your life to satisfy their sexual urge. FGD Youth, Western Rural
The attitude of the police has made the profession so unattractive that youths of Bonthe rural have vowed never to become police officers after school—whether local or national.
In Yamandu (Southern region), FGD participants were of the view that the Police were accused of exchanging justice for sex. Apparently, female defendants/accused/suspects offer sex to male Police officers in exchange for justice. The Police in Yamandu were also accused of interfering with local justice institutions by overturning Chiefs’ decisions.
Finally, the recurring complaint against the police is bribery—justice for sale. In almost every single focus group discussion, participants accused the Sierra Leone police of bribery. This takes several forms including request for transport fare to visit crime scenes, provision of feeding, purchase of stationery to write down statements taken from the complainants etc. This alarming pervasion of bribery allegations against the police could pose a serious threat to security and safety, as poor citizens may refuse or be unwilling to report security and safety issues for fear that the police may request for money. FGDs across all districts highlighted accusations of the Police taking bribes in order for any action to be taken against a reported crime.
“They are the most corrupt people in this country. They are always asking for money even if somebody stole your property and you take the person to them, if you do not give them money they will not take any action” FGD Youth, Bombali Urban
I am not happy because whenever a police comes to effect an arrest, they will first of all ask for a refund of the vehicle fare from Kailahun to Baoma. They usually charge us the sum of Le30,000 (Thirty thousand Leones) when in actual fact, the transport fare from Kailahum to Baoma is quite less FGD Youth, Kailahun Rural
R5: …presently when you take a case to the police they will ask you for something before making any statement. If you do not have money, it is impossible for you to make any statement. Without money, your case will be left unattended until you give up. FGD, Bombali Urban
78 | P a g e
Annex 2: Final Survey Questionnaire
Citizens’ Perception and Experience of Security and Justice Survey Questionnaire
Sample Point Number:
Sample point/ Locality name:
Chiefdom______
Location Type: City 01 Town 02 Village 03
District
Bo 01 Bombali 08 Bonthe 02 Kambia 09 Moyamba 03 Koinadugu 10 Pujehun 04 Port Loko 11 Kailahun 05 Tonkolili 12 Kenema 06 Western Urban 13 Kono 07 Western Rural 14
Respondent Number = District code + 3 digit code
Interviewer Declaration
I confirm that I have carried out this interview face-to-face with the named person of the address attached and that I asked all the relevant questions fully and recorded the answers in conformance with the survey specification.
Signature: ......
Interviewer name (CAPS): ......
Interviewer number: …….……………………… Interviewer Gender:
79 | P a g e
M 1 F 2
) Day of Interview 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(Mon (Thur) (Sun) Date of interview: ) / /13
Supervisor Declaration
I confirm that I have reviewed the completed questionnaire fully to validate consistency of responses. Inconsistencies were discussed with the interviewer. The corrections made were primarily to indicate “not applicable responses” and do not in any way alter the original answers provided by the respondent.
Supervisor Name (CAPS) and Signature: ………………………………………………………………………………………………
INTERVIEWER RECORD START TIME
INTERVIEWER RECORD END TIME
Length of Interview (minutes)
Interview:
My name is ______from the research agency, Dalan Development Consultants. We are conducting a survey on behalf of the Access to Security and Justice Programme (ASJP), about security issues in the local area, as well as fairness in the justice system at all levels, and would like to ask you some questions. The interview will take about 45 minutes. I would like to assure you that all the information we collect will be kept in the strictest confidence, and used for research purposes only. It will not be possible to identify any particular individual or address in the results.
I would like to seek your consent to continue with this interview. If consent gained, continue. If consent refused, thank respondent and ask if the respondent would prefer a female interviewer. Can we start the interview now?
YES 1 NO 2
If NO, please end interview. If respondent would prefer a female interviewer, note her particulars to schedule an alternate interviewer. Do not forget to note down, on a daily basis, the particulars
80 | P a g e
(district, chiefdom, EA number and gender etc) of respondents who refuse to take part in the interview.
Before we begin, can you please confirm that you are over 18 years of age?
YES 1 NO 2
If YES, continue with interview. If NO, ask if there is an adult present in the house who is willing to be interviewed. Only adults are eligible to participate in this survey.
Firstly, I would like to ask you some questions about safety.
A. General A1. Perceptions of Personal Safety
1a. Do you feel safe in your home? Always 1 Usually 2 Usually Not 3 Never 4 1b. Do you feel safe in your community? Always 1 Usually 2 Usually Not 3 Never 4 2. If “usually not” or “never” (to any of the 1. Being aggravated/hassled by kids/youths Not Applicable above two questions), what three things are 2. Being robbed you worried about, the most? 3. Being attacked (beaten up) 98 4. People breaking into the house Note: Enumerator must not read these 5. Rape/sexual violence answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s 6. Being kidnapped answer is, by circling THREE of the categories 7. Domestic violence below as appropriate or no. 8- Other and 8. Other (please specify)______specify the answer given. 9. Other (please specify)______
A2. Dealing with justice issues 1. What would you consider a serious problem or conflict with 1. Marriage breakdown/separation another person living in the same community? 2. Land dispute
3. Inheritance dispute Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the categories 4. Aggression/violence (general) below as appropriate, or no. 9- other and specify the answer 5. Domestic violence given. 6. Sexual attack 7. Robbery/burglary 8. Fraud/swindling 9. Other (please specify)...... 2. What would you consider to be a minor problem or conflict 1. Employment dispute with another person living in the same community? 2. Damage resulting from services provided (litigation)
3. Environmental problems/damage Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the categories 4. Petty theft below as appropriate or no. 12- other and specify the answer 5. Verbal abuse by neighbours or members of your given. community 6. Domestic violence 7. Licenses/registration (e.g. marriages) 8. Paternity/maintenance issues 9. Failure to pay back loans 10. Abuse by police/authorities/security personnel 11. Sexual violence 12. Other (please specify)______3. If you or your family enter into a serious dispute with another First place taken to: person living in the same community, where would you consider 81 | P a g e
going to first for support in getting the problem solved? 1. The village/town/chief or headman 2. The Section Chief Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record 3. The Paramount Chief what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the categories below as appropriate, or no. 11 - Other and specify the answer 4. The Mammy Queen given. 5. A local religious leader 6. The Police (SLP) 7. A local teacher 8. A local mediation and/or paralegal services NGO
9. Human rights NGO 10. Chiefdom police 11. Other (specify)______
4. If you were not happy with the result where would you go to Second place taken to: next? 1. The village/town/chief or headman
Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record 2. The Section Chief what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the categories 3. The Paramount Chief below as appropriate or no. 9 - Other and specify the answer 4. The Mammy Queen given. 5. A local religious leader
6. The Police (SLP)
7. A local teacher 8. A local mediation and/or paralegal services NGO 9. Other (please specify)______
5. If you had a serious problem or dispute with a person in your Place taken to: household, where would you consider going for support in 1. The village/town/chief or headman getting the problem solved? 2. The Section Chief Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record 3. The Paramount Chief what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the categories 4. The Mammy Queen below as appropriate, or no. 11 - Other and specify the answer given. 5. A local religious leader 6. The Police (SLP) 7. A local teacher 8. A local mediation and/or paralegal services NGO 9. Human rights NGO 10. Chiefdom police 11. Other (specify)______6. If you knew a woman in your community was being beaten by Advise her to: her husband, what would you advise her to do? 1. Go to police
Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record 2. Go to Mammy Queen what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the categories 3. Go to human rights NGO below as appropriate, or no. 6 – Other and specify the answer 4. Go to A local mediation and/or paralegal services NGO given. 5. Go to another local justice provider 6. Do not do anything 7. Other (specify)______7. Have you ever heard of the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Yes 1 No 2 If NO: Skip Leone? to Section B 8. If yes, how/where have you heard about the Human Rights Commission? 1. Media (radio, TV or newspaper) 2. Local authorities and/or local leaders Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record 3. Primary or secondary school what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling maximum 3 of the 4. College or university categories below as appropriate or no. 9 - Other and specify the 5. CBOs or NGOs answer given. 6. Events organized by the HRCSL or the district human 82 | P a g e
rights committees (Multiple selections possible) 7. Publications; books, reports, leaflets 8. From friends, family and community members 9. Other (please specify)______
9. What does the Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone do? 1. Investigate human rights complaints 2. Promote human rights protection Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just record 3. Conduct research and issue reports on human rights what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling maximum three of the 4. Education and public awareness on human rights categories below as appropriate or no. 8 - Other and specify the 5. Monitor and document human rights violations answer given. 6. Advise the government and Parliament on compliance with international human rights standards 7. Exercise quasi-judicial function with same powers as (Multiple selections possible) the High 8. Other (please specify)______9. I don’t know/remember.
B. Informal Justice Services B1. Experiences with Informal Justice (Traditional Leaders)
1. Have you or any member of your close family had any dispute or Yes No Don’t Know If No/Don’t problem in the last 2 years which was taken (either by you or the other know: Skip to party) to be resolved by a local leader (Chief; Headman; Mammy Queen 1 2 99 Section B2 etc.)?
2. If yes, what was the gender and age of 1. Myself (the respondent) Not the person at that time? 2. Female family member (under 25) Applicable Note: Enumerator must not read these 3. Male family member (under 25) answers out. Just record what the 4. Female family member (over 25) 98 Citizen’s answer is, by circling as many 5. Male family member (over 25) of the categories below as appropriate.
(Multiple selection possible)
3. What was the main reason for the 1. Marriage breakdown/separation Not dispute? 2. Land dispute Applicable 3. Inheritance dispute Note: Enumerator must not read these 4. Aggression/violence (general) 98 answers out. Just record what the 5. Domestic violence Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE OR 6. Sexual attack MORE of the categories below as 7. Robbery/burglary appropriate, or select no.14/15 - Other 8. Problems with neighbours and specify the answer given. 9. Fraud/swindling 10. Employment dispute 11. Damage resulting from services provided (litigation) 12. Environmental problems/damage (Multiple selection possible) 13. Abuse by police/authorities/security personnel 14. Other (please specify)______15. Other (please specify)______4. Where was the dispute taken to – in First place taken to the first instance? 1. The village/town/chief or headman Note: Enumerator must not read these 2. The Section Chief answers out. Just record what the 3. The Paramount Chief Citizen’s answer is by circling ONE of the 4. The Mammy Queen categories below as appropriate, or select no.10 - Other and specify the 5. A local religious leader answer given. 6. The Police (SLP) 7. A local mediation/paralegal services NGO 8. Local Police Partnership Board 83 | P a g e
9. Human rights NGO 10. Other (please specify)______
5. If the case was then taken further – Second place taken to: Not where was it taken to? 1. The village/town/chief or headman Applicable 2. The Section Chief Note: Enumerator must not read these 3. The Paramount Chief answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is by circling ONE of the 4. The Mammy Queen categories below as appropriate, or 5. A local religious leader 98 select no.10 - Other and specify the answer given. 6. The Police (SLP) 7. A local mediation/paralegal services NGO
8. Local Police Partnership Board 9. Human rights NGO 10 Other (please specify)______
6. In this case do you think that the Yes No Don’t Know Not Applicable issue/matter was dealt with fairly? a) For the case that you were involved 1 2 99 98 in? b) For the case that a family member was 1 2 99 98 If YES: Skip to involved in? Question 8
7. If no, what is the main reason for 1. The justice provider was biased in his/her decision. Not Applicable thinking that the issue/matter was 2. The justice provider did not obtain all the relevant information in order
not dealt with fairly? to make a proper judgement.
3. Complainant was pressured into dropping the complaint. Note: Enumerator must not read these 4. The sentence/punishment was too light. 98 answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is by circling ONE of the 5. The decision was not fair due to corruption. categories below as appropriate, or 6. Other (please specify)______select no.6 - Other and specify the answer given. 8. Were you satisfied with the manner in Yes Partially No Not Applicable which the case was handled, even if the result was not in yours or your family member’s favour? 1 2 3 98
9. Over the last two years, do you think Better Worse No Change Don’t Know that there has been any change in the quality of the work of local chiefs in resolving disputes? 1 2 3 99
B2 Trust in Informal Justice (Traditional Leaders)
1. How confident are you that your local Section Chief Fully Partially Not Not sure or Town/Village Chief or Headman or Mammy confident confident confident Queen ‘administers justice’ (resolves problems/disputes between people) - fairly? 1 2 3 4 2. How confident are you that your local Paramount Fully Partially Not Not Not Chief ‘administers justice’ (resolves confident confident confident sure Applicable problems/disputes between people) fairly? 1 2 3 4 98
3. Which of the following type of traditional leaders Town/Village Chief Section Chief Paramount Mammy None do you trust the most in administering justice? or Headman Chief Queen 84 | P a g e
1 2 3 4 5 4. Do you think that the local Town/Village Yes No Don’t Chiefs/Headmen understand and are sensitive to Know the problems and needs of women and girls when they mediate or decide on cases brought to them? 1 2 99
B3. Mediation and paralegal services (non-traditional leader) 1. Did you or any member of your close family have any Yes No If NO: Skip to dispute or problem in the last 2 years which was taken question 5 (either by you or the other party) to be resolved by a local organization which provides mediation (conflict 1 2 resolution) and paralegal (legal advice) services (not a local leader like a chief or a Mammy Queen)? 2. If yes, where was the dispute taken to? 1. Names of existing local NGOs providing Not Applicable mediation and/or paralegal services; Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just 2. Religious leader – church, mosque, etc. 98 record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the 3. Local professionals categories below as appropriate or no. 4- Other and specify 4. Other (please the answer given. specify)______
3. If yes, what was the main reason for the dispute? Not Applicable 1. Marriage breakdown/separation
2. Land dispute Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just 98 3. Inheritance dispute record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE of the 4. Aggression/violence (general) categories below as appropriate or no. 14- Other and 5. Domestic violence specify the answer given. 6. Sexual attack 7. Robbery/burglary 8. Problems with neighbours 9. Fraud/swindling 10. Employment dispute 11. Damage resulting from services provided (litigation) 12. Environmental problems/damage 13. Abuse by police/authorities/security personnel 14. Other (please specify)______4. In this case do you think that the issue/matter was Yes No properly dealt with – i.e. that justice was administered fairly? 1 2 5.Have you ever heard of a) a paralegal or b) a Yes No If NO: Skip to local mediation services provider in your area or Question 9 community? 1 2
6. If ‘Yes’ – can you tell me what either Provider a) or Respondent Not Provider b) do? Respondent correctly incorrectly Applicable responds responds POSSIBLE ANSWERS 98
i. Provide legal advice 1 2
ii. Provide legal information
iii. Help solve problems
iv. Negotiations with other parties
v. Legal awareness or training
vi. Visit police station or prison
85 | P a g e
7. Would they be able to help you if you get involved in Don’t serious conflict or problem with someone or have a legal Yes 1 No 2 99 know problem? 8. If you needed their support, where would you go or what Respondent Respondent Not would you do to obtain it? knows where to doesn’t know Applicable 98 go or who to 1 where to go or 2 see to get who to see to support get support 9. What do you think are the biggest problems here in your Please do not read out community that a mediation and paralegal services NGO 1. Separation/divorce could help people with? 2. Domestic violence Note: Enumerator must not read this list out. From the 3. Land disputes response given to you by the citizen, SELECT UP TO 3 of the 4. Business contract issues problems listed below that the citizen tells you are the 5. Paternity/maintenance issues biggest problems from the list below or choose 14 Additional if the problem chosen by the citizen is not in the 6. Assault cases list and specify what the problem(s) are. 7. Sexual assault/rape cases 8. Inheritance issues 9. Employment contract issues 10. Mining and environmental issues 11. Immigration issues 12. House/land purchase 13. Licenses/registration (e.g. marriages). 14. Additional (please specify)______
86 | P a g e
C. The Courts
C1. Local Courts
1. For what types of legal issues or disputes would you take the matter to a Local Court? Please do not read out
1. Separation/divorce Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. Just 2. Domestic violence record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling as many 3. Land disputes (including livestock damage) categories below mentioned by the respondent or no. 13 4. Business contract issues /14- Other and specify the answer given. 5. Paternity/maintenance issues
6. Assault cases 7. Sexual assault/rape cases (Multiple selection possible) 8. Inheritance issues 9. Employment contract issues 10. Mining and environmental issues 11. House/land purchase 12. Licenses/registration (e.g. marriages). 13. Other (specify): ______
14. Other (specify): ______
2. How confident are you that your Local Court administers Fully Partially Not Don’t Know justice (resolves problems/disputes between people) - fairly? Confident Confident confident 1 2 3 99
3. Have you or any member Yes 1 Respondent No 2 If NO, Skip to Question 7 of your close family or Close family friends been involved in a Close friend case in the Local Court in the last 2 years? (O15.2)
4. If so, in what role? Please do not read out Not Applicable 1. Complainant ( You / or your family member took the case to court) Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. 2. Defendant ( You /or your family member was taken to court by someone 98 Just record what the else) Citizen’s answer is by 3. Witness circling ONE of the 4. Other (please specify): ______categories below as appropriate or no. 4- Other and specify the answer given.
5. What type of case was Please do not read out Not it? Applicable 1. Separation/divorce
Note: Enumerator must not 2. Domestic violence 98 read these answers out. 3. Land disputes (including livestock damage) Just record what the 4. Business contract issues Citizen’s answer is, by 5. Paternity/maintenance issues circling as many categories mentioned by the 6. Assault cases respondents applicable to 7. Sexual assault/rape cases self or family member or 8.Inheritance issues friend or no. 13 - Other and specify the answer given. 9.Employment contract issues 10.Mining and environmental issues 11.House/land purchase
12. Licenses/registration (e.g. marriages). (Multiple selection 87 | P a g e
possible) 13.Other (specify) : ______6. Do you believe that the Yes Partially No Not Not Applicable decision was fair? sure a) For the case you 1 2 3 4 98 were involved in?
b) For the case a 1 2 3 4 5 family member or friend was involved in? 7. How confident are you Fully Partially Not Not Sure Not Applicable that your Local Court(s) confident confident confident delivered justice fairly? 1 2 3 4 98
8. Overall how would you rate the Local Courts in terms Very fast and Very fast but Acceptable Very slow Very of the quality of the justice services they provide (i.e. very fair unfair (neither fast but fair slow and speed of access to the court and the fairness of the nor slow, but unfair decisions made)? fair) 1 2 3 4 5 9. Do you think that the Local Courts treat women as Yes 1 No 2 Don’t 99 fairly as they treat men? know 10. What are your views about corruption in the Corruption is not an issue, 1 Corruption appears to be 2 functioning of the Local Courts? the courts are open and an issue as the courts are transparent and decisions not open and transparent made are based on the and decisions made are (Do not read the responses. Make the inference based evidence presented in court not fair or consistent with on the views expressed by the respondent.) and are fair. the evidence provided in court. 11. If you were involved in a conflict or a problem with Local chief/ 1 Local Court 2 Mammy 3 Don’t 99 another person would you rather have the case decided Headman Queen know by a local chief/headman or by the Local Court? (SKIP TO C2) 12. Why? Please do not read out
1.Quicker Note to Enumerator: You must not read these answers 2. More likely to get a fair Judgement out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling all categories mentioned by respondent or no. 6 - Other 3.Cheaper and specify the answer given. 4.Punishment /sentence is more reasonable if you lose the case 5.Less stress/disturbance 6.Other (please specify)______(Multiple selection possible)
Only ask this question if the respondent has said they would not use the local courts. Please do not read out
12. Why do you not use the local court? 1. Court is too far away 2. It costs too much money Note to Enumerator: You must not read these answers 3. Cases can only be brought by certain types of people out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling 4. The Local Courts don’t treat us with respect all categories mentioned by respondent or no. 7/8- 5. They take too long to do everything that needs to be done. Other and specify the answer given. 6. Need to hire a lawyer (Multiple selection possible) 7. Other (please specify)______
88 | P a g e
C2. Magistrates Courts
1. If a person commits an illegal act (a crime) against you, Yes 1 No 2 If YES, Skip would you take the matter to the Magistrates Court to to Question obtain justice? 3. 2. If not, why not? Please do not read out Not
1. Did not know about it Applicable Note: Enumerator must not read these 2. Do not understand the procedure and I don’t know answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s how to access the court 98 answer is, by circling all categories mentioned by respondent or no. 6 - Other 3. Not likely to get a fair judgement and specify the answer given. 4. It would cost too much money 5. It would take too long (Multiple selection possible) 6. Other (please specify)______3. If you have a very serious dispute with Please do not read out someone or they have done something bad 1. 1. Go to the police against you, your property or your family and you want to take the case to the Magistrate’s2. 2. Go to a private lawyer Court, what would be your first step? 3. 3. Go to a legal assistance NGO Note: Enumerator must not read these 4. 4. Go to a local leader answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s 5. 5. Other (please specify)______answer is, by circling ONE of the categories below as appropriate or no. 5- Other and specify the answer given.
4. Have you or any member of your close Yes 1 Respondent No 2 If NO: Skip family or friends been involved in a case in the Close family to Question local Magistrates Court in the last 2 years? Close friend 9 5. If Yes, In what role? Please do not read out Not Note: Enumerator must not read these Applicable 1. Complainant answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s 2. Defendant answer is by circling ONE of the categories 3. Witness 98 below as appropriate or no. 4- Other and 4. Other (specify): ______specify the answer given.
6. What type of case was it? Please do not read out Not
1. Separation/divorce Applicable Note: Enumerator must not read these 2. Domestic violence answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s 98 answer is, by circling ALL categories 3. Land disputes (including livestock damage) mentioned by respondent applicable to self, 4. Business contract issues family member or friend; or no. 13- Other 5. Paternity/maintenance issues and specify the answer given. 6. Assault cases (including sexual assault/rape)
7. Inheritance issues 8. Employment contract issues (Multiple selection possible) 9. Mining and environmental issues 11. House/land purchase 12. Licenses/registration (e.g marriages). 13. Other (specify) : ______
7. Were you satisfied that justice was Satisfied Partially Dissatisfied Not delivered (done) fairly? Satisfied Applicable a) For the case you were involved 1 2 3 98 with?
89 | P a g e
b) For the case your family member or 1 2 3 98 friend was involve with?
8. If Partially Satisfied or Dissatisfied, Why Please do not read out was this? 1. The Magistrate was biased in its decision. 2. The Magistrate did not obtain all the relevant information in Note: Enumerator must not read these order to make a proper judgement. Not answers out. Just record what the Citizen’s 3. The complainant was pressured into dropping the complaint. Applicable answer is by circling all categories mentioned 4. The sentence/punishment was too light. by respondent or no.7 - Other and specify the 5. The sentence/punishment was too severe. 98 answer given. 6. The decision was not fair due to corruption. 7. Other (please specify)______(Multiple selection possible) 9. Do you think the problem of corruption is serious in Yes No Don’t Know the functioning of the Magistrate Courts? 1 2 99 10.In your view, how do you think the Magistrate Please do not read out Courts treat women as compared to men? 1. Women get worse justice 2. Men get worse justice Note: Enumerator must not read these answers out. 3. Women and men get the same level of justice Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling 4. Don’t know ONE of the categories below that reflects the answer given.
D. Police Services D1. The Police (SLP) 1. Do you have trust in the SLP to do its job properly? Always Sometimes Never 1 2 3 2. Are the SLP responsive to calls for assistance from Always Sometimes Never citizens and community leaders? 1 2 3 3. Over the last two year do you think the Always Sometimes Never responsiveness of the SLP to calls for assistance by the local community has improved? 1 2 3
4. Are you satisfied with the way SLP officers treat Fully satisfied Partially Dissatisfied the public? satisfied 1 2 3
5. Do you think that the SLP treats men and women Yes No Not sure equally? 1 2 3
6. Did you have to pay any money to a Yes No If NO, Skip to policeman/woman in the last year in order for them Question 8. to do their job, or for other reasons? 1 2
7. If yes, what was it that the policeman/woman Please do not read out required money for? 1- To fill out a crime or incident report
2- To investigate a crime Not Applicable Note to Enumerator must not read these answers 3- To come and resolve a problem out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by 4- Other (please specify)______circling ONE of the categories below as appropriate 98 or no. 4- Other and specify the answer given.
8. Were you, or any member of your immediate Yes No If NO, Skip to family, a victim of a crime during the last 2 years? Question 14.
90 | P a g e
1 2
9. If yes) What kind of crime(s)? Please do not read out Not
1- Assault; Applicable Note to Enumerator must not read these answers 2- Request for bribe by a public official out. Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by 3- Sexual assault circling ALL categories mentioned by respondent 4- Domestic violence 98 applicable to self, family member or friend; or no. 7- 5- Theft of property Other and specify the answer given. 6- Burglary 7- Fraud (Multiple selection possible) 7. Other (please specify)
10. If so, did you report it to the police? Yes No Not Applicable 1 2 98
11. If yes, did the police carry out an investigation of Yes No Not Applicable the crime? 1 2 98
12. Were you satisfied with the way the SLP dealt Fully satisfied Partially Satisfied Dissatisfied with the crime? 1 2 3
13. Was anyone charged to court? Yes No Not Applicable 1 2 98
14. Do you know what a Local Police Partnership Yes No If NO, Skip to Question 18. Board (LPPB) is? 1 2
15. What is it for (what is it supposed to do)? Respondent Respondent (Correct answer is written in Interviewer Notes) answers correctly. doesn’t answer Not Applicable correctly POSSIBLE ANSWERS 98 i. Bridge or partnership between community 1 2
and the police
ii. Provide the police with information from chiefdom and districts
iii. Help police do their job by providing materials or other support
iv. Give information to the community, and help mediate cases
v. Speak to the police on the community's behalf and give feedback on community opinions
16. Is there a Local Police Partnership Board (LPPB) Yes No Don’t If NO/Don’t Know: Skip to or a contactable member of it in your know Question 18. town/chiefdom? 1 2 99
17.Do you think that it helps the SLP work better Yes No Don’t 91 | P a g e
with the local community to manage crime? know 1 2 99
18. Have you heard of the Local Police Complaints Yes No Board? 1 2
19. Do you think that the Chiefdom Police in your Yes No Don’t chiefdom/town help to provide security to the know population? 1 2 99
20. Are you satisfied with the way the local Chiefdom Satisfied Partially Not Police treat the public (especially women and Satisfied Satisfied children) 1 2 3
21. Do they treat men and women equally? Yes No Don’t Know 1 2 3
D2. FSUs
1. If a girl or woman is sexually assaulted or raped where Please do not read out can they or their family go for help? 1. The police 2. Family Support Unit Note to Enumerator must not read these answers out. 3. The Local Chief Just record what the Citizen’s answer is by circling ONE 4. The Mammy Queen of the categories below as appropriate or no. 6- Other 5. The local health clinic and specify the answer given. 6. A local NGO (specify which) 7. Other (please specify) 2. (If the FSU is not mentioned) Have you heard of the Yes No Not If NO/NOT Family Support Unit? Applicable APPLICABLE, Skip to END. 1 2 98 3. (If yes) can you tell me what the FSU does? Respondent correctly Respondent responds. incorrectly POSSIBLE ANSWERS responds
i. Has social workers and police working 1 2
ii. Staff are specially trained to help women and Not Applicable
children 98
iii. Specially trained to investigate crimes reported
by women and children
iv. Sympathetic and helpful to victims of sexual
violence and domestic violence
4. Do you know where your local FSU is? Yes No 1 2 5. Can any girl or woman who has been sexually Yes 1 No 2 Don’t 99 assaulted or raped go and get help from the FSU if they know want to? 6. Are you happy with the services which the FSU Yes 1 No 2 Don’t 99 If YES, Skip provides? know to END. 7. (If not) why not? Please do not read out Not 1. FSU is too far away Applicable Note to Enumerator must not read these answers out. 2. It costs too much money 92 | P a g e
Just record what the Citizen’s answer is, by circling ONE 3. It is only open sometimes/people are often not of the categories below as appropriate or no. 6- Other there 98 and specify the answer given. 4. The police don’t treat you with respect 5. They take too long to do everything that needs to be done. 6. Other Respondent’s Profile
DEMOGRAPHICS
Finally, some questions about you. I would like to reassure you that all the information that you provide us will be kept confidential but it will help with our analysis in comparing different groups of people.
ASK ALL
Q1. RESPONDENT CODE GENDER
Male 1 Female 2 Q2. What was your age on your last birthday? IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT KNOW PLEASE ASK FOR AN ESTIMATE. Age Exact age Estimated age Refused 96 Q3. What is your marital status?
Single 1 Married 2 Cohabiting/Living as married 3 Separated/Divorced 4 Widowed 5 Refused 96 Q4. Is your marriage registered?
Yes 1 No 2 Q5. Are you the head of the household?
Yes 1 No 2 Q6. How many years of formal education have you completed?
Enter number of years None 98 Don’t know 99 Q7. What is your working status? SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Employed full time 1
93 | P a g e
Employed part time 2 Self employed 3
Not employed 4 Refused 96
Q8. Who makes the financial decisions in your family? SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Self 1
Spouse 2
Other family member 3
Other 4
Q9. What is the total monthly income of your household from all sources before tax?
100000 Leones or less 1
100001 – 300000 Leones 2
300001 – 500000 Leones 3
500001 – 1000000 Leones 4
1000001 – 5000000 Leone 5
5000001 Leones or more 6
Don’t know 99
Refused 96
Q10. What religion, if any, do you belong to?
Islam 1
Christianity 2
Traditional 3
94 | P a g e
Other (PLEASE WRITE IN AND CODE ‘4‘) 4
None of these 98
Refused 96
Q11. Do you have a mobile phone?
Yes 1 RECORD NUMBER:
No 2
Q12. How often do you listen to the radio?
Never 1
Not very often 2
Regularly 3
Very often 4
Always 5
Q 13 ASSETS
PERSONAL HOUSE/FAMILY Mobile Phone 1 Car 1 Radio 2 Television 2 Motor Bike 3 Bicycle 4
95 | P a g e
Annex 3: FGD Topic Guide
Citizen Perception Survey of Security and Justice
Focus Group Discussion Guide
April 22
Welcome and Introduction.
Explain who we are and what we’re trying to do:
Purpose of this assessment
The Access to Security and Justice Programme (ASJP), has commissioned a study about security issues in the local area, as well as fairness in the justice system at all levels. The findings of the study will provide information that will contribute to interventions to improve on justice and security, especially for vulnerable groups.
Explain purpose of sign in sheet. Ask each member of the FGD a few quick demographic questions (Occupation, Educational level, years in community, gender if mixed group). Note taker will fill in appended sheet.
Thank participants for consenting to take part, explain: - What will be done with this information - Why we asked you to participate
Explain the process steps in a focus group discussion: - Has anyone here participated in a focus group before? - About focus groups: We learn from you (positive and negative) Not trying to achieve consensus, we’re gathering information No virtue in long lists: we’re looking for priorities Feel free to move around
Ground Rules: - Participate! - Let’s keep it confidential - Stay with the group: no side talk - Have fun
96 | P a g e
Ask whether Participants would like to ask you any questions before the start of discussions?
Introductions: - Go around table: Ask each participant to state their name (Note Taker will write down initials ONLY, educational status, what they did for a living, gender if mixed group).
Questions: - Pose each question, one at a time. - Allow for silent thinking time (some people do better when they think first). - Discussion begins.
Follow- up contacts: If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask any of the study team members. You may also call Dalan Consultants -The Consultancy firm contracted to carry out this assessment on behalf of ASJP on 033- 851-405,076-627-878.
97 | P a g e
IDENTIFICATION
GROUP TYPE: ADULT MALE ONLY ADULT FEMALE ONLY YOUTH GROUP (MIXED)
DISTRICT …………………………………………………. CHIEFDOM ……………………………………………….
EA TYPE: URBAN RURAL
SAMPLE POINT NUMBER:
LOCALITY NAME: ………………………………..
FGD PARTICIPANTS PROFILE:
INITIALS OCCUPATION EDUCATIONAL LEVEL NUMBER OF GENDER ( IF YEARS IN MIXED None, Primary, COMMUNITY GROUP) Secondary, Post Secondary
98 | P a g e
Section A. Perception of Concept and Issues of Security, Personal Safety and Justice
1. I will start this discussion by asking you to tell me how you understand the key topics for this meeting: - What does it mean to you, to say I feel secure in this community, home or workplace? - What does it mean to say we feel safe in this community? What things could happen to people in this community for you to say we are no longer safe? - What does it mean to you when people talk of justice? What would you consider as injustice?
2. Could you please tell me about the things that have happened to people in this community that make you and others that reside here worry about your safety and security- let participants freely list events. Probe: - Experience of the three most important security issues/incidents experienced in the community; how often did community experience it in the last year? - Who was affected by the incidents- gender, age and status in society - Security and safety issues community not so worried about, even though it was experienced in the last year? Why do people not worry that much about it; how often/rare do they occur?
3. Could you tell me about the main security and safety issues that you and others in your household are worried about on a daily basis? Could you tell me the last time that a resident of the community was affected by any of those issues?
Section B. Security and Safety Institutions and Structures Now I want us to talk about the places and people you look up to for your safety and security in this community.
4. Who do you think is responsible for ensuring that people and their property are safe and secured in this community? Probe: - Role/responsibilities of different agencies and structures including traditional authorities, chiefdom administration, police. - What sort of security issues are most appropriate for the handling of different agencies/structures-i.e. police, chiefs, etc.
5. Refer back to Question 2 above- where/who did people go to with security and safety complaints? Probe: - What sort of complaints were taken to chiefs, the police, other stakeholders. - What was the outcome of the complaint. - Do people feel satisfied with the way the issue was handled.
6. If you feel insecure or have concerns about your personal safety today, who will you go to for protection?
99 | P a g e
Pose: Various security issues and ask why participants will prefer to contact that person or institution. Probe: - Which institution will you not necessarily go to for protection?
Section C. Access and Barriers to Justice, and Satisfaction with the Outcomes
7. What can you tell me about the sorts of disputes that occur between people and in families/households in your community? How common do you hear of those disputes?
8. When somebody has misunderstanding with a family member or another person in the community, what do they normally do to ensure their rights are not trampled upon? Probe: - Where/who do they go to first, and why?
9. Where do people go to seek justice and obtain rights when they have dispute with others? Probe: - How often do they go to the formal justice system- i.e. courts; what sort of complaints do they take there? - How often do people turn to traditional and local justice system- including chiefs and local courts, to arbitrate in disputes? - Who is more likely to seek justice in formal courts (is it the rich/poor, adults/young people, men/women or educated/illiterate). Who is more likely to seek justice in traditional and local courts, and why?
10. Overall, what can you say about the ability of the traditional leaders (chiefs, Mammy Queens, etc) in this community to be independent, impartial, fair and thorough in administering justice in matters that come to them? Probe by asking instances, as much as possible: - Do certain individuals/groups get privilege and preferential treatment in the arbitration process? - Do the rich and the poor, men and women, youth and adults, educated and illiterate get the same treatment?
11. Overall, what can you say about the ability of the magistrate and high courts to be independent, impartial, fair and thorough in administering justice in matters that come to them? Probe by asking instances, as much as possible: - Do certain individuals/groups get privilege and preferential treatment in the arbitration process? - Do the rich and the poor, men and women, youth and adults, educated and illiterate get the same treatment? - Is there something one could do to influence the magistrate/judge and other court officials?
12. Overall, what can you say about the ability of the Sierra Leone Police to be independent, impartial, fair and thorough in supporting the courts with investigations and the prosecution process, so that those who are alleged of committing crime are brought to the court for trial? Probe by asking instances, as much as possible: 100 | P a g e
- Do certain individuals/groups get privilege and preferential treatment from the Police? - Do the rich and the poor, men and women, youth and adults, educated and illiterate get the same treatment from the police? - Is there something one could do to influence investigations (including tampering with evidence) conducted by the Police?
13. What can say are the (main) difficulties that people face in taking complaints to the police (including the FSU) and the courts? Probe: - What do people usually have to worry about if they have to report a matter to the police? - What do they worry about when they have to complain or defend against complaint in court? - Who is most worried about these difficulties; why? - Where do people seek assistance from, in order to deal with those challenges?
101 | P a g e
Annex 4: Survey Sampling
Sampling Strategy for the Household Survey
To estimate the total number of respondents surveyed, the following formula was applied:
2 nmin =DE ×z 1 –α/2×p×(1−p) d2 Where: nmin= Minimum number of respondents to be surveyed. DE = Design effect (the ratio between the variance from the cluster design to the variance that would be obtained from a simple random sample), meaning the sample size is adequate in obtaining the desired precision. p = Expected coverage. d = The desired width of the confidence interval. α = Confidence level (0.05). z1-α/2= 1.96
Having established the number of clusters, C, to be sampled; it is then possible to determine, n: n× C >nmin.
Assuming: A significance level of 5% (or confidence level of 95%), a design effect of 2, the number of clusters to be 30 (with 7 households per cluster and 2 respondents per household), a sample size of 420 respondents will be obtained for each district. These resulted in total sample size of 5,880 respondents to be selected in 420 Enumerator Areas (EAs).
Statistics Sierra Leone has a list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) that covers the entire country. The EAs will serve as clusters and the households as sampling units.
Selection of Households and Respondents
Enumerator guidelines on household selection
. When entering each Locality/street, the enumerator will select dwelling structures in the following sequence to approach for an interview: On the right hand side of the Locality/street, select the 1st, 6th, 11th, 16th (and so on, in intervals of 5) dwelling structures. On the left hand side of the Locality/street, select the 2nd, 7th, 12th, 17th (and so on, in intervals of 5) dwelling structures. . If all the households in a Locality/street do not sum up to the required number of households per EA (7), then the enumerator will move to the next Locality/street in his/her list until the required number is obtained. . If the selected dwelling structure has more than one household, list and number the names of the head of households by surname (A to Z) and select one household randomly using a ballot system. . Enumerators will carry out an interview at one household in each dwelling structure.
102 | P a g e
Enumerator guidelines on respondent selection
. Once an enumerator has selected a household, he/she will then ask an adult living there to share the names of all the adults aged 18 and over who live in the household. The enumerator will write the names down. . A ballot system will be used to select two respondents to interview. . There is no need to specify if the respondent should be male or female, as obtaining fairly equal numbers of interviews with men and women should occur naturally using this method. . If the selected respondent is not available for an interview at that time, then the enumerator will repeat the ballot and select another resident in that household. . If the selected respondents refuse an interview, the enumerator will record this information, move on to the next dwelling structure in the sequence and start household/respondent selection procedure again. For example, if the enumerator is at the fifth dwelling structure in the Locality/street, he/she will move on to the 10th dwelling structure in the Locality/street. . If there are no adults living in the household, the enumerator will move on to the next dwelling structure in the sequence and start the selection of household and respondent procedure again.
103 | P a g e
Annex 5: Sample Size
District No. of EAs No. of HHs per No. of respondents No. of respondents EA per HH
Bo 30 7 2 420 Bombali 30 7 2 420 Bonthe 30 7 2 420 Kailahun 30 7 2 420 Kambia 30 7 2 420 Kenema 30 7 2 420 Koinadugu 30 7 2 420 Kono 30 7 2 420 Moyamba 30 7 2 420 Port Loko 30 7 2 420 Pujehun 30 7 2 420 Tonkolili 30 7 2 420 Western Rural 30 7 2 420 Western Urban 30 7 2 420 TOTAL 420 5,880
104 | P a g e
Annex 6: FGD Sampling
DISTRICT CHIEFDOM SECTION EA NAME URBAN/ RURAL Koinadugu Senbge Bilimaia Koinadugu Road Urban Koinadugu DembeliaSinkunia Sinkunia Gbindi Rural Kambia Magbema Kambia Kambia 1 Urban Kambia GbinleDixing Rogberay Rogbere (A)1 Rural Port Loko Maforki Batpolon Dura Site (Rogberay Junction) Urban Port Loko Marampa Magbele Magbaft Rural Bombali Makeni Town BombaliSebora-T Wusu street Urban Bombali SellaLimba Kamankoh Kamgathara Rural Tonkolili KholifaRowala Bo Road New Site Urban Tonkolili KafeSimiria Mabonto Mabonto (B) Rural Kenema Kenema Town Gbokakajama A-Lam Lumbebu Layout Urban Kenema KanduLeppiama Karga Levuma Rural Kono Koidu Town Tankoroh New Sembehun Kissibona Street Urban Kono Nimikoro Bandafafeh Gaya (D) Rural Kailahun Njaluahun Sei 1 Segbwema Urban Kailahun Luawa Baoma Baoma (A) Rural Bo Bo Town East Ward-Bumpeh-W Lansana Street Urban Bo Baoma Lower Pataloo Yamandu (D) Rural Pujehun FutaPejeh Koilenga Gobaru Urban Pujehun Galliness Jakema I Bumpeh Rural Moyamba Moyamba Town Urban Moyamba Dasse Mano Mano Dasse Rural Bonthe Jong Bayengbe Goba Town (A) Urban Bonthe KpandaKemoh Sewama Lawana (A) Rural Western Urban Central I Susan’s Bay Susan’s Bay Urban Western Rural Mountain Rural Regent Regent Rural
105 | P a g e
Annex 7: Number of respondents who view local leader’s dispute resolution as fair, by Chiefdom
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
Bo CHIEFDOM BADJIA 0 1 0 0
BAGBO 1 1 0 0
BAGBURIE 0 0 1 1
BAOMA 1 0 0 0
BUMPEH NGAO 2 2 3 0
JIAMA BONGOR 8 4 0 0
KAKUA BO TOWN 4 6 12 3
LUGBU 0 0 1 0
NIAWA LENGA 2 2 2 1
TIKONKO 1 0 2 0
VALUNIA 4 1 2 0
WONDE 2 0 0 0
Bonthe CHIEFDOM BENDU-CHA (GBA- 1 2 1 1 GBA SECTION)
BONTHE URBAN 12 3 1 3 (BONTHE TOWN)
BUM 1 1 2 0
BUM (FIKIE SECTION) 2 1 1 0
BUM (GBONDUBU 1 0 1 0 SECTION)
BUM (LANJE 1 0 3 0 SECTION)
106 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
BUM (YARGBE 5 1 3 0 SECTION)
DEARU YOH 0 0 1 0 SECTION
DEMA ( CHEPO) 0 2 0 0
IMPERI BABUM 0 1 0 1 SECTION
IMPERRI CHIEFDOM 8 0 1 7
IMPERRI CHIEFDOM 1 2 5 1 (BIGO SECTION)
IMPERRI MOMALIGIE 1 0 0 0
JANGE JONG 2 0 2 1 BAYINGA SECTION
JONG (KUMABEH 3 0 0 2 SECTION)
JONG BASIAKA 2 1 1 1 SECTION
JONG BAYENGBE 3 0 1 1 SEC.
JONG CHIEFDOM 8 1 7 0
JONG LANDI NGELE 5 1 4 0 SECTION
KBANDA KEMOH 3 0 0 0 SEWANA SECTION
kenema town 0 0 1 0
KPANDA KEMO (BA 3 2 1 1 KOBUTU SECTION)
107 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
LOWER BANTA (MOKOTAWA 1 0 0 0 SECTION)
NONGOBA CHIEFDOM BULLOM 6 1 1 1 SECTION
NONGOBA KESSIE 1 0 0 0 SECTION
NONGOBA TORMASU 2 0 0 1
SITTA KAMAI 2 0 1 0 SECTION
SITTIA CHIEFDOM 6 1 1 2 YONI SECTION
SITTIA NGEPAY 5 3 1 0 SECTION
SOGBENI NDOPIE 4 1 0 1 SECTION
YAWBEKO (HAHUN 2 0 3 0 SECTION)
Moyamba CHIEFDOM BAGRUWA 5 0 0 0
BAGRUWA (MOKASSI 3 2 2 1 SECTION)
BAI LARGOR ZONE 3 1 0 0 0 SECTION
BUMPEH (BUMPEH 2 0 0 2 SECTION)
BUMPEH (MASSIPOTO 5 1 5 0 SECTION)
108 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
BUMPEH (MOFORAY 0 2 2 0 SECTION)
BUMPEH (SAMU 1 0 0 1 SECTION)
DASSE 0 1 0 0
DASSE (MANO 1 1 0 0 SECTION)
DEMBELIA SINKUNIA 1 0 1 0
FAKUNYA (SONGO 3 1 2 4 SECTION)
FAKUNYA KOVELLA 1 2 0 0 SECTION
FAKUNYA TULLU 1 1 2 0 SECTION
JAWIE 1 0 0 0
KAGBORO (MAMBO 6 1 1 3 SECTION)
KAGBORO (MOYIBO 2 0 2 0 SECTION)
KAGBORO (TASSOH 5 2 1 0 SECTION)
KAIYAMBA (ANGIGBOYA 5 4 1 1 SECTION)
KAIYAMBA CHIEFDOM 2 1 2 0 KOROMBOYA SECTION
109 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
KAMAJEI (KOWAMA 1 0 0 0 SECTION)
KONGBORA (GIBINA 3 0 2 2 SECTION)
KONGBORA 4 2 0 0 SENEHUN SECTION
KORI ZONE 3 1 1 0 0 SECTION
KOWA (KPANDOBU 2 0 0 0 SECTION)
LAMAJEI (KOWAMA 0 1 0 0 SECTION)
LOWER BANTA (BENGELLOH 4 0 2 0 SECTION)
LOWER BANTA (WULBANGE 7 0 2 1 SECTION)
LOWER BANTA CHIEFDOM 3 1 2 0 (MOKOTAWA)
LOWER BANTA GBANGBATOKE 2 1 1 1 SECTION
NONGOBA KISSIE 1 0 1 0
RIBBI (MASANKA 3 2 1 1 SECTION)
RIBBI (YONI 4 3 0 1 SECTION)
110 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
RIBBI MOBUREH 5 1 2 1 SECTION
TIMEDE (YAPOMA 3 0 2 0 SECTION)
Pujehun CHIEFDOM BARRI 6 7 5 3
BUN(LANDE 0 0 0 1 SECTION)
GALLINESS 2 1 3 0
GALLINESS PERI 1 1 0 0
KPANGA 1 0 2 0
KPANGA SAMBA 1 0 3 0
MAKPELE 1 1 0 2
MALEN 8 3 9 5
MANOSAKRIM 0 1 0 1
PANGA KAGBONDEH 2 3 2 4
PEJEH FUTA 2 2 1 4
SORO GBEIMA 2 0 2 2
sowa 3 0 2 0
SOWA 0 2 0 1
YKK 1 0 1 0
Kailahun CHIEFDOM DEA 1 1 0 0
JAWIE 2 2 6 0
KISSI KAMA 0 0 2 0
111 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
KISSI TENG 1 1 1 1
KISSI TONGI 2 0 3 0
KISSY TOWN 0 0 2 0
KPEJE BONGRE 2 4 1 1
KPEJE WEST 1 3 1 0
LUAWA 10 10 7 7
MALEMA 5 0 1 0
MANDU 2 1 2 0
NJALUAHUN 2 0 0 1
PENGUIA 0 2 1 1
SIMBARU 1 0 0 0
UPPER BAMBARA 5 5 1 2
YAWEI 2 3 0 3
Kenema CHIEFDOM DAMA 0 0 1 0
GORAMA MENDE 0 2 3 2
GUARA 6 0 1 0
KANDU LEPPIAMA 2 0 1 1
KENEMA TOWN 15 3 22 8
LANGRAMA 2 1 2 2
LOWER BAMBARA 11 4 6 3
MALEGOHUN 5 2 3 0
NIAWA 2 0 2 1
112 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
NONGOWA 5 2 10 2
SANDOR 1 0 0 0
SIMBARU 2 1 2 1
SMALL BO 1 2 1 0
TUNKIA 1 1 1 0
WANDOR 1 1 1 0
Kono CHIEFDOM FIAMA 4 1 1 1
GBANE 5 0 1 0
GBANE KANDOR 5 0 3 0
GBENE 2 0 0 0
GBENSE 4 3 5 2
GBENSE - MOINDEKOR/KOIDU 1 0 2 0 TOWN
GBENSE SINA TOWN 1 0 3 0
GORAMA KONO 8 3 5 0
KOIDU TOWN 6 4 6 2
LEI 5 2 1 0
MAFINDOR 5 0 6 0
NIMIKORO 14 2 8 2
NIMIYAMA 3 1 0 0
SANDOR 13 8 12 1
SOA 4 3 5 0
113 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
TANKORO 9 9 2 5
Bombali CHIEFDOM BIRIWA 3 3 3 2
BOMBALI SEBORA 3 5 2 2
GBANTI KAMARANKA 3 1 4 0
GBENDEMBU 1 0 4 0 NGOWA
LIBEISAYGAHUN 1 0 0 0
MAKARI GBANTI 0 1 3 0
MAKENI TOWN 7 1 6 0
PAKI MASABONG 15 0 15 0
SAFROKO LIMBA 0 3 0 0
SANDA LOKO 1 2 1 0
SANDA TENDARAN 0 1 0 0
SELLA LIMBA 8 2 8 1
TAMBAKA 1 0 1 0
Kambia CHIEFDOM BRAMAIA 6 1 6 0
GBINLE DIXING 0 1 3 1
MAGBEMA 9 3 16 2
MAMBOLO 10 1 3 0
MASUNGBALA 20 2 4 0
SAMU 10 1 1 0
TONKO LIMBA 10 2 11 1
114 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
Koinadugu CHIEFDOM DEMBELIA SINKUNIA 3 0 4 1
DIANG 3 1 4 0
FOLOSABA 3 0 3 1 DEMBELIA
KASUNKO 1 0 0 1
MONGO 2 1 4 0
NEXA 1 0 3 2
NEYA 4 0 3 1
NIENI 6 3 3 5
SENGBE 1 1 2 0
SULIMA 4 0 4 1
WARA WARA 5 0 3 1 BAFODIA
WARA WARA 4 1 11 2 YAGALA
Portloko CHIEFDOM BKM 3 1 4 0
BUYA ROMENDE 1 0 0 0
DIBIA 2 1 0 0
KAFFU BULLOM 5 2 7 1
koya 5 1 1 0
KOYA 0 4 8 1
LOKOMASAMA 12 2 3 1
MAFORKI 14 3 4 0
115 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
MARAMPA 2 0 2 0
MASIMERA 3 2 3 1
SANDA 0 0 4 0 MAGBOLONTON
SENDUGU MAFORKI 3 0 1 0
TMS 1 0 2 0
Tonkolili CHIEFDOM GBONKOLENKEN 6 1 4 0
KAFE SIMIRA 1 0 0 0
KALANSOGOIA 2 1 2 1
KHOLIFA MABANG 1 0 0 0
KHOLIFA ROWALA 4 1 7 0
KUNIKE 2 0 4 0
KUNIKE BARINA 2 1 0 0
MAKENI ROKEFULA 0 0 2 0
PETIFU UPPER 2 2 2 0 (YONI)
SAMBAYA 9 3 3 3
TANE 1 2 2 1
YELE MANOWO 1 0 1 0
YONI 11 2 3 1
W/A Urban CHIEFDOM CENTRAL 1 0 0 2 0
EAST I 1 1 0 1
EAST II 2 0 2 0
116 | P a g e
Section B1.6a and b. In this case do you a) For the case that you were b) For the case that a family member think that the issue/matter was dealt involved in? was involved in? with fairly? Yes No Yes No
EAST III 8 2 5 2
WEST 1 3 1 2 0
WEST II 3 4 3 3
WEST III 2 2 3 3
W/A Rural CHIEFDOM Koya Rural 2 0 2 2
KOYA RURAL 8 1 2 0
MOUNTAIN RURAL 2 4 0 0
WATERLOO RURAL 12 6 4 6
YORK RURAL 10 9 11 6
117 | P a g e