A Commentary By Foday Moriba Conteh

When Sierra Leoneans went to the polls on June 23rd, 2023, many hoped the election would consolidate the country’s democratic gains and strengthen public confidence in governance. Instead, the aftermath left a trail of uncertainty and division. The main opposition, the All People’s Congress (APC), citing irregularities and lack of transparency in the tallying process, rejected the results announced by the Electoral Commission for Sierra Leone (ECSL).

In a bold political move, the APC declared that it would not participate in governance effectively withdrawing its Members of Parliament, Mayors and Councillors. This unprecedented boycott left the political space tense and fractured, testing the very fabric of Sierra Leone’s democracy.

Months of political stalemate ensued until regional and international mediators including ECOWAS, the African Union and the Commonwealth intervened to broker peace. Their efforts culminated in a three-day dialogue between the Government of Sierra Leone, led by the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) and the opposition All People’s Congress (APC).

From that dialogue emerged the National Unity Agreement (NUA) a document heralded as a roadmap to political reconciliation and stability. The NUA contained eight key resolutions, each crafted to restore mutual trust, enhance democratic dialogue and strengthen state institutions. Among those resolutions, one stood out for its potential to reshape Sierra Leone’s political culture: the joint condemnation of hate speech, incitement and divisive rhetoric by citizens both at home and abroad.

That clause was more than symbolic. It reflected a collective acknowledgment that Sierra Leone’s biggest threat may not be electoral disputes alone, but the growing culture of toxic political discourse. The Unity Agreement explicitly stated that both parties would “strictly condemn all citizens at home and abroad who incite violence, spread hate speech and disrupt national cohesion,” with Government committing to “bring those involved to justice.”

Yet, over a year since the signing of that agreement, the spirit of that resolution appears to be fading.

To the credit of both the SLPP and the APC, several aspects of the Agreement have been implemented. Opposition lawmakers have since taken their seats in Parliament, cross-party committees have resumed dialogue and the atmosphere in Freetown has somewhat stabilized.

However, the pledge to combat hate speech one of the most crucial commitments remains largely unfulfilled. In recent months, inflammatory remarks by political figures, including senior SLPP officials, have surfaced in both traditional and social media spaces. What has been most disappointing to many Sierra Leoneans is the Government’s silence in response to such remarks.

This selective outrage where only opposition voices are scrutinized or punished for incendiary speech while ruling party members escape censure undermines the very essence of the Agreement. Many citizens now question whether the fight against hate speech was ever about national unity or simply a political convenience to manage public perception.

Ironically, on June 3rd, 2024, the SLPP and APC jointly released a powerful statement reaffirming their commitment to combat hate speech and promote peaceful political discourse. In that joint communiqué, the two parties expressed “deep concern over the rising tensions in political dialogue” and pledged to strengthen democratic institutions, resume regular cross-party communication and protect free speech with responsibility.

The statement outlined key principles:

• That freedom of expression should never be used to incite violence or hatred;
• That individuals should not be disparaged based on ethnicity, gender or political affiliation; and
• That legal action should be taken against anyone found guilty of using hate speech to destabilize the nation.

The declaration was hailed by diplomats and Civil Society actors as a positive step. But as political realities unfolded, the gap between written commitment and practical enforcement became glaring. The joint statement, much like the National Unity Agreement itself, began to feel like an exercise in political optics rather than genuine reform.

At the heart of Sierra Leone’s political problem lies a deep-seated culture of intolerance; one that transcends party lines. Supporters of both major political parties have often resorted to inflammatory language, hate speech and online intimidation. The emergence of social media has further amplified those divisions, turning digital platforms into battlegrounds for partisan attacks.

While freedom of expression remains a cornerstone of democracy, Sierra Leone’s experience shows how easily it can be weaponized. The line between free speech and hate speech has been dangerously blurred, with little institutional will to draw it clearly.

The National Unity Agreement offered an opportunity to reverse this trend, but selective implementation has only deepened public cynicism. The Government’s reluctance to call out its own supporters for incendiary behavior sends a message that hate speech is unacceptable except when politically convenient.

The consequences of this selective approach are profound. Hate speech does not exist in a vacuum; it fuels division, breeds resentment and erodes public trust in state institutions. In a country still recovering from the scars of civil war, such rhetoric can easily ignite tensions and reverse years of peacebuilding efforts.

Moreover, by failing to apply the same standard of accountability to all citizens regardless of political affiliation the Government risks normalizing impunity. When one side is perceived as untouchable, it emboldens extremists and weakens the credibility of national cohesion efforts.

The silence of political leaders in the face of inflammatory speech, particularly from within their own ranks, is not neutrality it is complicity.

True leadership demands moral consistency. It requires the courage to speak truth even when it is politically inconvenient. Both the SLPP and APC must recognize that hate speech, if left unchecked, poses a greater threat to Sierra Leone than partisan rivalry ever could.

The implementation of the National Unity Agreement should not be reduced to a checklist of political compromises; it must be treated as a living commitment to nation-building. The fight against hate speech must be inclusive, impartial and transparent. Civil society, the media and the justice system all have roles to play in ensuring that accountability is not selective.

If the ruling party fails to uphold its own commitments under the National Unity Agreement, it risks eroding the very trust that the agreement was meant to rebuild.

As Sierra Leone awaits the full implementation of the Tripartite Recommendations and looks ahead to future political contests, the stakes for national unity could not be higher. Both major political parties must recommit to the principles of responsible speech and respect for dissent.

The promise of the National Unity Agreement was not merely to end a political boycott, but to redefine the country’s democratic values. That promise remains unfinished.

It is time for the SLPP and APC to move beyond rhetoric and embrace genuine accountability. Hate speech, from any corner, must be condemned without fear or favor. Only then can Sierra Leone truly begin to heal not as two rival camps but as one nation united in purpose and dignity.