Advocates Redesign

Category: Case Based Legal Support

  • MAPO and NMJD Renew Call for Justice Over Koidu Mining Abuses in Sierra Leone

    A press conference held in Freetown, Sierra Leone, last Friday brought together members of the Marginalized Affected Property Owners Association (MAPO), their legal representatives, and senior officials of the Network Movement for Justice and Development (NMJD), to renew calls for justice for mining-affected communities in Kono District.

    The event highlighted years of alleged abuse, injustice, and environmental destruction linked to the operations of Koidu Limited, a diamond mining company operating in eastern Sierra Leone.

    Voices from the Affected Communities

    MAPO Chairlady, Mrs. Sia Janet Bayoh, delivered an emotional account of her community’s ordeal and described how Koidu Limited forcefully seized their lands and flooded her home to compel her family to relocate.

    “We were moved to a new place without water, without schools, without a clinic,” she said. “They call it resettlement, but it was more like abandonment.”

    Mrs. Bayoh also recounted how frequent blasting by the company, often done without notice, damaged their houses and endangered lives. “My own son’s head was seriously injured by a flying rock,” she said tearfully, accusing Koidu Limited of refusing to take responsibility for the incident.

    MAPO Chairman, Mr. Tamba Prince Boima, spoke of the “monumental destruction” caused by mining activities to their farms, rivers, and livelihoods. He detailed a pattern of intimidation, bribery attempts, and undue pressure from company agents, government officials, and traditional authorities aimed at silencing their movement.

    “They tried to buy our conscience,” Boima said. “But we refused. We are poor, but we are not for sale. We will continue this fight for justice — for our land, our children, and our dignity.”

    Painful journey

    NMJD’s Executive Director, Mr. Abu Brima, reflected on the long struggle for justice within Sierra Leone’s mining sector, describing it as “a painful journey of resistance, deceit, and systemic failure.”

    He recalled NMJD’s early interventions, including research conducted with Partnership Africa Canada (now IMPACT), which established the link between the country’s decade-long civil war and the illicit diamond trade.

    Mr. Brima emphasized that the findings of that research inspired the creation of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), a global initiative aimed at preventing conflict diamonds from entering the mainstream market and ensuring that diamond revenues contribute to community development.

    However, he lamented that “despite Sierra Leone’s participation, the objectives of the Kimberley Process have been betrayed by persistent injustice, exploitation, and government complicity.”

    Failures of Accountability and Governance

    Mr. Brima accused Koidu Limited of consistently violating national laws and community rights and stated that the company’s non-compliance with social and environmental obligations triggered MAPO’s ongoing court case.

    He also criticized the World Bank for what he described as “biased interventions” through its Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), arguing that their involvement was designed to protect corporate interests rather than national welfare.

    The NMJD Director further condemned the role of certain local chiefs, alleging that they had become “beneficiaries” of the company’s operations and had turned a blind eye to the suffering of their people.

    He also recounted two fatal incidents in Kono involving state security forces and protesting residents.

    In December 2007, two demonstrators were shot dead during a peaceful protest against Koidu Holdings. The subsequent Jenkins Johnston Commission of Enquiry found the company guilty and issued 17 recommendations — none of which were ever implemented. Five years later, in a similar protest, two more lives were lost, yet justice was again denied.

    “Every year, government officials attend Kimberley Process meetings abroad and present deceitful reports of compliance,” Mr. Brima said. “But if there were real compliance, these injustices wouldn’t persist.”

    Judicial Delays and Obstacles

    The speakers also described the slow pace of justice, citing repeated changes in court venues, long adjournments, and missing case files — challenges that have prolonged their legal struggle for years. These obstacles, they said, have drained the affected families emotionally and financially, but their resolve remains firm.

    Landmark judgment

    Dr. Chernor M. Benedict Jalloh of C&J Partners and Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs all residents of Kono District told the media that Court of Appeal of Sierra Leone has delivered a landmark judgment in the case of Aiah Fengai & 73 Others v. Octea Limited & Others, overturning a 2022 High Court decision that had dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims for lack of jurisdiction.

    He said the ruling, announced by a three-member panel led by Justice Fynn, found that the High Court erred in law when it denied the plaintiffs legal standing to sue, and further granted an interlocutory injunction freezing the defendant companies’ assets pending trial.

    The case, according to Dr. Jalloh, was filed by 74 class plaintiffs, 14 additional class plaintiffs, and nine individual plaintiffs — all residents of Kono District — who allege that Octea Limited’s mining operations caused extensive environmental destruction, unlawful deprivation of property, economic displacement, and emotional distress.

    He explained that their multiple suits were consolidated into one action at the High Court but struck out in October 2022 on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked the capacity to sue and were not parties to any relevant contracts.

    Dr. Jalloh further said the trial judge failed to acknowledge their property and personal rights protected under law, even on customary lands owned by traditional chiefs.

    “The plaintiffs therefore challenged the court’s insistence that they exhaust a non-functional corporate grievance mechanism before seeking judicial redress. The Court of Appeal agreed, holding that damages for personal injury, property loss, emotional harm, and environmental nuisance were valid claims”, the Lead Counsel added.

    “In a decision hailed as groundbreaking, the Court affirmed that residents of customary lands have the right to sue for violations affecting those lands, even when legal title rests with local chiefs. Drawing inspiration from Ghanaian jurisprudence, the Court stated that restricting such rights to chiefs alone “would be absurd,” adding that traditional authorities are not immune from accountability.”

    According to him, the ruling allows the case to proceed to trial at the High Court and sets an important precedent in Sierra Leone’s legal history. It broadens access to justice for communities impacted by extractive industries and establishes, for the first time, that citizens can bring human rights–related lawsuits against multinational corporations for abuses tied to mining and environmental harm.

    A Call to Action

    The press conference concluded with a renewed appeal to the Government of Sierra Leone, the international community, and civil society actors to take decisive action to ensure accountability in the mining sector and protect the rights of affected communities.

    “Justice delayed is justice denied,” Brima stated. “The people of Kono have waited too long. It is time for the government to act, not to protect corporations, but to defend its citizens.”

  • Court of Appeal Overturns High Court Ruling in Landmark Human Rights and Environmental Case

    The Court of Appeal of Sierra Leone today delivered a significant judgment in the matter of Aiah Fengai & 73 Others v. Octea Limited & Others, overturning a prior High Court decision that had struck out the plaintiffs’ claims for lack of jurisdiction.

    In a unanimous ruling delivered by a three-member panel of Justices of the Court of Appeal presided over by Justice Fynn, the Court found that the High Court had erred in law when it ruled that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing (locus standi) to bring the case and granted an interlocutory injunction freezing the companies’ assets.  The case will now return to the High Court for trial.

    Background

    The case involves 74 plaintiffs, all residents of Kono District, who had initially filed multiple writs of summons against Octea Limited and other associated parties, alleging a wide range of environmental, economic, and personal harms arising from the defendants’ mining operations. These claims included allegations of unlawful deprivation of property, environmental degradation, economic displacement, and emotional distress. The writs were consolidated into one action at the High Court.

    However, on 27th October 2022, the High Court struck out the consolidated action, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter on the basis that the plaintiffs had no legal capacity to sue, and were not privy to any contract that would entitle them to claim under the relevant mining and environmental laws.

    Appeal and Findings

    Dissatisfied with that decision, the plaintiffs, represented by C and J Partners, with Dr. Chernor M. Benedict Jalloh as the Lead Counsel, sought and were granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The appeal was based on several key errors in the High Court’s decision, notably:

    • Failure to recognize that many of the plaintiffs’ claims arose from personal damages (rather than contractual claims) for which legal standing could not be denied.
    • Failure to recognize that plaintiffs had property rights that were protected under law, even if the ownership of their land was vested in traditional Chiefs.
    • The need to extend Sierra Leone law to recognize universal standing to enforce environmental rights and obligations.
    • Unwarranted imposition on the plaintiffs of an obligation to use an internal corporate grievance mechanism before coming to court, despite recognition that the grievance mechanism was not actually functional.

    After careful consideration of all the submissions, the Court of Appeal issued a judgment that resoundingly vindicates the plaintiffs’ rights to justice for the harm they suffered.  Quoting the famous maxim that: “where there’s a wrong there must be a remedy,” the Court criticized the trial judge for striking out all the plaintiffs’ claims and held that damages for personal injury, property deprivation, emotional harm, and nuisance (environmental harms that affect residents’ peaceful enjoyment of their property) could go forward.

    Breaking new legal ground, the Court of Appeal also concluded that the plaintiffs had the right to sue for violations of the rights they hold to the traditional lands they inhabit, even if those lands belong to the Chiefs by law.  Noting that giving Chiefs the exclusive right to account for the land their subjects occupy “does not sit easily on our mind,” and giving credit to the courts of Ghana for recognizing the same principle, the Court decided that residents of customary lands should be able to sue for infringements on that land when their Chiefs decline to do so.  “Monarchs are now seldom found to be absolute, and their conduct comes under scrutiny regularly the World over.  It is our opinion that the attempts to make the right to sue or be sued with respect to customary land exclusive to the chiefs have lost its allure … We opine that to hold anything to the contrary would be absurd.”

    The Court also criticized the trial court for accepting unsubstantiated arguments that agreements between the Chiefs and the company had deprived the plaintiffs of their right to sue, and for requiring the plaintiffs to use Octea’s corporate grievance mechanism without giving them the chance to prove that the mechanism was inoperative.

    Finally, the Court granted an interlocutory injunction, extending the interim freezing order that it had imposed on the companies’ assets until a final judgment in the case is reached.  The Court recognized that this measure was necessary to prevent the company from stripping its assets from Sierra Leone in advance of the trial.

    Implications

    This decision paves the way for the plaintiffs to return to the High Court and have their claims fully heard on their merits. It marks a significant development in access to justice for affected communities in resource-rich regions and expands the scope of legal standing for land rights claims on customary lands in Sierra Leone.

  • 20 community members complete legal training on land and property rights

    Twenty representatives from some communities in the Eastern Region, where Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA) operates, have successfully completed a three-day legal training program focused on land and property rights, as well as Ghana’s mining laws.

    The training, organized and facilitated by ACA, sought to strengthen participants’ understanding of the legal framework governing land acquisition, ownership, and registration, while equipping them with the tools to educate their communities on sustainable and lawful practices.

    This program formed part of ACA’s ongoing capacity-building initiative and served as a follow-up to an initial session conducted in April 2025. The series was informed by a needs assessment undertaken by ACA’s Legal Department, which highlighted significant challenges faced by local communities, including disputes over land acquisition and the adverse impacts of mining activities.

    ACA’s legal team led interactive sessions covering Ghana’s legal and regulatory frameworks on land and mining.

    Key legislation

    Participants were introduced to key legislation such as the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) and its Amendment Act 900 (2015), the Minerals Development Fund Act, 2016 (Act 912), Minerals and Mining (Compensation and Resettlement) Regulations, 2012 (L.I. 2175) and the Land Act, 2020 (Act 1036).

    The facilitators emphasized that individuals or entities seeking to explore, prospect, or mine minerals must first secure a mineral right through the Minerals Commission, with approval from the sector minister.

    They also highlighted the legal requirement for chiefs, allodial landowners, and District Assemblies to be formally notified of such activities, ensuring transparency and accountability in land use.

    Land ownership

    On land ownership, the Land Act, 2020 (Act 1036) was highlighted as the central law governing acquisition, registration, and ownership. The facilitators underscored the importance of land registration as a safeguard against disputes and a means of securing legal ownership rights. Participants were also briefed on the roles of key institutions such as the Lands Commission, the Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands, and Traditional Authorities in ensuring effective land governance.

    Participants expressed their appreciation for the workshop, noting that the knowledge gained would not only help them protect their rights but also empower them to educate others within their communities.

    Confident

    “Before this training, many of us did not fully understand the laws governing land in Ghana. Now I feel more confident that I can protect my family’s land and help others in my community avoid mistakes. This knowledge is very empowering,” said Asabea Sarah, a representative from the Odumase community in the Eastern Region.

    They also called for similar training programs to be extended to other districts and regions facing similar challenges.

    Through such initiatives, ACA continues to promote community empowerment, legal awareness, and sustainable approaches to land and natural resource governance in Ghana.

    ACA helps West African communities that are threatened by the destructive impacts of extractives-led development to take control of their own futures. ACA works directly with communities to design their own sustainable development plans and advocate to achieve those plans, and it builds and supports networks of lawyers and other professionals that will serve communities in need.

  • Marginalized Affected Property Owners (MAPO) enjoins Koidu Ltd, Octea group of Companies

    The Sierra Leonean Court of Appeal today extended an interim injunction brought against the Koidu Limited Mining Company, a major mining company operating in Koidu City Tankoro Chiefdom, Kono District to next Monday July 28th, 2025. The injunction application, brought before the court by the Marginalized Affected Property Owners (MAPO) was first upheld last Thursday in Freetown.

    The court’s order prohibits the company (Koidu/Octéa mining company limited) from selling, disposing of or in any way alienating any of its properties.

    On Thursday 17th, July 2025, the court granted an interim injunction against Koidu Limited Mining Company, a major mining company operating in Koidu City Tankoro Chiefdom, Kono District.

    This legal action was initiated following a request made by the lawyering firm C&J Partners, working with the Network Movement for Justice and Development (NMJD), with support from the Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA).

    The injunction is a temporary measure, pending further legal proceedings. The court has scheduled a hearing for Monday 21st, July 2025, where both the complainants and the defendants will present oral or electronic arguments, each side allocated 20 minutes to state their case.

    This case is expected to have broader implications for corporate accountability and community rights in Sierra Leone’s mining communities.

    At today’s hearing, the motion was converted to inter partes. Counsel for the company pleaded that due to the other injunctions pending against the company, he would like the court and the applicants to be served with those papers in the form of an affidavit in opposition.

    Counsel for the applicants are expected to file an affidavit in reply.

    Brief background

    Koidu Limited is a diamond mining company that operates in Sierra Leone and is privately owned by BSG Resources Limited (BSGR) through its subsidiary, Octéa Limited. The company is accused of degrading the living conditions of people living near its mining operations and failing to properly relocate them or compensate them for their losses.

    Residents who have not been relocated find it increasingly difficult to farm because waste rock and rubble from Koidu Ltd.’s operations have covered much of their farmland. “Koidu Limited has destroyed our lives,” said Mr. Prince Boima, Chairman of the Marginalized Affected Property Owners Association. “We used to farm and live in peace, but now our lands and water sources are poisoned and covered in rubble. Our homes are shaken by explosives every day.”

    Residents also report that their health has suffered. Dust from the mining operations often cover the community and causes headaches, difficulty breathing, and a burning sensation in the residents’ eyes. The operations have also contaminated the water, and many residents develop skin rashes and digestive problems they did not previously experience. High stress from living with frequent blasting further causes headaches, high blood pressure, heart palpitations, and respiratory problems in the community.

    Despite promising to properly relocate affected community members in advance of expanding its mining operations, Koidu Ltd. has left the people to suffer.  Many community members have neither been relocated, nor compensated for the damage to their properties, health, and livelihoods.  Others have been relocated to a new area, but the conditions of relocation have been incommensurate with what they lost.

    In all these, Koidu Limited had closed the mine, laid off all its workers, and was stripping valuable machinery from the site. The mine site is currently stripped of everything of value except for the power plant and is abandoned except for a token detachment of police officers who are keeping guard. This prompted the plaintiffs to freeze the company’s assets to ensure that there would be enough left to satisfy an eventual judgment in favor of their favour.

    The community is supported in its fight for justice by Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA), a Ghana-based human rights organization, and Network Movement for Justice and Development (NMJD), a Sierra Leonean civil society organization that organizes communities for a more just society in the face of natural resource extraction.

  • IFC Plays Pontius Pilate, Dodges Accountability for Harmful Rubber Project in Liberia after Six Years

    In 2019, 22 communities in Liberia filed a complaint with the World Bank Group’s Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO), accusing the International Finance Corporation (IFC) of fueling abuse and environmental destruction through a loan to the Salala Rubber Corporation (SRC). That loan helped SRC expand its rubber plantations—with devastating consequences.

    Nearly six years on, in March 2025, the CAO published its damning findings: the IFC failed to follow its own safeguards, enabling widespread harm to land rights, community health, and cultural heritage. Women suffered, with disturbing reports of sexual exploitation by SRC contractors who demanded sex in exchange for jobs or wages.

    But rather than take full responsibility, IFC Management responded with a weak action plan that – aside from a livelihoods fund that should provide some welcome livelihoods support to the impoverished populations of plantation-adjacent communities – leans on voluntary reforms by SRC’s former owner, Socfin, and its new buyer, Jeety.  Civil society groups say this move amounts to passing the buck.

    “The CAO has validated the long-standing concerns expressed by local communities: that the International Finance Corporation (IFC) not only overlooked critical issues but also allowed its client to illegally seize land, contaminate vital water sources, and perpetuate various forms of violence and abuse,” stated Alfred Lahai Gabbai Brownell Sr., a lawyer representing the 22 affected communities and the winner of the 2019 Goldman Prize for Africa. “Now, the IFC is playing Pontius Pilate, washing its hands, asserting that it is powerless to take any corrective measures merely because the loan has been repaid. This is not a demonstration of accountability; rather, it constitutes a profound abandonment of responsibility towards those impacted.”

    The communities’ complaint details how SRC’s expansion left entire villages landless, razed crops without compensation, and disregarded ancestral land claims. Toxic chemicals leached into waterways. Women faced systemic sexual violence. And throughout, IFC continued to finance the project, despite knowing SRC lacked the capacity—or will—to protect people or the environment.

    The CAO agreed with almost all of the communities’ claims and urged IFC to commit to real remediation. But because the CAO can only make recommendations, it’s up to IFC Management to act—and so far, its response falls short.

    Key concerns with IFC’s response include:

    No accountability for land rights violations: IFC refuses to examine whether the plantation was built on land the government had no right to give away.

    No proper analysis of Indigenous identity: IFC sidestepped the question of whether the affected Kpelle communities are Indigenous, citing generalizations rather than facts on the ground despite an abundance of expert testimonies and very strong recommendations from the CAO.

    A shameful and diluted compensation plan: IFC proposes to create a livelihood fund that is spread across all surrounding communities—not just the 22 complainant villages—potentially weakening the communities’ support network and failing to address specific harms.

    Shrugging off responsibility: IFC claims it has no leverage since the loan was repaid and the plantation was sold. But the CAO clearly states IFC could have, and still might, use legal remedies to demand accountability from SRC.

    Delaying action: Claiming that the security situation in the communities is too unpredictable, IFC management has declared that the implementation of its assistance plan will be delayed until an undetermined date in the future.

    While we welcome the CAO’s clear and courageous findings—and hope the livelihoods fund offers some relief—we reject IFC’s decision to wash its hands, and walk away from the communities it helped harm. The burden of fixing this mess should not rest on the goodwill of private plantation owners. IFC must step up, accept responsibility, and ensure the communities finally get justice.

    The Affected Indigenous Communities are shocked and overwhelmed by their frustration and condemnation of the IFC and those voices are captured in this press statement as follows:

    Ma. Mattia Gbar, Chairlady, Martin Village: “We depend on our land and forest for everything, fishing, making farm, medicine for treatment when we are sick, and other activities, but since SRC took our land, everything is hard for us. So, why will they say we are not traditional people? Let them pay for everything they did to us.”

    Yeagbamah National Congress for Human Rights, a victim of SGBV, name withheld for her protection: “I and other women were asked for sex just to get or keep a job with the company. This is not just unfair—it is violence. It can hurt women and keep them afraid and silent. The IFC’s action plan talks about protecting people and fixing harm, but what about the women who suffered this violence and abuse? We want to see real action, not just promises. The IFC and the company must make sure this never happens again and that we women get justice. Respect for women must be part of the solution, said, SGBV victim from SRC.”

    Mr. James Gorgbor, Elder, Gorgbor Town: “Look, I have always said that IFC supported SRC to kill us on our own land. I worked for SRC for so many years until I fell sick, and the management left me on sick bed and paid me off without any benefit.  They took 95% of my land and destroyed all of the rubber I planned for my children. Their Management Action Plan is beating around the bush. What I can say is, let them pay for our crops according to the COA Compliance Report, because we don’t know who will implement the Management Action Plan.”

    David Shiffa, Elder, Shiffa Molley Villiage: Let IFC pay for all the harms. One thing I can say is we are traditional people and if IFC do not believe that, I think they should bring someone to check on the way we are living. We have lived here for so long practicing our culture, and we believe in our tradition.”

    Ma. Quetta George, Chairlady, Doakai Town: “The thing SRC did to us with this IFC money is not good. The company took the money and came on our land and cut our rubber down and planned their rubber. Today some of our rubber is among their rubbers and they’re tapping it. They did not pay for our rubbers, and they also destroyed our town. The CAO report says they must pay for it, they made a plan for the report, and who will work with the plan, because SRC is going, and Jeety says he bought the plantation.” So, let IFC pay for all our things the company spoiled and give our land back.”

    Pastor. Melton Gweh, Elder, Gleebah Town: “IFC told us that, since 2020 they have no contract with SRC, and the COA report says that IFC should work with SRC to address our complaint. IFC has come up with a Management Action Plan, who will implement the plan since SRC is going? We are calling on the IFC to be the ones to implement the plan in line with CAO recommendations.t”

    Equally disturbed and deeply betrayed by the IFC’s inadequate actions are also the leadership of the supporting organizations that tried to work with the IFC to resolve the violent abuses perpetrated by the IFC client. Those voices are also captured below:

    Francis Colee, Head of Program and Acting Director at Green Advocates International “While we can thank the IFC management for some of the actions they have taken to assist the victims in the Management Action Plan (MAP), it is disappointing that the IFC greatly undermined the victims’ ability to receive real benefits for the harm they suffered because of the IFC’s failure to effectively apply its own definition of Indigenous peoples, as clearly and succinctly provided in the IFC Performance Standards. This makes the IFC complicit in the harm these people suffered.”, Francis Colee, Head of Program and Acting Director at Green Advocates International

    Paul Larry George, Chairman, of Alliance for Rural Democracy (ARD): “I welcome the recommendations and findings of the CAO report and believe that the recommendations and findings are evidence of the voices and struggles of affected communities, who have long demanded justice for the harm caused by the IFC’s financing of SRC’s operations. I am deeply troubled that, despite overwhelming evidence of abuse, SRC has chosen to neglect responsibility for the damages caused by allegedly divesting the company to an Indian businessman Jetty, whom we believe will not uphold or take full accountability for implementing the IFC so-called MAP”.

    Windor B.K. Smith, Head of Secretariat, Alliance for Rural Democracy (ARD), “I believe that, IFC is hiding under the escape tactic of SRC to neglect its responsibility to the affected communities. I am calling on the IFC and its client, SRC, to take full responsibility for the harm caused to the lives of Indigenous communities and fully respond to the concrete recommendations and findings in the CAO report. True accountability requires more than a repaid loan that IFC speaks of. It requires compensation, recognition of Indigenous rights, and a clear plan for remediation. The ARD is very disappointed with the IFC MAP and is calling on the IFC to honor the CAO’s recommendations, work directly with the impacted communities, and ensure that justice is not delayed or denied.”

    Abraham N. Kamara, Chairman, Yeabamah National Congress for Human Rights (YNCHR): “I am calling on the IFC to take full responsibility of the harm done to us as Indigenous Communities. The Management Action Plan released by the IFC, does not address the complete recommendations proposed by the CAO, and we think this is unfair to us, because I have advocated for so long that I am now disabled from the blindness I suffered when the state and SRC security forces arrested me and sprayed a tear gas canister directly into my eyes.”

    Veronica B. Gray, Acting Head of Secretariat, Natural Resources Women Platform (NRWP), “The CAO report confirms what women in affected communities have been saying for years—we have lost land, our environment is damaged, and women have faced threats, harassment, and sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) without protection or justice. These are not isolated incidents; they are the result of intentional, willful, reckless, and systemic negligence. The IFC cannot hide behind SRC’s divestment. Real accountability means compensation, recognition of rights, and direct action to repair harms. Anything less is injustice. We believe that justice that is delayed or diluted is, in effect, justice denied. The lives, dignity, and lands of Liberian communities must not be collateral damage for profit”,

     

    Contact information for Media Inquiries

    Jonathan Kaufman (Advocates for Community Alternatives): +1 617 645 4069, jonathan@advocatesforalternatives.org

    Francis Colee (Green Advocates International): +231-777-770-206, francis.colee@greenadvocates.org

    Paul Larry George (Alliance for Rural Democracy): +231-777-216-981, chairman.ard@gmail.com

    Windor B Smith (Alliance for Rural Democracy): +231-886-726-037, ard.headsecretariat@gmail.com

    Veronica Gray (Natural Resources Women’s Platform): +231-888-312-250, nrwomenplatform@gmail.com

    Abraham Kamara (Yeabamah National Congress for Human Rights: +231-775-071-272

    Ma. Quetta George (Doakai Town): +231-881-758-466

    Pastor. Melton Gweh (Gleebah Town): +231-886-933-720

    Mr. James Gorgbor (Gorgbor Town): +231-886-111-928

  • ACA trains 40 communities on Mining and Land Rights

    Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA) continues to equip West African communities with the legal knowledge they need to protect their land and natural resources. In a recent initiative, ACA hosted a three-day legal training for representatives from 40 communities across Ghana, strengthening their understanding of mining and land governance.

    The training followed a needs assessment survey by ACA’s Legal Department, which revealed widespread legal threats facing community members – particularly around land acquisition and mining activities. In response, ACA brought together 50 Community-Based Facilitators (CBFs), Facilitated Collective Active Process (FCAP) executives, and other community representatives to participate in a hands-on learning session.

    The ACA Legal Team, which facilitated sessions on Ghana’s mining and land regulatory frameworks, explained key legislations, including the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703), its amendment Act 900 (2015), and other relevant laws such as the Minerals Development Fund Act, 2016 (Act 912), the Minerals Income Investment Fund Act, 2018 (Act 978), and the Kimberley Process Certification Act, 2003 (Act 652).

    The team further emphasized that any individual intending to search for, prospect, or mine minerals must first obtain a mineral right through the Minerals Commission, with approval from the sector minister. The law requires notification to relevant chiefs, allodial owners, and District Assemblies, including clear communication of the affected land area.

    On land ownership, the Land Act 2020 (Act 1036) was highlighted as the key legislation addressing ownership, acquisition, and registration and underscored the importance of land registration in preventing disputes and protecting legal rights.

    The ACA Legal Team also cited the Lands Commission, Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands, and Traditional Authorities as the primary institutions involved in land governance.

    Participants expressed appreciation for the training and requested similar workshops in their communities.

    “This training was insightful. I wish my whole community could have been here to benefit,” one participant shared.

  • Kono residents unperturbed about adjournments by Sierra Leone’s Court of Appeal

    Members of the Marginalized Affected Property Owners Association (MAPO), a civil society group based in Kono in the Eastern Region of Sierra Leone, say they are unperturbed about the frequent adjournments of their case pending at the Court of Appeal in Freetown and have vowed to relentlessly pursue their case despite the frustrations.

    “Even if they ask us to come here a hundred times, we shall come. We’re determined to fight for our rights and to seek justice through the legal process. Even though we’re not happy about the continuous dragging of our case at the courts, we are not intimidated by any attempts to frustrate us”, they said after Sierra Leone’s Court of Appeal again adjourned their case to November 14, 2025.

    Last Thursday, the Court of Appeal again adjourned hearing Kono community’s human rights claims, which seek to determine whether the community members can legally take on a multinational diamond mining company for causing harm to their livelihoods, health, and their traditional lands.

    The community members and their partners left the court premises disappointed and helpless but remained resolute in their bid to relentlessly fight for their rights in a case which has dragged on for five years amidst several court adjournments. One of the three-member panel of judges, Hon. Justice Emily Wright, was unavailable, leading to the latest adjournment.

    The matter is adjourned to Thursday 14th November 2024. Counsels for the two parties agreed before the Hon. Justice Reginald Fynn (JA) and the Hon. Justice Sulaiman Bah (JA), in Chambers, that if for any reason the matter is unable to proceed, the Defence Counsel will file written submission while the Counsel for the Appellant will file a written reply to his submission. Under this arrangement, the matter will then be withdrawn for ruling, meaning no further hearings after the 14th of November 2024.

    “We keep travelling all the way from Koidu, and other parts of Kono to Freetown, a 12-hour return trip any time the Court decides to sit on our case. We keep coming in our numbers to court and they also keep adjourning our case, but I can assure everyone that we are never going to retreat or surrender, but rather, we’re going to soldier on despite the adjournments”, Mr. Prince Boima, the MAPO Chairman, said after the court announced yet another adjournment on Thursday.

    The Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs, Dr. Chernor Mamoud Benedict Jalloh urged the justice system to ensure that justice is delivered in a timely manner in this matter because “justice delayed is justice denied to all parties in this litigation.”

    The hearing of the Koidu community’s human rights became possible after a ruling on Thursday February 29, 2024, that struck out preliminary objections filed by the defendant mining company, Koidu Limited.

    The Appeals Court’s ruling last February brought a new life into the Koidu plaintiffs’ case, which was dismissed by the High Court in Makeni on 27th October 2022, on the basis that the plaintiffs were not qualified to press their claims in court.  The dismissal order also ruled that the plaintiffs should have used a non-judicial grievance mechanism before going to court, despite also recognizing that the grievance mechanism did not actually exist.

    Brief background

    Koidu Limited is a diamond mining company that operates in Sierra Leone and is privately owned by BSG Resources Limited (BSGR) through its subsidiary, Octéa Limited. The company is accused of degrading the living conditions of people living near its mining operations and failing to properly relocate them or compensate them for their losses.

    Residents who have not been relocated find it increasingly difficult to farm because waste rock and rubble from Koidu Ltd.’s operations have covered much of their farmland. “Koidu Limited has destroyed our lives,” said Mr. Prince Boima, Chairman of the Marginalized Affected Property Owners Association. “We used to farm and live in peace, but now our lands and water sources are poisoned and covered in rubble. Our homes are shaken by explosives every day.”

    Residents also report that their health has suffered. Dust from the mining operations often covers the community and causes headaches, difficulty breathing, and a burning sensation in the

    Residents’ eyes. The operations have also contaminated the water, and many residents develop skin rashes and digestive problems they did not previously experience. High stress from living with frequent blasting further causes headaches, high blood pressure, heart palpitations, and respiratory problems in the community.

    Despite promising to properly relocate affected community members in advance of expanding its mining operations, Koidu Ltd. has left the people to suffer.  Many community members have neither been relocated, nor compensated for the damage to their properties, health, and livelihoods.  Others have been relocated to a new area, but the conditions of relocation have been incommensurate with what they lost.

    The community is supported in its fight for justice by Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA), a Ghana-based human rights organization, and Network Movement for Justice and Development (NMJD), a Sierra Leonean civil society organization that organizes communities for a more just society in the face of natural resource extraction.

  • Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris begins hearing Zogota massacre victims

    The Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France has begun hearing the case brought before it by the survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea.

    The hearing was inconclusive as the government of Guinea was not represented, and as such not many arguments took place at the courtroom.

     

    The Presiding Judge said she would deliver her final decision on October 9, but it is still possible that she would reopen the arguments and give both sides a chance to submit more documentation and arguments.

     

    Among others, the judge asked lawyers for the plaintiffs to submit originals of some key documents and demonstrate that the government of Guinea was notified of the legal action.

     

    According to the lawyers, the Guinean government has been notified of the legal action while efforts are underway to furnish the court with the key documents being requested for.

    Exequatur suit

    In October last year, some survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea run to the Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France, to seek justice through a lawsuit against the Guinean state.

    Earlier in 2018, these survivors brought their case to the Abuja-based ECOWAS Court of Justice after their complaints were repeatedly stalled and ignored in the Guinean courts.  The ECOWAS Court found that Guinea had violated its international human rights obligations and ordered it to pay 4.56 billion Guinean francs (then approximately $436,000) to the plaintiffs, but the government is yet to comply.

    This led to an exequatur suit filed by the massacre survivors at the tribunal in Paris, which they hope will grant exequatur, or recognition, of the ECOWAS Court judgment.  The purpose of the exequatur suit is to recognize that the ECOWAS Court decision is enforceable in France, on an equal basis with judgments of the French courts.

    Exequatur, if granted, would allow the massacre survivors to locate and seize certain Guinean state assets in France to satisfy the ECOWAS Court’s compensation order.

    One of the biggest weaknesses in the international justice system for human rights abuses is the difficulty in enforcing human rights tribunals’ judgments against states, so this exequatur action could fill a major accountability gap.”

    High stakes

    The stakes in this action are high because not only could success make the difference that allows the Zogota massacre survivors to finally receive justice, but it would also pioneer an important new strategy for victims of grave abuses worldwide.

    “The exequatur procedure seems appropriate to us because it will allow the rights of victims of this atrocity to be restored. This is because of the refusal of the Republic of Guinea to execute the judgment of the ECOWAS Court of Justice”, Foromo Frederic Loua, one of the Lawyers for victims said in an interview.

    For his part, one of the village chiefs stated that: “We have suffered a lot from this atrocity, we lost close relatives, fathers, children and friends. And for a very long time we have continued to suffer, we have had no support from the Guinean authorities to date, we are asking for compensation for our losses and know that we can count on French justice.”

  • Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris hears Zogota massacre victims today

    Survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea are keeping their fingers crossed as hearing of their Exequatur suit begins today at the Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France.

    The stakes in this action are high because not only could success make the difference that allows the Zogota massacre survivors to finally receive justice, but it would also pioneer an important new strategy for victims of grave abuses worldwide.

    In October last year, some survivors of the 2012 massacre by state security forces in the village of Zogota in the West African country of Guinea run to the Tribunal Judiciaire in Paris, France, to seek justice through a lawsuit against the Guinean state.

    Earlier in 2018, these survivors brought their case to the Abuja-based ECOWAS Court of Justice after their complaints were repeatedly stalled and ignored in the Guinean courts.  The ECOWAS Court found that Guinea had violated its international human rights obligations and ordered it to pay 4.56 billion Guinean francs (then approximately $436,000) to the plaintiffs, but the government is yet to comply.

    This led to an exequatur suit filed by the massacre survivors at the tribunal in Paris, which they hope will grant exequatur, or recognition, of the ECOWAS Court judgment.  The purpose of the exequatur suit is to recognize that the ECOWAS Court decision is enforceable in France, on an equal basis with judgments of the French courts.

    Exequatur, if granted, would allow the massacre survivors to locate and seize certain Guinean state assets in France to satisfy the ECOWAS Court’s compensation order.

    One of the biggest weaknesses in the international justice system for human rights abuses is the difficulty in enforcing human rights tribunals’ judgments against states, so this exequatur action could fill a major accountability gap.

  • PILEX rescues of a Nigerian widow

    A member of ACA’s Public Interest Lawyering Initiative for West Africa (PILIWA), Courage Nsirimovu, has initiated pro bono legal steps to retrieve a car for a Nigerian widow, Pleasure Amadi, whose husband passed away on August 28, 2022, after a short illness.

    Madam Amadi’s late husband is said to have parked the car in his brother’s residence shortly before his demise, but the brother has refused to surrender the property to the widow despite various attempts to retrieve it.

    The widow says she badly needs the car for commercial use to enable her to fend for herself and her only child.

    Lawyer Courage Nsirimovu, who is also the Coordinator of PILEX Centre For Civic Education Initiative-The Peoples Advocates, says he, together with his team, will leave no stone unturned to secure justice for the widow.

    According to him, efforts will be made to ensure that all other properties that are supposed to be given to Madam Amadi and her child will be retrieved through the legal process that has been initiated.