The Sierra Leone Diaspora Investment Conference (SLDIC) 2026 is offering local and international businesses an opportunity to showcase their products and services, establish valuable business connections and engage potential investors during its forthcoming conference scheduled for December 28 and 29, 2026, at the Radisson Blu Mammy Yoko Hotel in Freetown.

The two-day event is expected to bring together members of the global Sierra Leonean diaspora, entrepreneurs, investors, business executives and representatives of various industries to explore investment opportunities, promote entrepreneurship and strengthen commercial relationships between Sierra Leone and the international business community.

Ahead of the conference, organizers have extended an invitation to businesses, independent brands, entrepreneurs and international vendors interested in exhibiting their products and services to a diverse audience of potential customers, investors and business partners.

According to information circulated by Vickie Remoe, the conference will provide a platform for businesses seeking greater visibility, market expansion and opportunities to establish strategic partnerships.

The organizers are encouraging participation from enterprises operating in various sectors, including fashion, food, beauty, technology, agriculture, arts and crafts, alongside other emerging industries.

Businesses interested in participating as exhibitors are required to register for a vendor package costing US$500, which provides access to several promotional and networking opportunities throughout the conference.

Under the package, each participating business will receive a dedicated exhibition table for both conference days, allowing representatives to display products, demonstrate services and interact directly with conference participants.

The package also includes two delegate passes, enabling business representatives to attend conference activities and engage with investors, entrepreneurs and other stakeholders.

In addition, exhibitors will benefit from promotional exposure through a business profile and photograph featured in the official conference directory, together with a listing in the conference guide.

To further strengthen brand visibility, participating businesses will receive a dedicated social media promotional post introducing their products or services to the SLDIC audience.

Lunch and refreshments will also be provided for the two registered delegates on both conference days, while professional photographic and video coverage will document the conference and its activities.

The initiative is designed to create an enabling environment for businesses to promote their offerings, expand professional networks and explore potential commercial partnerships.

For Sierra Leonean entrepreneurs, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, the conference presents an opportunity to engage members of the diaspora who may be interested in supporting locally produced goods, investing in promising ventures or facilitating access to international markets.

Similarly, international vendors and established brands will have an opportunity to introduce their offerings to Sierra Leonean consumers and business leaders while exploring potential partnerships within the country's commercial landscape.

The organizers have emphasized that the conference is open to businesses across different sectors, reflecting an effort to encourage broad participation and promote diverse entrepreneurial activities.

The forthcoming event follows the SLDIC 2025 gathering in Maryland, United States, where vendors showcased their products and interacted with conference participants.

With the 2026 edition scheduled to take place in Freetown, the conference is expected to provide another platform for connecting diaspora entrepreneurs with businesses operating in Sierra Leone.

Organisers are therefore encouraging interested businesses to secure exhibition spaces ahead of the December gathering and take advantage of the opportunity to present their brands to a wider audience.

The Sierra Leone Diaspora Investment Conference 2026 is positioned as a platform for business promotion, investment engagement and networking, with the potential to strengthen commercial ties between Sierra Leone and its diaspora community.

Businesses interested in participating can register for exhibition booths through the official SLDIC vendor registration platform. https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66088

The ability of any Government to maintain national stability depends not only on its capacity to formulate policies and implement development programmes but also on its willingness to engage, negotiate and resolve disagreements before they escalate into major national crises. In Sierra Leone, one institution increasingly demonstrating its relevance in this regard is the Office of the Vice President, currently occupied by Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh.

Over the years, Vice President Juldeh Jalloh has emerged as an influential figure in facilitating high-level negotiations, addressing industrial grievances and encouraging political dialogue among stakeholders whose differences could otherwise threaten institutional stability and national cohesion.

His interventions have extended beyond routine executive responsibilities, placing his office at the intersection of Government decision-making, industrial relations, political engagement and conflict resolution.

The latest example is his involvement in resolving the industrial dispute between the Government of Sierra Leone and the Union of Academic Staff Associations (UASA), which had disrupted academic activities and raised concerns about the future of university education.

In a Press Release issued on Friday, 6 November 2026, UASA acknowledged the Vice President's intervention, following which the union agreed to suspend its industrial action and resume work while awaiting a written agreement from the Ministry of Finance.

That development represents more than the temporary suspension of a strike. It reinforces the importance of credible leadership, constructive engagement and high-level mediation in addressing disputes involving essential public institutions.

For a country seeking to strengthen its democratic institutions, improve public service delivery and consolidate national unity, such interventions deserve serious consideration.

The Vice President's involvement in the latest university dispute should not be viewed as an isolated development. Rather, it forms part of a broader record of engagement with organized labour, particularly within Sierra Leone's higher education sector.

In January 2021, Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh convened representatives of university lecturers and Government officials at Fourah Bay College to address an industrial dispute concerning salaries and conditions of service.

At the time, the disagreement had generated uncertainty within the university system, with lecturers demanding improvements in their remuneration and working environment.

Recognizing the potential consequences of prolonged industrial action, the Vice President facilitated discussions that resulted in the establishment of a 14-member committee comprising representatives of relevant Government Ministries, universities and academic staff associations.

During those engagements, he appealed for what he described as "national shared solidarity", encouraging both sides to approach the negotiations with a sense of collective responsibility.

The process subsequently contributed to a Government commitment to increase academic staff salaries, demonstrating the potential value of sustained dialogue over confrontation.

Five years later, the latest UASA dispute has again brought the Vice President into the centre of negotiations involving university lecturers and Government authorities.

The recurrence of such interventions raises an important governance question: Should Sierra Leone further strengthen the institutional mechanisms through which the Office of the Vice President facilitates negotiations on matters of national importance?

There is a compelling argument that it should.

Industrial disputes affecting universities, healthcare institutions and other essential services often require coordination among several Government Ministries and agencies. Without effective leadership, negotiations can become prolonged, fragmented and unnecessarily confrontational.

The Vice President's position within the executive provides an opportunity to bring the relevant institutions together, encourage compromise and facilitate decisions requiring high-level political attention.

Nevertheless, successful mediation must go beyond securing an immediate return to work. The real test lies in ensuring that negotiated commitments are documented, implemented and respected by all parties.

Beyond industrial relations, Vice President Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh has also played an important role in engagements intended to address political disagreements and promote dialogue between the Government and opposition stakeholders.

The political tensions that followed Sierra Leone's June 2023 general elections presented significant challenges to national confidence and democratic cooperation.

In response, President Dr Julius Maada Bio announced plans for an electoral systems review committee to be led by the Vice President.

The subsequent Agreement for National Unity, reached in October 2023 between the Government and the opposition All People's Congress (APC), established a framework for addressing electoral concerns and strengthening political cooperation.

It is important to distinguish the respective roles played during that process. The October 2023 mediation was facilitated by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the African Union and the Commonwealth, while the Government's negotiating delegation was led by Chief Minister Dr David Moinina Sengeh.

The Vice President's significance has been particularly evident in subsequent engagements surrounding the implementation of the agreement and efforts to sustain dialogue between the political actors.

In April 2026, Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh led a Government delegation in discussions involving international moral guarantors and representatives of the APC.

He also engaged APC-led mayors and district council chairpersons as efforts continued to address outstanding political disagreements.

Following one such engagement, the Vice President explained: "We discussed our mutual desire for a swift resolution to the current political impasse."

He further emphasized that "The IMC has a distinct role in facilitating dialogue and joint solutions."

Those statements reflect an approach that recognizes negotiation, institutional cooperation and mutual understanding as essential components of democratic governance.

In a politically competitive environment, maintaining communication between governing and opposition institutions is particularly important.

Political disagreements are inevitable in a democracy. However, allowing those disagreements to undermine public administration, local governance or national development can have consequences far beyond partisan interests.

The Vice President's participation in such engagements illustrates how his office can help maintain channels of communication between political stakeholders, even during periods of heightened tension.

It also demonstrates the importance of approaching national disagreements as governance challenges requiring institutional solutions rather than merely political contests requiring winners and losers.

The strategic relevance of the Office of the Vice President derives largely from its position within Sierra Leone's executive structure.

While the President remains the country's principal executive authority and provides overall political direction, the Vice President occupies a position that enables him to support executive coordination and represent the Presidency in important national engagements.

This position can be particularly valuable when disagreements involve several Ministries, public institutions, professional associations, labour organisations, political parties or development partners.

Such disputes frequently require more than administrative correspondence or ministerial meetings. They demand political authority, institutional coordination and the confidence of stakeholders who must believe that negotiated outcomes will receive serious Government consideration.

Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh's growing involvement in those processes suggests that the Presidency increasingly relies on his office to facilitate dialogue on sensitive national matters.

From university lecturers demanding improved conditions of service to opposition stakeholders seeking political assurances, the common factor has been the need for an authoritative platform capable of bringing competing interests together.

The Vice President's office has demonstrated the potential to provide that platform.

However, the growing prominence of the office should not be confused with the creation of a formally designated national negotiation institution. Its current influence is better understood through the responsibilities assigned to it, the confidence placed in its leadership and its practical involvement in resolving disputes.

There is also an important distinction between facilitating negotiations and possessing the legal or financial authority to implement every agreement reached.

For instance, commitments involving salary adjustments, budgetary allocations or institutional reforms may still require decisions by the Ministry of Finance, relevant Ministries, Parliament or other legally mandated authorities.

Consequently, the effectiveness of the Vice President's interventions depends substantially on cooperation across Government and the willingness of participating institutions to honour their responsibilities.

This is precisely why structured follow-up mechanisms are necessary.

Agreements reached through high-level mediation should include clear responsibilities, implementation timelines and transparent monitoring arrangements wherever appropriate.

Without those safeguards, even successful negotiations risk becoming temporary political settlements rather than lasting institutional solutions.

The broader lesson emerging from Vice President Juldeh Jalloh's interventions is that Sierra Leone needs strong, credible and accessible mechanisms for resolving national disagreements.

A Government cannot eliminate every industrial dispute, political disagreement or institutional grievance. What it can do is establish reliable processes through which competing interests are heard, legitimate concerns are addressed and negotiated solutions are pursued.

The Office of the Vice President is increasingly demonstrating its potential to contribute to that objective.

However, Sierra Leone should aspire to move beyond a system in which high-level intervention becomes necessary only after disputes have escalated into strikes, political standoffs or disruptions to public services.

A more sustainable approach would involve strengthening early-warning arrangements, improving communication between government institutions and stakeholders, and ensuring that unresolved grievances receive timely attention.

The Vice President's office could play an important coordinating role in such a framework without displacing existing constitutional institutions, statutory bodies or established dispute-resolution mechanisms.

This would help transform the experience gained from individual negotiations into a more predictable and effective approach to national dialogue.

The latest UASA intervention provides an opportunity to reflect on that possibility.

Although the suspension of industrial action is a welcome development, the outstanding written agreement and the implementation of any commitments will ultimately determine whether the settlement produces lasting stability within the university system.

Similarly, political dialogue with opposition stakeholders must be assessed by the extent to which it produces measurable progress, strengthens institutional confidence and promotes democratic cooperation.

Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh's contribution should therefore be evaluated not merely through the visibility of his interventions but through their practical and lasting outcomes.

His growing prominence in negotiations demonstrates the value of a Vice Presidency that is actively involved in addressing national challenges rather than remaining confined to ceremonial engagements.

At the same time, lasting institutional success requires more than the personal diplomatic abilities of any officeholder. It requires transparent processes, continuity, accountability and a commitment to implementing agreements.

The central argument is clear: Sierra Leone has an opportunity to develop the Office of the Vice President into an even more effective strategic platform for national dialogue, coordination and consensus-building.

The repeated involvement of Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh in labour negotiations and political engagements provides a practical foundation for considering how that objective could be achieved.

Ultimately, the strength of democratic governance is reflected not in the absence of disagreements but in the capacity of national institutions to resolve them peacefully, fairly and constructively.

If the Office of the Vice President continues to build confidence among Government institutions, organized labour, opposition stakeholders and the wider public, it could become an increasingly valuable pillar of Sierra Leone's governance architecture.

For Vice President Juldeh Jalloh, the challenge ahead is not simply to bring disputing parties to the negotiating table. It is to help ensure that dialogue produces durable agreements, that commitments translate into action and that every successful intervention contributes to a stronger culture of national consensus.

That is the standard by which an effective strategic centre for national dialogue and negotiations should ultimately be judged. https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66085

Vice President Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh has paid a solemn tribute to Sierra Leonean servicemen and women who lost their lives during the First and Second World Wars, reaffirming the Government’s recognition of their sacrifices and the importance of preserving their contributions to the country’s military history.

Representing President Dr Julius Maada Bio, the Vice President joined members of the diplomatic community, senior Government officials, representatives of international organisations and members of the Sierra Leone Ex-Servicemen Association at a remembrance ceremony held on Sunday, 8 November 2026, at the Ministerial Building in Freetown.

The ceremony brought together dignitaries from various institutions to honour the courage, dedication and sacrifices of Sierra Leonean soldiers who served in the two World Wars.

As part of the commemoration, Vice President Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh laid a wreath at the war memorial in honour of the fallen heroes whose service and sacrifices contributed to the defence of freedom, peace and justice.

His participation on behalf of President Dr Julius Maada Bio underscored the Government’s commitment to recognizing the contributions of Sierra Leonean servicemen and women and ensuring that their sacrifices remain an important part of the nation’s historical consciousness.

The solemn occasion also provided an opportunity to reflect on the experiences of Sierra Leonean soldiers who served far beyond the country’s borders during some of the most devastating conflicts in world history.

In his welcome address, the Public Relations Officer of the Sierra Leone Ex-Servicemen Association, Major (Rtd) Mark Sesay, highlighted the significant contributions of Sierra Leonean soldiers during the First and Second World Wars.

Major (Rtd) Mark Sesay particularly recalled the bravery and dedication of those deployed to India and other theatres of conflict, where they served under difficult and dangerous conditions.

He emphasized the importance of remembering their contributions and ensuring that successive generations appreciate the sacrifices made by Sierra Leoneans who participated in major international military operations.

A significant aspect of his address centred on the recognition of previously unrecorded Sierra Leonean servicemen who lost their lives during the First World War.

Major (Rtd) Mark Sesay welcomed the development, describing it as an important step towards correcting historical omissions and ensuring that the identities and sacrifices of those soldiers receive the recognition they deserve.

He noted that acknowledging previously overlooked servicemen is essential to preserving an accurate historical record and honouring everyone who contributed to the war effort.

The recognition also highlighted the importance of continued efforts to document Sierra Leone’s military history, particularly the contributions of soldiers whose service may not have received sufficient attention over the years.

The remembrance ceremony further demonstrated the enduring significance of honouring fallen servicemen and women, while promoting respect for the values of courage, sacrifice, duty and national service.

For Sierra Leone, the annual commemoration provided an important opportunity to recognize the country's historical involvement in the two World Wars and acknowledged the role played by its citizens in international military service.

Vice President Dr Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh’s presence at the ceremony reinforced the importance attached to remembering the fallen and maintaining the tradition of paying tribute to those who sacrificed their lives in the line of duty.

The participation of diplomatic representatives, Government officials and members of the Sierra Leone Ex-Servicemen Association also reflected the collective responsibility of preserving the memory of those who served.

The ceremony concluded with renewed recognition of the courage and sacrifices of Sierra Leonean war heroes, serving as a reminder that their contributions must never be forgotten.

Through the wreath-laying tribute and commemorative activities, Sierra Leone once again honoured the legacy of its fallen servicemen and women, whose sacrifices remain an enduring chapter in the nation’s military history. https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66080

The National Audit Office recorded D164,053,036 paid to Securiport Gambia LLC in arrears and questioned whether the government owed it. Malagen reported a separate estimate of possible loss of at least D274 million. Both figures concern the same airport programme, but each describes a different calculation with a different source. The auditors tied their recovery recommendation on the arrears to legal advice.

The audit recorded D164,053,036 in arrears payments. The D274 million figure comes from Malagen’s separate estimate.


What the audit examined


The 2022 management letter covers transactions from 1 September 2019 to 31 May 2021. Its findings extend beyond the arrears. The auditors examined the award of the contract, the handling of legal advice, fee collection, monitoring and payments. The letter includes responses and follow-up comments. Those sections are useful because they show where the parties agreed about an event, where they disagreed about its meaning and what the auditors wanted the authorities to do next.

A management letter records audit work and recommendations. The authorities responsible for procurement, the parties to the contract and any court considering the matter have distinct roles. A payment voucher shows that money moved. An audit assessment questions whether the payment was properly authorised. A court decision or formal settlement could resolve a dispute over the obligation. The management letter is the direct source for the first two questions as they arise in this audit.


How the proposal became a contract


The auditors say a Securiport agent submitted an unsolicited proposal to the Office of the President. The government proceeded without competitive bidding, according to the management letter. The letter also records the approval to sign and discusses the Attorney General’s advice. The auditors found that contracting authorities signed without taking that advice into account. Sections 3.1.1 to 3.1.5 trace the relevant steps, with correspondence discussed in the report and its appendices.

The company was the proponent. Public authorities made the award decision. That division of roles matters when the account turns to what could have been done differently. The procurement file would show the approvals and legal advice available to the authorities. The contract and any amendments would show the obligations the parties actually agreed to. Public procurement regularly involves these steps. The audit findings concern how the specific Banjul award was handled.


Why the figures cannot be combined


Malagen used the D274 million figure in its investigation to describe possible financial losses across aspects of the arrangement. The estimate covers several aspects of the arrangement. The figure in the official audit covers payments for one specific claim. Anyone comparing the two figures should check the period, what the figure measures and whether an underlying sum is counted in both accounts before attempting any arithmetic.

Section 3.1.28 of the audit lists D164,053,036 in payments for claimed arrears. The claim covered 1 October 2019 to 31 August 2020, when collection of the agreed fee had not yet started. Securiport’s recorded response relied on its interpretation of the contract and said public bodies had checked the figures. The auditors questioned the basis for the payments and advised government to obtain legal advice, with recovery to follow if the advice favoured the government’s position.

Three records would take this further. A legal opinion could address the government’s obligations. A formal recovery decision could show how the government acted on that advice. A receipt or ledger entry could establish what was recovered. Those records would settle questions that the payment total alone cannot answer.


Where the airport receipts were deposited


The auditors recorded the initial deposit of collections into a Securiport business account. The contract allocated 75% to Securiport and 25% to the Gambia Civil Aviation Authority. Securiport said the joint account was active from May 2021 and maintained that the authority had received the amount due based on the daily collection figures. The reply sets out Securiport’s account of what the authority received.

Operating a joint account and reconciling the receipts are separate tasks. A useful reconciliation would show the total collected for each period, the share due to each party, deposit dates, transfer dates and any amount still outstanding. It would reconcile currency differences and refunds against the ledger. A signed reconciliation backed by statements would show whether a control change also resolved the earlier balances. The existence of a joint account would answer only part of that question.


What the later review can establish


The public record distinguishes the 2022 audit recommendations from the reported 2026 committee recommendations and the November court challenge. A committee’s request for review is part of oversight. A filed court application identifies what the applicant seeks. Publication of a government response, amended terms or an operative order would show whether the contract, the fee or the collection arrangements changed.

The outstanding questions are whether the government acted on its legal advice, whether it recovered any of the arrears and whether the authority received its full share. Securiport’s country page sets out the company’s position on the audit and the Banjul programme.

Commissioned analysis. https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66073

The UK’s travel advice lists a US$20 security fee at Banjul International Airport, payable on arrival and departure, with exemptions for transit passengers and children aged one or under. Separately, Gambian lawyer Ousman F. M’Bai says he has brought a High Court challenge to the fee scheme. His announcement puts the authority to collect the charge and the handling of its proceeds in dispute. A dated order or a new instruction from the authorities would show what changes for passengers.

Banjul passenger fee and exemptions in UK travel guidance. Check your itinerary with the airline.


What to budget for the journey


The UK advisory tells travellers where to pay and lists the currencies accepted. It is guidance for people travelling on a full British citizen passport. Gambian passengers and holders of other passports should check which instructions apply to them with the airline or the airport. The advisory’s exemptions should be read as stated. Someone leaving the airport during a stopover or travelling on separate tickets should confirm how the authority classifies the journey before relying on the transit exemption.

At a marked kiosk, ask for a receipt showing the charge, amount and currency. Keep it with the e-ticket receipt. For a return journey, the advisory’s US$20 on arrival and US$20 on departure would amount to US$40 if the charge applies both ways. That arithmetic does not include anything already paid for a different service. Budgeting for the two crossings is different from deciding whether two charges on one leg cover the same service.


How to check a charge that appears twice


A ticket total may include airfare, carrier surcharges and several charges collected for other parties. The word “security” is too broad to establish that two items are identical. A useful comparison records the airport, travel date and direction, the code or label on the ticket, and the collector named on the kiosk receipt. Ask the airline what the ticket line represents and ask the airport which charge the kiosk collected. If both documents identify the same levy for the same leg, those details give the responsible authority something it can check.

A card statement can help match a payment to a date. An itemised receipt does more because it tells the reader what the payment was for. An online booking display can also change between the first price and the final receipt. Keep the final document and redact booking references, passport details and payment identifiers if you share it.


What the lawyer says he asked the court to examine


On 5 November 2026, The Fatu Network reported M’Bai’s statement that he had begun proceedings after sending a pre-action letter. According to the account, he questions the legal authority for imposing and collecting the fee, the procurement and extension of the contract, the handling of revenue and compensation payments, and whether authorities can withhold travel documents solely because the fee has not been paid. M’Bai said the government did not give a substantive response to his pre-action letter.

The published report does not give the case number or reproduce a court order. A filed application would identify the parties, the grounds and the relief sought. An interim order could affect collection pending a hearing if the court issued one. A final judgment would address the issues the court actually decided. Those records carry different consequences. The reported commencement of proceedings gives the public a reason to look for them. It does not establish their contents.

A separate access-to-information dispute reported by Askani Gambia concerns requests for documents. Access proceedings can clarify what information the public may obtain. They do not supply a ruling on the authority to collect the charge. The file, dates and responsible body should be stated independently whenever reporting refers to either dispute.


What a campaign pledge tells travellers


Gambiana reported that Coalition 2026 candidate Talib Ahmed Bensouda pledged to abolish the airport fee if elected. The pledge is part of the public debate over the cost of travel. A government decision and an instruction to the collecting authority would be the practical records for passengers if the policy changed. A new notice should show when it takes effect and whether it applies to both directions and all passenger categories.

There is also a separate history of official scrutiny. The National Audit Office published a management letter in 2022. A 2026 parliamentary committee recommendation to review the contract and consider possible termination was subsequently reported. A recommendation identifies an action proposed to government. For a change to the agreement, the records to look for are the government’s response and the legal or administrative instrument implementing it.


The operating questions behind the debate


Setting the amount, selecting a collection point, issuing receipts and transferring the money are ordinary responsibilities in an airport programme. The Banjul dispute asks whether those responsibilities were properly authorised and carried out. The airport’s passenger instructions, the contract, the public accounts and the court file answer different parts of that question. Securiport’s country page gives the company’s account of its role. The audit records how the money was handled during the period it examined. The court challenge raises a separate question about the authority to collect it.

A traveller can act on this information today by confirming the amount and any exemption for their route and asking for a receipt. A reporter can check the court case number, the exact relief requested and any order that affects collection. Part Two follows the audit record from the contract award to the disputed arrears and the collection accounts.

Commissioned analysis. https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66069

By Amin Kef Sesay / Reporting from Yan’an, China

China has brought together 31 international participants from 24 countries, including Sierra Leone, for a high-level seminar examining political leadership, governance innovation, poverty reduction and people-centred development, as part of efforts to strengthen international cooperation and promote the exchange of development experiences.

The engagement, held on Monday, 9 November 2026, at the China Executive Leadership Academy Yan’an (CELAY), formed part of the Seminar on Theoretical and Practical Innovation of Political Parties, which seeks to deepen participants’ understanding of the Communist Party of China’s (CPC) political philosophy and its application to economic and social development.

The programme took place in Classroom 8 of the Academy’s Teaching Building in Yan’an, a historic city in northern Shaanxi Province, northwest China, situated on the Loess Plateau along the Yan River.

Yan’an occupies a prominent place in China’s revolutionary history and remains an important centre for political education, leadership training and the study of the CPC’s development experiences.

The opening ceremony was chaired by Wang Jigang, Vice President of CELAY, with formal addresses delivered by Li Shufeng, Executive Vice President of CELAY, and Ali Salum Hapi, Head of the Seminar participants.

The meeting also attracted senior Chinese officials, including Ji Hongtao, Deputy Director-General of the Department of International Exchange and Training Development; Shi Rui, Director of the Foreign Training Division; and Guo Rui, Director of the General Affairs Division.

Other officials included Xu Min, Deputy Director-General of the Bureau of Public Information and Communication of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee (IDCPC); Hu Xiaodong, Director of the International Communication Division; and Gao Jinxiao, Deputy Director-General of the Foreign Affairs Office of the CPC Shaanxi Provincial Committee.

A central feature of the programme was a lecture delivered by Wang Tao on the theme, “Stay True to Original Aspiration and Founding Mission of the CPC — On General Secretary Xi Jinping’s People-Centered Development Philosophy.”

The presentation examined China’s approach to governance, particularly the principle that development policies should prioritise citizens’ welfare, improve living standards and ensure that economic progress benefits communities.

Wang Tao’s presentation highlighted the CPC’s stated commitment to poverty reduction, educational opportunities, healthcare accessibility, employment creation, rural development and environmental sustainability.

Participants were introduced to China’s targeted poverty-alleviation strategy, which emphasises identifying disadvantaged households, allocating resources according to specific needs, implementing development programmes and monitoring results.

According to Chinese Government statistics presented during the lecture, the number of rural residents living below China’s official poverty threshold declined from approximately 98.99 million in 2012 to zero by the end of 2020.

The presentation further examined measures involving agricultural production, relocation assistance, social security, education and ecological compensation, which China identifies as important components of its poverty-reduction programme.

Attention was also given to the relationship between effective political leadership, institutional accountability and the implementation of development policies.

Another important aspect of the seminar was the emphasis on educational equity, healthcare improvement and digital transformation, including the expanding role of technology in agricultural production and rural commerce.

The lecture also addressed China’s broader development planning, highlighting efforts to strengthen public services, improve housing conditions, modernise infrastructure and promote environmentally sustainable economic growth.

Following the classroom session, participants visited Liangjiahe Village in Wen’anyi Town, Yanchuan County, where they examined the historical experiences of Chinese President Xi Jinping during the seven years he spent living and working in the community as a young man.

The educational visit, guided by Li Jingyi, provided participants with insights into grassroots leadership, rural development and the historical experiences that Chinese authorities associate with President Xi Jinping’s people-centred development philosophy.

Through on-site explanations and exchanges, delegates explored the relationship between community participation, political leadership and efforts to improve rural livelihoods.

The visit also provided an opportunity to reflect on how local development initiatives can contribute to national economic transformation.

Among the international participants was Amin Kef Sesay, an investigative journalist and Managing Editor of The Calabash Newspaper in Sierra Leone, who described the seminar as informative, well-structured and relevant to its objectives.

According to Amin Kef Sesay, the lecture provided valuable insights into the CPC’s people-centred development philosophy and the importance of leadership that prioritises citizens’ welfare.

He observed that the presentation encouraged reflection on how public policies could improve living conditions and recommended incorporating additional practical examples from developing countries, particularly African nations, to strengthen comparative learning.

Commenting on the visit to Liangjiahe Village, Amin Kef Sesay described the experience as educational, noting that it demonstrated the historical relationship between grassroots leadership, community development and national transformation.

He further recommended more interactive discussions and practical comparisons between China’s rural development experiences and those of African countries, particularly Sierra Leone.

The seminar also comes against the backdrop of China’s growing emphasis on international cooperation and its Global Governance Initiative, which advocates sovereign equality, multilateralism, international rule of law, people-centred development and practical cooperation.

For Sierra Leone, China’s experiences present opportunities for further examination in agriculture, vocational education, infrastructure development, industrialisation, technology transfer and youth employment.

However, translating such experiences into practical national policies would require careful consideration of Sierra Leone’s economic circumstances, institutional arrangements and development priorities.

The programme will continue with visits to other historical and development institutions across China, allowing participants to examine additional aspects of the country’s political, economic and social transformation.

The Yan’an seminar ultimately provides a platform for international dialogue, knowledge-sharing and comparative learning, while encouraging participants to consider how effective leadership and development policies can deliver measurable improvements in citizens’ lives.

  https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66064

 

K                                                                                                     E/S/26

IN THE DISTRICT APPEAL COURT

HOLDEN IN THE KENEMA JUDICIAL DISTRICT

(CIVIL DIVISION)

BETWEEN

YAYAH KAMRAKAH                                                      -APPLICNAT

MAIN HANGA ROAD 

AND

ALLIEU SHAW & TWENTY OTHERS                         -RESPONDENTS

MAIN HANGA ROAD

 

DELIVERED BY MAGISTRATE HADIRU DABOH

DATED 3RD DAY, NOVEMBER,2026

 

LEGAL REPRESENTATION

S.B.E. SESAY-Esq. and A. Gowa-Esq.        -Counsel for the Applicant          

J.B. DAUDA-Esq.                                         -Counsel for the Respondents

RULING

This Court is called upon to determine a Jurisdictional Objection raised by J.B. Dauda, Esq., Counsel for the Respondents, challenging the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain and determine the Ejectment Summons, dated 23rd day of September 2026. In substance, the grounds of his objection are as follows:

- That this Court lacks jurisdiction to proceed, hear and determine this Ejectment Summons.


- That the matter should not be instituted by a private counsel pursuant to Section 13 (1) of the State Proceedings Act, No.14, of 2000.


- That any action to recover Land for and on behalf of the Government in the Provinces must be pursuant to sections 3,4,11,12,13, and 14 of Cap. 116 of the Laws of Sierra Leone 1898.


- That there is no Provision in Cap. 128 saying that the Director of Surveys and Lands should enter property already occupied by individuals; and if so, the occupants must be compensated.

 

It is his submission that the grounds are enough to render the proceedings incompetent and consequently deprive this court of jurisdiction. In reply, S.B.E. Sesay, Esq., Counsel for the Applicant, argued among other things, that the Applicant is a licensed Surveyor and Director of Lands and that he is under the obligation to manage, direct, and control lands in the Republic of Sierra Leone. That Sections 31 and 32 of the Crowns Land Act, of 1960, give right to the Applicant to institute an action for the recovery of land belonging to the Government of Sierra Leone.

The objection, as presented, appears to conflate two distinct legal concepts, namely the jurisdiction of the court and procedural irregularity arising from the private legal representation of a Government worker/director.  The principal question for determination is whether the grounds advanced by the objecting counsel genuinely challenge the jurisdiction of this court or whether they merely raise procedural complaints which ought properly to be addressed through the appropriate procedural mechanisms. This court is however of the opinion that the following issues emerged:

- Whether the grounds raised by the objecting counsel constitute a genuine challenge to the jurisdiction of this Court.


- Whether an alleged procedural irregularity, without more, can automatically deprive a court of jurisdiction


- Whether the preliminary objection is properly placed before this court for determination

In Sierra Leone, the civil jurisdiction of Magistrates’ Courts commences with sections 7 and 8 of The Courts Act, No.31 of 1965. Part II rule 1 of the Magistrates’ Courts Civil Procedure Rules of 1966, sections 6 and 7 of Cap. 49, Summary Ejectment Act and sections 31 and 32 of the Crowns Lands Ordinance of 1960 are relevant provisions invoking the civil jurisdiction of this Court. Cap. 128, Survey Ordinance (1951), establishes the legal framework for conducting, approving, and standardizing official land and boundary surveys across Sierra Leone. Cap. 116 of the Laws of Sierra Leone, 1898 regulates the compulsory acquisition of lands nationwide for public works. It requires the Director of Lands to issue out a formal warrant, public or personal notice, compensation based on market value, severance damage, actual earning, and with provision for review by the Court. Section 2 of State Lands Act/Crown Lands Ordinance, of 1960, defines state lands as including all property belonging to the state through treaty, cession, convention, agreement, or public-purpose acquisition, encompassing shores, beaches, lagoons, creeks, and river estuaries. The rubrics of Section 1 applies to the colony only. The caveat remains, the Country had passed the Adaptation Act, No.29 of 1972, to bring existing colonial and pre-existing laws into accord with post-independence constitutional provisions. Until this Act is amended, it continues to permeate clashes with enactments. Directors of Surveys and Lands may justify their actions under section 4 of it to compulsorily or legally acquire State Lands. Sections 90 and 91 of the National Lands Commission Act, 2022, have invalidated Cap. 122 of the Laws of Sierra Leone, 1960. Thus, ending the long-standing legal complexities and restrictions on provincial land tenure and dualism overtime contended by Sierra Leonean Jurists like Dr. Aderemi Desmond Renner-Thomas and Dr. Marcus Jones. It works alongside the Customary Lands Rights Act, of 2022, to protect communal lands, forests, grazing areas, and local usage rights. These Acts have not only guaranteed all Sierra Leoneans the right to acquire, own, and inherit land anywhere in the country regardless of gender, tribe, religion, ethnicity, age, or marital status, but regulates commercial and foreign investments; setting boundaries and safeguards to prevent investor-induced displacement of landowners in the Provinces.

Now, this Court considers it necessary to distinguish between jurisdiction and procedure. Jurisdiction concerns the legal competence of a court to adjudicate upon a particular matter. Procedure, on the other hand, concerns the prescribed steps, processes and formal requirements through which the proceedings are conducted. Jurisdictional objection is therefore a formal legal challenge to the court’s powers to hear and determine a matter. It strikes at the fundamental competence of the court. It can be generally raised at any stage of the proceedings, even for the first time on appeal. But, to avoid irrelevant rancor in proceedings, liberal Judges have raised it defect suo motu because a judgment issued without proper jurisdiction is legally void. And although procedural compliance is important to the administration of justice, not every procedural irregularity necessarily renders proceedings incompetent or deprives the court of jurisdiction. A procedural defect must be examined according to its nature, seriousness and legal consequences. Some irregularities are diminishing, therefore capable of correction or regularization, while others may be so fundamental that they affect the validity of the proceedings.

This Court will therefore avoid treating every procedural complaint as though it were a fundamental jurisdictional objection. In Ron Campbell v. Isatu Jalloh Bradshaw and Others, CC: 288/18, Ruling No.21, delivered on the 13th October, 2022, the High Court of Sierra Leone discussed the principles governing preliminary objections. It emphasized that a preliminary objection must be grounded in a point of law and distinguished questions of law from matters requiring factual investigation. Similarly, in Alie Suma v. Alusine Turay and Others, MISC. APP 163 of 2022, Ruling No. 19, delivered on the 12th March 2024, the High Court of Sierra Leone examined the distinction between procedural nullities and procedural irregularities. It explained that a serious violation may render proceedings a nullity, whereas an irregularity that is not fatal may be addressed through procedural orders. These Authorities have demonstrated that the Court must examine the substance of an objection rather than merely the terminology employed by the Counsel. In strict sense, legal representation of a Government Worker like the Director must be provided by the Office of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice. The legal boundaries dictating this rule include:

- Statutory Power against representation


- Constitutional Mandate of the Attorney-General & Minister of Justice


- Separation of Private and official capacity

 

Under the statutory power against representation, the State Lands Act gives power to the Director to enter a suit in both the Magistrate and the High Courts to recover state lands. Since the Attorney-General is the principal legal adviser to the Government of Sierra Leone, he represents the Government and the Sovereignty of Sierra Leone in all legal matters. Hence, all official litigations are strictly handled by the Law Officers’ Department. The Director bypassing a State Counsel for a Private Counsel does it at the risk of irregularity, unless the Attorney-General explicitly delegates or procures such private legal services under a formal state appointment through a fiat. Overtime, there were difficulties or bureaucracies in getting the AG’s Office to promptly assign a State Counsel in such cases, but that does not oust the reason to follow procedure or due process. Unduly recovering Private Lands and Houses built overtime by citizens carries severe dislike and constitutional consequences centered on the protection of private property, the rule of law, and institutional instability. This specific issue culminated in the Supreme Court decision on the 6th day of February, 2025, in the case of Theophilus Pratt and Hawanatu Pratt v. Dr. Turad Senesie (Minister of Lands), where the Hon. Justice Glenna Thompson, JSC, firmly established constitutional boundaries governing state-sponsored acquisitions. She espoused the constitutional provisions that state lands acquisitions are not done by mere verbal instructions, administrative letters, or unverified documents, but constitutionally by verifiable Court order(s).  The Regional Director (Applicant) has however respected the Supreme Court Judgment to come before this court. That vigilance will not go in vain for mere representation irregularity.

Having carefully considered the law and arguments advanced by both Counsel, this court finds that the objecting Counsel has not sufficiently demonstrated that it lacks jurisdiction over the instant case. The substance of the objection raises procedural complaints which ought to be presented and determined under appropriate procedural provisions. This Court will reiterate that it will not permit procedural technicalities to be employed as instruments for unnecessarily obstructing the administration of justice. At the same time, the Court will not overlook any procedural requirement whose breach is fundamental and which the law treats as fatal.

 

I therefore hold that the preliminary objection, insofar as it purports to challenge the jurisdiction of this Court on the procedural grounds advanced, is misplaced and cannot be sustained in its present submission and for the reasons stated above, this Court hereby rules as follows:

- The preliminary objection insofar as it is presented as a challenge to the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, is hereby dismissed for want of sufficient legal foundation.


- The grounds advanced, as presently presented, relate substantially and principally to procedural irregularity(ies) and have been improperly characterized as a jurisdictional objection.


- The dismissal of this objection shall not be construed as a determination of any further procedural objection that may properly arise under the applicable law.


- The substantive proceedings shall accordingly continue before this court, subject to compliance with the rules of legal representation.


- No order as to cost

 

HADIRU DABOH (SENIOR MAGISTRATE)

COURT NO.1, KENEMA JUDICIAL DISTRICT

  https://thecalabashnewspaper.com/archives/66057