| From Freetown, Sierra Leone. Volume 3A CHAPTER FOUR
Nature of the Conflict Introduction 1. The Commission is required by its enabling legislation to determine whether the conflict was a result of deliberate planning, action or authorisation of any person or government, and what roles external or other actors may have played in the conflict. 2. The conflict started as an attempt to overthrow a dictatorial and tyrannical regime. It was unable to mobilise support among the people to prosecute the revolution. It resorted to abductions, forced recruitment and other violations and abuses to increase its numerical strength. Community militias were established to resist the purveyors of revolution. In no time, the militias themselves began to attack the civilian population that they were established to protect. 3. The defining character of this conflict was its radical departure from other armed conflicts in terms of targets. This was a conflict waged against the civilian population. The combatant factions did not target conventional military targets. There were very few accounts of direct confrontation between the combatant factions. In consequence, civilians bore the brunt of the violations and abuses that marked the conflict. 4. The conflict was also notable for its chameleonic nature. Factions and groups changed sides frequently culminating in the wholesale transfer of loyalty from a national army to a renegade fighting force established by an illegal government. The confusion among the civilian population led to the sobriquet, “sobels,” soldiers who became rebels at night in order to loot and plunder the resources of the people. 5. What shines through in the rest of this chapter is the plethora of violations and abuses to which the people were subject. The chapter analyses the fighting forces and identifies the strands in their composition and behaviour that enable an understanding of the violence they deployed against the civilian population. 6. Using qualitative testimony and quantitative analysis, the Commission captures the roles played by the armed factions in prosecuting their campaigns and ascribes responsibility for the violations and abuses to the different combat groups including the ECOMOG peacekeeping forces. 7. The Commission has researched the influence of external actors and factors in starting, and fuelling the many thousands of violations that took place during the conflict. Indeed there are specific examples of foreign involvement that attest to a war with significant international, particularly sub-regional, dynamics and reverberations. The overwhelming majority of abuses recorded by the Commission were carried out by Sierra Leoneans against Sierra Leoneans. The patent truth is that for eleven years the people of this country effectively waged armed conflict against themselves. In its essence, it was a self-destructive civil war. 8. The nature of the conflict is better understood in terms of its complexities and ambiguities than through the lens of any single, defining cause of ill intent. What this chapter shows is the multiplicity of causes and effects that permeate the violations and abuses of human rights and international humanitarian law as well as the institutional fluidity of the violators themselves. 9. There are notable paradoxes at the heart of this analysis, which the time and resources available did not permit the Commission fully to resolve. One of our most important observations is that in spite of all the malice and suffering of the conflict period, Sierra Leone has returned in peacetime to what appears to be a climate of tolerant and harmonious co-existence. Sierra Leoneans demonstrated tremendous courage, resilience and desire to put the past behind, through accepting many of those who committed violations against them back in their home communities. 10. However, a propensity for conflict continues to exist among the people. Many of the root causes of the malice and violence remain unaddressed. To a large extent, the purpose of this chapter is to pose a deterrent to the recurrence of armed conflict by recording the full extent of the violations and abuses that have taken place and analysing the context that enabled the perpetration of such violations. The chapter also reports on two further features identified by the Commission as characteristics of the conflict: (a) particular malice, whereby violations and abuses
are found to have occurred as a result of deliberate targeting,
planning or policy on the part of their perpetrators; and
(b) particular suffering, whereby the specific ordeals of communities, groups or single persons demand to be given a voice in the hope that we might all learn lessons from them and unite to ensure that such things never happen again. 11. Based upon the tenets outlined above, this chapter has been divided into four main sections. The first section outlines the Nature of the Violations by describing the framework for the categorisation of violations adopted by the Commission. The second deals with the victims of the conflict, noting certain characteristics of the violations and abuses perpetrated, and focusing on the patterns of abuse and evidence of targeting. The third section profiles those who committed the violations, that is, the perpetrators and perpetrator groups. It includes an assessment of the character and conduct of each of the militias and armed groups involved in the prosecution of the conflict. The fourth section titled, ‘Characteristics of Context’ elaborates the general trends that underpin the conflict. Each of these sections is supported, where necessary, by qualitative and quantitative data identifying patterns and peculiarities in the conflict.
NATURE OF THE VIOLATIONS 12. The violation categories used by the Commission are the violations known to have occurred frequently during the conflict in Sierra Leone. These are quite different from those that occurred during outbreaks of mass human rights abuse in other conflicts and countries. By using these common violations, the Commission hopes to comprehensively describe the common experiences of the Sierra Leonean people during the conflict. 13. The list is deliberately short, numbering 16 violations. Each is precisely defined to avoid ambiguity, ensuring a common understanding of the violations recorded by the Commission. While the list is short, there is scope for a broad analysis of each one. For example, acts of rape should be considered as not only happening in the context of abduction as sex slaves or “bush wives”; but as a violation perpetrated against women during attacks on villages or as part of encounters at checkpoints or in the bush. Furthermore, the burning of property should be understood, not just as an economic crime, but on occasion, as a means of murdering the persons detained within the property. Data Framework 14. In order to grasp the context in which the violations took place, the Commission organised the different violation types into a framework. Some violations such as amputation, forced cannibalism and forced displacement stand alone, because of their specific character and the patterns in which they were committed. The remaining violations have been divided into three sections: violations perpetrated in the context of abduction; violations without prior abduction; and economic violations. It was a major characteristic of the conflict that economic violations were accompanied by other violations, such as beatings. 15. Abduction is violation by itself. In the context of the war, it was carried out with other violations and/or provided a foundation for other violations. Abduction is defined by the Commission as the capture and forced/unwilling removal from current location, in the control of person/s defined as perpetrators. The Commission recorded 5968 cases of abduction. 16. Certain violations occurred specifically in the context of abduction. Abductees experienced abuse for an extended period, often for many years, whereas the experiences of non abducted victims were in the context of encounters with perpetrators. These experiences represented “events” in the lives of the non abducted victims. They occurred mostly during attacks on villages, village occupations, check point encounters, ambushes on the road and bush encounters. For those who were abducted, life was a continuous state of fear, within a rigid hierarchical command structure based on terror. The consequences on the lives of these two categories of victims varied accordingly. 17. It is important that we do not forget the common experiences of thousands of Sierra Leoneans who suffered during chance encounters with perpetrators. This created a climate of general terror within the country, as people never knew when they would be abused and their rights violated, in their village, in their home, etc.
18. The violations occurring in the context of abduction are dealt with more specifically in the chapters of this report dealing with Women, Children and Youth respectively. Indeed, sexual slavery was perpetrated mostly against women and girls. Forced recruitment was targeted at children and youths by the RUF, the AFRC and the CDF. The targeted age group for forced recruitment violations were those 10-14years. 19. Following from the above, the Commission developed the following framework for categorising the violations recorded in its database: 1 Amputation
2 Forced Cannibalism 3 Abduction and subsequent long term Detention and Mistreatment 3.1
Forced Recruitment and Sexual Slavery with particular reference to
children (including the Drugging violation), Forced Labour
4 Mistreatment without Abduction3.2 Assault, Torture and Rape of both children and adults that accompany or follow from Abduction 4.1 Forced Labour, Assault, Torture and Rape
5 Economic Violations4.2 Short term Detentions 5.1 Looting and Property Destruction
6 Forced Displacement5.2 Extortion 7 Killing 20. The purpose of the framework was to make the organisation and analysis of data collected practical. If the Commission had used the hundreds of categories of violations available in the legal or international instruments, the incidents would have been too few for relevant analysis or for the identification of patterns. 21. The examples provided throughout this chapter come from witnesses who made statements to the Commission and serve to illustrate the nature and the circumstances of each violation. However, it is important to understand that in the majority of the situations, victims suffered a combination of several violations from the same perpetrators in one incident. 63% of the victims suffered two or more violations. While the Commission deals with the specificity of each violation, it also provides an account of how these violations were interrelated. For example, looting and destruction of property were usually carried out together and are therefore treated together. 22. The following testimony provides an example of this interrelation. The events described relate to the invasion of Moyolo village in Moyamba district, on the 18th of February 1996: “The RUF told us that they are divided into 4 groups. The
first group was called the Killers. The second group was responsible
for amputations, the third was responsible for stabbing people to death
and the last group responsible for burning.
Ten people were
captured. They divided empty gallons into half, placed them on these
people, sprinkled fuel and set them on fire. These people were burnt to
ashes. As we were all locked in a room, the RUF started to kill people
from this room one after the other. They would call you from the room,
you would be taken out and be killed. The killing lasted for hours.
After,
they said they were going to start cutting off hands. Many people were
severely wounded. Six people had their hands finally chopped off.
Amputation stopped and they started stabbing. Many people were again
severely wounded and later died. That stopped and they started beating.
Many people were beaten to death and survivors are still suffering from
serious pain as of today.
I am a victim of the amputation group.
I was seriously beaten and severely wounded on my hands for they had
wanted to amputate me. I managed to escape from them, went into the
bush and managed to reach Moyamba the next day.”
23. This testimony included numerous incidents or acts of violations and no less than six categories of violations: torture, arbitrary detention, killing, amputation, assault and forced displacement. The testimony also demonstrates the planned and structured character of the abuses that were perpetrated, a topic that will be addressed later in this chapter. Violation Categories 24. The following violations are captured in the database: amputations; forced cannibalism; abduction, forced recruitment, sexual slavery; drugging; forced labour; assault; torture; rape, arbitrary detention; looting and destruction of property; extortion; forced displacement; killing and cannibalism. A general characteristic of these violations is the indiscriminate manner in which they were committed. There was no respect shown to traditional norms, or vulnerable groups. The percentage of each violation committed by the armed factions shows that none of the violations was a peculiar characteristic of any group. They all seemed to be competing to outdo themselves on who would commit the most violations against civilians. Even the government soldiers who had gone through formal training did not seem to have felt themselves bound by the laws of war. Terror became the main tool for the armed groups. Even those groups set up to defend the communities against attack made no distinction between friend and foe. This chapter is therefore very painful reading of how armed groups claiming to act on behalf of the common man turned their guns on the very people in whose name they claimed to be acting. 1. Amputation: 25. The Commission has compiled statistical data only on those acts of amputation that involved the chopping off of a limb. The decision in this regard was to reflect more accurately how many victims were “disabled” by the violation. Therefore, the Commission defines amputation as the removal of one or more hands, feet, arms or legs. 26. The Commission finds that amputations occurred in “sets” or “spates” during the conflict; in other words they were not a constant or underpinning feature to the prosecution of the war, but rather came in the form of campaigns. Some of the notable campaigns for which amputations were carried out include the 1996 elections, the expulsion of the AFRC from power, the January 1999 attack on Freetown. While data in the database does not contain the total number of amputees in the country, they do reflect the general trends that during the conflict. The graph below captures the level of amputation committed by the armed groups during the war. THE GRAPH MENTIONED ABOVE CAN BE SEEN IN THE PDF DOCUMENT Peaks in amputation are believed to have occurred at the following times and places: a.
From November 1995 to June 1996, abuses were concentrated in Bo, Kono,
Moyamba, and Port Loko. This was the period covered by the elections
that led to the disengagement of the military from power. Many of the
young soldiers were unwilling to give up power. The Chief of the army
claimed that he could not guarantee security for the elections. This
alleged inability was exploited by renegade elements in the army and by
the RUF to commit amputations against the civilian population.
b. The second quarter of 1997, from April to June. This period marked the entry of the RUF into the Government of the AFRC in Freetown. Their entry to Freetown was followed by particular brutality and ferocity. c. The first half of 1998, from February to May. This was the period when the Nigerian led ECOMOG expelled the AFRC from power by. Abuses were concentrated in Bombali, Koinadugu and Kono - the route taken by the AFRC as they fled Freetown. To a lesser extent, abuses also occurred in Kenema and Tonkolili. d. The first quarter of 1999 (January to March). The AFRC with a rag tag of RUF elements marched on Freetown in January 1999. The entry was marked with wanton attack on civilians. Abuses concentrated in Western Area. Having failed to keep Freetown, they laid waste to the city as they departed under heavy casualties from ECOMOG bombardment. Their resentment at the civilian support for ECOMOG was marked by the highest peak in amputations throughout the war. 27. The peaks mark separate campaigns. The motivations for the various campaigns differ. While the RUF campaign before and during 1996 was in protest against the elections and terrorising the people to stop them from voting, the purpose of the AFRC/RUF amputation campaigns of 1997, 1998 and 1999 was revenge on the population for failing to support them. The more the people kept away from the AFRC, the more they were punished by AFRC/RUF combatants through amputations and other violations perpetrated against them. 28. The RUF was responsible for the majority of the amputations carried out during the conflict in Sierra Leone. The percentage of amputations attributed to the RUF is 40.7% (154). The RUF conducted a campaign of violence in and around 1996 known as “Operation Stop Elections” which entailed the chopping of hands and arms as a way of preventing people from voting. One specific circumstance surrounding the cutting of limbs was for the victims to be told to go to President Kabbah for a new hand or that the amputations were a message to the President that the elections were meaningless without the RUF. 29. Tamba Amara, an adult farmer, had his limb amputated in his village Bo Ngleya in 1996: “People
armed and in combat uniforms attacked our village and killed many
people. They went all round and shouted that we, in the village had
voted for President Kabbah as President of the Republic of Sierra Leone
and because President Kabbah is a proud man they are going to cut off
our arms so that we will never vote for him again. It was in 1996 and
they said that we should go to him to treat us and give us another
hand. Four of us were amputated, two men and two women.”
30. Morlai Conteh had her hand amputated by the RUF in 1995 in Kainu town: “After they cut off my hand, they gave it to me and told me to take it to the government.”
31. Mohammed Kallon encountered armed men on Election Day in 1996: “I
was on my way from Njopewahun with my children to Bo for elections. We
fell into rebel ambush at Falaba. They then asked us our reasons for
travelling and where were we going to vote. We then told them we were
going to Bo. Then I was tied, laid on three “mortar pestles” and they
cut off my right arm.”
32. In the RUF, a significant proportion of those who wielded the “implement of amputation” and actually performed the cutting off of limbs appear to have been children. Many of the testimonies collected by the Commission indicate that the perpetrators themselves were acting under strictly enforced orders or other forms of compulsion. For example, the children were instructed that they would be killed if they did not act as their commanders wished. This applied to all violations, but was more prominent in amputations where the children were given different nommes de guerres such as “Cut Hand”. 33. The amputating implement in most cases was a local agricultural machete known as a cutlass, but on occasions also included knives, axes and other forms of crude cutting blades, picks and crowbars, and broken glass from smashed windows or bottles. 34. The AFRC demonstrated a specialisation in amputations in the period 1998 to 1999. While the AFRC was responsible for 3255 of all violations committed during both years , they committed 44% of the amputations that took place between 1998 and 1999. 35. The amputations carried out by the AFRC were all part of campaigns. One AFRC abductee recalls the following event in 1998: “About
28 of us who were all abducted were taken to the camp. The AFRC sobels
we were with were expecting some ammunition for an attack on Koidu Town
but, most unfortunately, a letter came through to the effect that they
have to handle with care the ammunition they have left; they should not
use their ammunition at all until they were back from the raiding trek.
Instead, any enemy being captured - Kamajor, civilian or ECOMOG - must
have his hands chopped off. This letter was signed by most of the AFRC
PLO’s and top officials. I was cooking for them while they met to
discuss it.”
36. With ammunition scarce, it was considered cheaper to amputate victims’ limbs and save the ammunition for confrontations with the government. Any person captured by the AFRC risked having their limbs chopped off during this period. Mohamed Kanu became a victim of amputation by the AFRC/RUF in his village Baba Foindu in 1999: “One of them threatened to kill me and some
others but it was stopped by another soldier. Rather, that soldier that
prevented us from being killed told us that they should give us letters
that will be taken to His Excellency Tejan Kabbah. After they left my
wrist shaking, they told me, ‘that is the letter we have given you to
be taken to Kabbah’”.
37. People were often lined up and their limbs amputated in turns with the choice of having their right or left hand amputated. Single and double amputations of hands were routine, like the following event that occurred in Calaba town in the Western Area in 1998: “They announced to us that the time has come to
display amputated hands. First was Mr. Tickim. His hand was cut off
with an axe, and they also macheted him in several places. He fell down
and was dumped into the gutter, he was presumed dead. Second was Pa
Jolloh, his hand was amputated. Third was me. My left hand was
amputated and then they told me to put the right hand again. I did but
when he hit it with the machete, not all the bones and veins were cut.
They did this to all ten of us. Some were doubly amputated, others
single. One Mamie Sampa did not survive the amputation. She died
shortly after. They told us to go to Tejan Kabbah to give us hands.”
38. On other occasions, civilians were asked if they wanted “long or short sleeves”. If they answered short, their arm was amputated above the elbow; if they said long, it was amputated below the wrist: “I
was brought to a small boy called “Burn House.” He placed my right hand
on a stick and asked me whether I wanted long sleeve or short sleeve,
not knowing what to say, my hand was cut from the elbow area and I was
asked to go and clap for Tejan Kabbah.”
39. All the armed factions carried out amputations against the civilian populace. Even children as young as one year old and very old people had their limbs amputated. They were indiscriminate. The first case of amputation recorded by the Commission was against a SLA soldier by the RUF in July 1991 in Kailahun. In October of the same year, an automobile mechanic in Pujehun had his hand amputated by the SLA for rendering service to the RUF. Since then, amputation became a popular tool used by all the armed factions against perceived opponents irrespective of the laws of war. The amputations have become the clearest manifestation of the brutality of the RUF. In many of the cases reported to the Commission, the perpetrators were exacting punishment on the civilian population for policy actions of the Government or the ECOMOG forces. For the 1996 elections, those whose hands were amputated were told to ask the President to give them new hands. Some were told that they would given letters to the president, only to have their limbs amputated. One of the poster campaigns for the 1996 elections read, “let’s put hands together to create a new future”. Figuratively, the RUF was collecting thousands of hands to prevent people from voting. The targeting of civilians was clearly in breach of the Geneva conventions. Even the leadership of the army did not seem to have made serious efforts to dissuade the targeting of civilians for amputation or punish those who were responsible. One amputee said the commander of an AFRC troop contingent told him in Kono in 1998 just before they amputated both his hands, “you want Kabbah and not the AFRC. We have been kicked out of power and you are going to pay for that. Those hands that were used to vote for Kabbah, you will not use them again. For those who survive, Kabbah will give you hands.” Another commander said, “you don’t want us, it is democracy you want. You are going to pay for that.” 40. It is difficult to determine where the idea of amputation in the conflict came from. There are however examples from different parts of the world that could have motivated the combatants who used amputations to devastating effect. During the colonial period in the Democratic Republic of Congo (former Zaire), the Belgians cut off the hands of workers who didn't bring home enough rubber. Mozambique's RENAMO rebels also carried out amputations during the 70s and 80s, and in Uganda, the Lord's Resistance Army has amputated ears, particularly, and tongues. Nazi Germany was also reputed for terrible medical experiments on victims that included amputations and mutilations. What makes the Sierra Leone case unique is that people elsewhere usually lost limbs to land mines. In Sierra Leone, they were hacked off by human beings using an ax or a machete. What is more, the amputees elsewhere typically lost a leg or sometimes two legs, which though horrible still allows the victim to function with crutches or a wheelchair. In Sierra Leone, most amputees have lost an arm, and many are what technicians call "double upper-limb amputees." 41. The World Food Programme registered 1,128 amputees in the amputees camp in February 2002. Since then, the numbers in the camp have drastically reduced, because of the voluntary resettlement of many of the amputees in their home communities. It should be recalled however that thousands of the amputees didn’t have access to medical care in the communities where their limbs were amputated. Many of them have probably died from lack of care. 2. Forced cannibalism: 42. Throughout the conflict, various factions forced their captives to eat the flesh and body parts of human corpses, cooked and uncooked. The Commission defines forced cannibalism as the act of forcing a person to eat human flesh, body parts or drink human blood by threat, intimidation, force or violence. This particular violation also manifested itself in the forced drinking of (one’s own or another’s) blood, and the forced chewing of body parts, especially parts of one’s ears. The Commission recorded 19 forced cannibalism violations in its database. While this number may seem small in relation to the total number of violations in the Commission’s database, the extraordinary character of the violation and the purpose it served warrant a closer look at the circumstances under which it was perpetrated. The Commission recognises that many more cases of forced cannibalism and other violations may not have been recorded during the statement taking exercises and hopes that further inquiries into the war will unearth the full plenitude of violations committed against the people of Sierra Leone. 43. Forced cannibalism was a means of inflicting psychological torture on the victims, who were often relatives or neighbours of the person they were forced to eat. Cecilia Caulker’s son was murdered by the RUF in 1992 in Bonthe: “They cut my son in
pieces alive. I was under gun point and all actors were in uniform and
caps [which] were very low over their eyes, I did not detect anybody.
They cut him in pieces with a knife and when they opened his chest,
they took out his heart and cut a piece of it and pushed it into my
mouth, saying you first eat of it, but then when they have cut his
head, they laid it in my hand saying go and breast feed your son and
they started dancing.”
44. These acts were also perpetrated on children. The following account was given to the Commission by a girl who was 8 years old at the time of the events: “On the 6th of
January 1999 RUF/SLA rebels attacked my house at 3 Kissy Road Mental
Hospital. The rebels captured me and my sister and they put my sister
on the top of my head and they told her they were going to kill her if
she did not give them money. My sister was not able to meet their
demands and the rebels stood by their words and they shot at my sister
on the top of her head and all her blood spilled over my body. I had
wanted to cry but they told me that if I do they will kill me also. The
rebels further gave me human flesh to eat. After they killed my sister
they cut off her head and they told me to dance and laugh.”
45. On many occasions, victims were forced to eat parts of their own body, or drink their own blood. This was a means to humiliate the victims. The two following victims were forced to dink their own blood: “Corporal
Blood came with a dagger and a block and cut off one of my finger, but
the remaining one he did not cut of, he only cut them half way, he cut
off my right ear and gave me my blood to drink. Whilst he was doing
this exercise one of his comrades was pointing a torchlight for him.
They also cut the hands and ears of the other six people.”
46. The following victims narrated to the Commission how they were forced to eat parts of their own bodies by the Kamajors and the RUF respectively: “One of the Kamajors dragged me outside and cut off my left ear and told me to chew it under gun point.”
“I
told them there was nothing more and I kept pleading for mercy. Still
one of them came from among their lot and cut off my left ear and then
put the half into my mouth to eat. As I chewed, the blood oozed out of
my mouth. But as I wanted to take it out he hit me with a gun. Still I
was pleading to [them to] show mercy. They told me that the next
operation was going to be my penis, which they were going to cut off. I
was then held, tied up and dropped to the ground. They opened my legs
and put them apart. My scrotum was first held and pierced open. The
penis was then held as well and chopped off using the same knife. After
that they left me and went away to my village where they assembled in
their numbers.”
47. The CDF and the RUF account for the majority of the forced cannibalism violations. For every other violation category, the majority of that violation type are attributed to the RUF. 48. It is difficult to understand the logic of forced cannibalism outside the desire for psychological torture of the victims. It is more baffling in the case of the CDF, which was a community response to the inability of the army to protect the populace. Some of the CDF targets were soldiers and members of their families. The targeting of soldiers was a response to their perceived collusion with the RUF. What this violation demonstrates is that this was a war without rules. Nothing was sacrosanct. 3. Abduction, forced recruitment and sexual slavery: 49. These violations have been dealt with comprehensively in the chapters of the report on women and children respectively. Forced recruitment is the forced or unwilling recruitment of any individual to an armed group or organisation by threat, or intimidation to self or family members and /or violence, while sexual slavery is where the perpetrator exercised all or any of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over one or more persons, such as by purchasing, selling, lending or bartering such a person or persons or by imposing on them a similar deprivation of liberty; and where the perpetrator caused such person or persons to engage in one or more acts of a sexual nature.. The victim often known as a “bush wife” is held by one or more perpetrators. 4. Drugging: 50. Most of the young people who testified before the Commission complained of forcible drugging by local commanders within the armed factions. Women, abducted and converted to “bush wives” were injected with the psychotropic substances or forced to consume them. In a drugging violation, the victim takes a substance, which alters, temporarily, or permanently, their mental state. The taking of the substance was also be achieved by devious means such as lacing drinks or food with the drugs. The drug may result in permanent physical and/or mental injury. Drugging was used mainly against children forcibly recruited into an armed faction to make them more inclined to fight. 51. One witness before the Commission who was abducted as a little girl gave the following testimony: “I
don’t remember from where [I was abducted] but I spent ten years with
them. I don’t know my parents or their whereabouts. My commander was
colonel Kontobi. I was raped many times. I also cooked for them. I was
injected the first time I complained of sickness. I felt cold
immediately and sat quietly under the sun for a long time. My body
would rise and I became hyperactive. I felt this way for almost two
months. One day I was stabbed on the breast by junior and I was told to
shoot him. I couldn’t. They gave me cocaine to sniff saying I won’t be
afraid. I tried it and started laughing. My eyes felt watery. I opened
fire where junior was standing. He ran into the bush and I ran after
him firing everywhere until someone held me from the back.
Other
times we were injected with a red liquid. Sometimes it was yellow. They
said it would give us strength. Then they will disperse us to go
‘jaja’. If you refused to take the injection, you will be starved. The
effect of this drug is dangerous. We were merciless. I was given a
human liver to roast and I did and we shared it. We were given blood to
drink and we did.
We most times go ‘jaja’ after eating. There
is always a different feeling after you eat. I came across a pregnant
woman who strayed into our camp. I threatened to stab her with my
knife. The others came around and were curious to know the sex of the
baby she was carrying. I said male and others said female. The boys
opened her up a front of me and brought out a boy. I jumped with joy
that I had won.
We called our Doctor Samuel. He administered
drugs on everyone when sick or when on the verge of a mission.
Sometimes we are told to go to the car park to collect items including
boxes of medical drugs, rice, clothes, and cows. I am not sure where
they came from but I guess it was from Guinea through Kabala.
We
could hunt dogs and catch them with knives and kill them. This we
cooked for every one to eat. We threw grenades to scare the inhabitants
of a village away always. Then we would go in to “jaja”. A person is
re-injected when they know that the previous effect is wearing off. I
used to wonder how come they knew when it was wearing off. But when we
were given it, we are recharged.”
52. Another witness recounted his abduction as a little boy by one commando, Osman, alias ‘Kill man no blood’. He acquired this nickname because he drank the blood of his victims. Osman was one of Rambo’s commandos. “I was called ‘kill
man blood small’ since I was his boy. Marijuana was boiled and given to
us to drink. They said it will make us wild, unafraid. When I take it I
was not afraid to confront anybody. Under its influence I could shoot
anyone without being ordered to do so. Cocaine was first administered
to me through a cut on the arm. I loved the effect on me. I felt very
happy, playful with the fun. We called it coffee or coco. I beat kids
younger that I am. Sometimes we were injected. This is normally a blue
liquid. After taking it, I once slapped my boss and he locked me up. We
had Brown Brown and tablets like Valium 10 or Blue Boat. Sometimes we
won’t pay and fighting would break out. We could fire and people are
killed. Rambo on the other hand could just walk in and take whatever
drugs he wanted. When hungry we also used to open up to 60 bullets and
empty the powder on a leaf or piece of cloth. This we would chew and
later drink water believing it would make us strong. When food was
cooked, our commander would sprinkle a white substance into it, we [had
no] sauce but it had a bitter taste. Afterwards, I normally felt dizzy
but I didn’t want to sleep. Then we were sent out to ‘jaja’.”
53. The widespread use of drugs within the armed factions demonstrates that it was condoned and promoted by the leadership of the factions. Many of the children who consumed hard drugs within the factions are now suffering from all kinds of mental health problems presenting an immediate challenge to the health authorities. 5. Mistreatment Violations 5.1 Forced labour: 54. The Commission defines Forced Labour as forced/unwilling labour by a victim that occurs whilst they are detained. It excludes the labour implied by being the victim of a “Forced Recruitment” or “Sexual Slavery” violation. 55. Forced labour occurred either without or in addition to abduction. Abductees were forced to do all kinds of domestic work, including cleaning, cooking, and so on, for their abductors. They were forced to carry loads to various locations, engage in agricultural labour and work in the diamond mines. 56. Outside abduction, forced labour occurred when villagers were forced to engage in agricultural activities in their own farms, the proceeds of which were given to the RUF or the CDF. Town chiefs were asked under the threat of death to provide a determined quantity of agricultural products, usually cocoa or coffee, within a specified period. Failure to comply led to the punishment of either the chief or the entire town population. 57. According to one witness, Fomba Mohammed: “I
was at Sefadu in Kono district when the war came. I had tried to escape
to Guinea but it was not possible. I went to stay with an uncle at
Giema. When the RUF first entered Giema they did not harm anybody.
After a while they gathered all the strong men and they elected a Town
Commander. The next day they took us to their training base. …After we
finished training, we were given guns [and] sent to the war front. This
did not last long as a separation occurred in the movement between the
Gio RUF and the Junior commandos who were trained here in Sierra Leone.
I was appointed the master farmer responsible for food. I would order
civilians to brush and plant rice for them and it was the food that we
would use anytime they have visitors.”
58. Upon entering a town or village, the factions usually recruited all the able-bodied men and women as forced labour. The civilians had to cook and carry looted property for them back to their base or to another town, and to perform sundry other services for them. The following account involved the SLA in Yele in 1994: “These soldiers were bullies. They used to take
the wives of community people to sleep with them, cook for them as well
as launder their clothes.”
59. A witness told the Commission about the RUF attack on his village in 1991: “They
made us sit on the ground and ordered us to cook for them. Chickens
were caught and slaughtered and food cooked by the women. We were all
forced to eat the food with the rebels because they feared that they
would be poisoned by the civilians.”
60. The RUF is responsible for the majority of the forced labour violations recorded in the TRC database amounting to 68.2%, while 11% is attributed to the AFRC. The remaining perpetrators were each responsible for less than 7% of the forced labour violations. 5.2 Assault: 61. An assault violation consists of physical harm inflicted on a victim by punching, kicking, and/or striking with an object or objects over a period of time. It also includes whipping, lashing, stabbing and the shooting a victim. 62. Assault was used to punish civilians, compel victims to do things or hand over goods. The following statements relate to incidents involving the AFRC in 1998: “One day, rebels asked me
to carry a bag on my head to Makeni. When I refused, they started
beating me with sticks. Five rebels beat me with sticks. They hit me on
all parts of my body. They released me later.”
“I was stopped by
some soldiers who were well armed. I refused to stop and one of them
chased me and later gave me a hard hit on the side. My two-month-old
child got loose on my back and fell while the soldiers took the bag of
rice I was carrying. I was then commanded to go with them. As I wanted
to take my child, the soldier told me to go away and leave him there.
So I had to leave my child crying.”
63. The RUF also used beatings to force civilians to comply with orders: “They
insisted on us producing food and meat. When we failed to comply with
their demand, two men took out their belts and started beating us at
random. They beat me and I fell down. They continued to beat me until I
became unconscious. I sustained a deep wound on my head.”
64. Suspected collaborators were beaten. Those who were perceived to be sympathetic to the Government of the CDF were singled out and severely punished. “They gathered everybody under the barrie. Our
children suffered beatings. This group was headed by CO Manawai who
ordered the boys to beat themselves. People started beating each other.
We asked them what wrong have we done? They answered that we had
allowed our sons to run away and that they had gone to the Kamajors.”
65. The Commission also received numerous testimonies of assault by the SLA and the ECOMOG forces. Assaults were often combined with other violations, especially looting, extortion and physical torture. The number of assault violations attributed to the RUF is 1883 or 58%. For the other groups, the numbers of assault violations are as follows: SLA 245 or 7%; ECOMOG 53 or 1.6% and the AFRC 320 or 9.9%. 5.3 Torture: 66. Torture is the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody of or under the control of the accused, except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. The method of torture may be unspecified. The torture could lead to bruising, bleeding, internal injury or severe pain. It includes mutilations such as cutting off ears or breasts. 67. Torture was a means of terrorising the population and breaking down their resistance. Public acts of torture were extensively used to humiliate victims in front of their communities and/or relatives. The following victim was stopped in a village by the RUF in March 1997. She was carrying her husband’s gun in a basket, without knowing that the weapon was there. When they found the gun, she was tortured: “They
stripped me naked, laid me on the ground and told me to roll on the
ground. As I was rolling on the ground, they got buckets of water and
poured them on me, laid me under the sun and told me to look at the sun
for several hours. When they brought me to Mobai naked, there was an
RUF commander named Tidda who passed the order that 8 of his men beat
me to death. Commander Tidda also gave the command that they should put
me in a deep hole. I was put into a deep cemented hole and padlocked
until the morning of the next day.”
68. Instances of torture carried out by the CDF were brought to the attention of the Commission. A witness described how alleged members of the RUF were tortured and killed by the Gbethes in the North: “Between October and
December 1998, I was in Port Loko. The Gbethes were using a house as
their base, with their commander Mr. Dumbuya. Normally, he and his boys
would go on raids. When they returned, they would come with six to ten
men, whom they accused to be rebels. They blindfolded them, tied their
hands and locked them in a dark room where they used to torture them.
In the night, he would take the victims out and summarily execute them
in a secret place. He carried these exercises every four days until
December 31st 1998, when the rebels attacked the township.”
69. The following account illustrates how torture was used by the AFRC, in this case, to humiliate civilians, leaving them with scars for the rest of their lives: “He ordered the operation to start. He started
by cutting my two ears. He had wanted to cut the man close to me but he
ran away. So the third man’s ears were cut off.”
70. The elderly were also tortured. This was part of the RUF strategy to break down the social fabric and communal norms. “My
grand-father was too old to run when there were attacks on the village.
He was always left in the village alone. One day, these rebels captured
him and brought him out of the house. They tied him up and seriously
beat him. One of them stabbed him on the eye, which resulted in the
loss of his eye. As a result of the torture, he became very sick. He
couldn’t bear the pain and died.”
71. The AFRC and the CDF are responsible for 235 or 11.5% and 217 or 10.6% of the acts of torture recorded in the Commission’s database respectively. The RUF is responsible for the majority of torture violations in the database, accounting for 1136 or 55.4%. 6. Rape: 72. The Commission has defined rape as where the perpetrator invaded the body of a person by conduct resulting in penetration, however slight, of any part of the body of the victim or of the perpetrator with a sexual organ, or of the anal or genital opening of the victim with any object or any other part of the body. The invasion was committed by force, or by threat of force or coercion, such as that caused by fear or violence, duress, detention, psychological oppression or abuse of power, against such person or another person, or by taking advantage of a coercive environment or the invasion was committed against a person incapable of giving genuine consent. 73. While victims who were abducted and turned into sex slaves or bush wives suffered numerous rape violations, hundreds of other rape violations were reported to the Commission outside of the context of abduction, during encounters on the road or in the bush, or during village attacks. 74. Male combatants did not use rape merely as a weapon against female civilians. It was a devastating tool of terror wielded intentionally to strike a sense of vulnerability into the wider society. It became the crux of a whole-scale assault on belief systems and traditional norms; a medium through which entire families or communities were “punished” in revenge acts; and a crime against humanity. The very nature of the forced sexual acts forced upon the civilian population was an aberration to the individual and collective sense of self. 75. Civilians were often forced to rape family members, under the threat of being killed if they refused. The NPFL used this strategy to devastating effect at the beginning of the conflict: “We were
here when the Liberian rebels entered the country in 1991. The rebels
came and they met me on the road with one girl by the name of A; they
captured us and demanded to know where we were going. We told them that
our people had sent us to collect food for prayer. When they asked me
about my relationship with A I told them that she was my sister. They
ordered that I must have sex with her by force. After the sex they
threw plenty of dirty water on us and allowed us to go.
I left
for another nearby village in search of salt. It was that same night
that the rebels entered this village and commanded us all to come out
of our various houses and homes. They ordered us to undress ourselves
naked, both men and women, and to dance, men on one side, women on the
other. The rebels then ordered the women to lie down on the ground on
their backs.
The rebels then made the men to identify their
relationships with these women on the ground. Each time when a man
points to one lady or girl to identify her as his sister or mother
those rebels will force him by the gun to have sex with her. We did
this for over one hour.
One man lost his life during this
process because he refused to have sex with his mother; he was brutally
beaten. The next day we saw only his dead body.”
76. On occasion, civilians were forced to witness the rape of a family member, a mother, sister or daughter. This was aimed at stigmatising family members thereby weakening the bonds of the family, since it is the most basic component of society. “It was during the dry season in
1998 at Romendi village in the Bombali district when a group of RUF
rebels headed by Superman attacked the village. One of the rebels
arrested my daughter Fatmata and raped her in front of my naked eyes. I
went to his colleagues after the attack and reported him. This rebel
was taken to Lunsar to their commander Superman for further punishment.”
“In January 1999, RUF/SLA attacked my village called Rokou. They raped
my wife in my presence and they abducted her. Since the abduction, I
have not set eyes on her.”
77. The RUF used rape to destroy the social respect and standing for pregnant and older women. A victim narrated an experience in 1991: “One fearful thing they used to
do was when they got hold of old women, they raped them. Some of these
grand mothers died from sex with these young men. Sometimes, a woman
who had just given birth would be used for sex until she dies.”
In
traditional Sierra Leonean society, men did not have sex with pregnant
or lactating women. It was a social taboo. The rape of such women
during the conflict was aimed at destroying the traditional social
fabric, stigmatising the old and pregnant women and nullifying the
boundaries of acceptable behaviour within the community.
7. Arbitrary detention: 78. Arbitrary detention is defined as detention in a single location such as a prison, guardroom, or civilian building adapted to use as a detention place. The detention is illegal and the detainees are not charged with an offence. 79. Arbitrary detention was used extensively to punish civilians who disobeyed orders, or suspected of being allied with the “enemy”: “On the 6th of January 1999, I
was at home with my children [when] I saw a group of Kamajors and
ECOMOG soldiers coming to our area. I ran inside with my children and
they opened fire on us. They were shooting directly at our house. We
all laid down on the floor to avoid being hit by the bullets. I found
out that two of my children had been shot. I heard the ECOMOG soldiers
telling the Kamajors to stop shooting. They came to our house and they
saw what they had done, but they did not care. The ECOMOG soldiers told
us that if we don’t like President Kabbah, they will make sure that
they kill all of us. We told them that we liked Tejan Kabbah and that
we voted for him. They locked us in a house for three days without
food. On the fourth day, they released us and I managed to take care of
my children.”
80. Detainees were often beaten and tortured while in detention. They were denied basic utilities such as water: “One
day in 1997, I was caught by the ECOMOG forces. They misconceived me as
a rebel and I was taken to the Daru barracks where I was detained. I
was given a serious beating. I was detained in the guardroom for four
days without food and water.”
81. Many of the cases of arbitrary and illegal detention occurred in the period after the restoration of President Kabbah to power in 1998. 18.2% of all recorded detentions occurred in 1998 and 15.7% occurred in 1999. 1998 and 1999 are the first and second highest years, respectively, for reported cases of arbitrary and illegal detention. 82. The graph below shows the annual pattern of reported detentions, and the 1998-1999 peak is higher and sustained longer than any other period. GRAPH CAN BE SEEN IN THE PDF FORMAT OF THIS VOLUME 83. People suspected of being sympathisers of the AFRC were attacked at will, severely beaten and detained. In a number of instances the detentions were orchestrated by ECOMOG as a means of protecting people from rampaging bands of Kamajors attacking Northerners and AFRC “collaborators”. However the detentions became prolonged even after the threat level had minimised. According to records at the CID obtained by the Commission, more than 3000 people were detained at the Pademba Road prison in the period after the restoration of the president to power. 84. Hundreds of civil servants who had served in one capacity or another during the AFRC regime, and others with connections to leaders of the AFRC were detained under the state of emergency declared by the government. A subsequent inquiry established by the Government declared that many of them had no cases to answer and should be released. Despite this recommendation, many of them languished in detention for several months thereafter. 85. Hundreds of people, many of them former soldiers of the RSLMF with no connections to the AFRC other than that they were soldiers and who had not supported the AFRC were detained first at Lungi and subsequently at the Pademba Road prisons, until the Government determined that they had no relationship with the AFRC and ordered their release. 86. Following the events of May 6-8 2000 in Freetown, leaders of the RUF were ordered to report at the police stations nearest to them. All those who did were detained. The explanation offered then was that the detention was protective since mob justice after members of the RUF was on the prowl. Till date, no less than 16 of those persons are still in detention at the Pademba Road prisons without any charges having been preferred against them. 8. Economic violations 8.1 Looting and Destruction of property: 87. Looting consists of theft of personal or commercial goods with the victim absent, or present under threat, intimidation, force or violence. 88. Destruction of property is defined as the destruction/damage to private/public property through burning, mining, bombing, shelling, and arson or by other means. Property means a home or other building or personal effects. 89. The looting and destruction of property violations are often interrelated. In most cases of attack on towns and villages, movable properties of civilians were looted and the remaining items, such as houses and other fixed assets were burnt down or otherwise destroyed. 90. The Commission recorded 3044 looting violations and 3404 property destruction violations in its database. Of these, the RUF committed 56.4% of the property destruction and 60.5% of the looting violations. The AFRC committed 12% and 8.3% respectively while the CDF committed 3.2% and 5.7% of the property destruction and the looting violations respectively. “It was in January 1999 when about 5 RUF/AFRC
rebels came into our compound. We were so frightened. They came into
our house and demanded money, but my stepfather begged them telling
them that we do not have money in the house. They did not believe him.
They went into the rooms, ransacked everywhere; they took the video,
television, clothes and many other things. They told us to come out of
the house and put us together in a corner of the compound and ordered
us not to move an inch or else they would shoot us. They took petrol,
sprinkled it on the house and set the house on fire.”
91. The Commission received many testimonies of people being locked up in a house and the house set on fire with the people burnt alive. An old woman described how her granddaughters were killed: “I am
explaining a sad story. This was at the early stage of the war in 1991.
The rebels invaded Rotifunk and went to the house where my
granddaughters were living. All four of them were ordered to enter into
the house. They closed them in and set the house ablaze. They all died
in the fire.”
92. Another witness had his properties stolen and his house burnt down on three occasions: “I
returned to the village and discovered that my house had been burnt
down. Also, all my possessions that were in the house were burnt down
[by the RUF]. We went to Bandajuma Sowa. While there, I built another
house, which I occupied with my family. Later in 1997, the Junta
soldiers drove us from Bandajuma, stole all properties in our houses
and again burnt down my house. We returned home to Kobeibu and built
huts there. One day in 1998, the AFRC Junta soldiers came and burnt
them down.”
93. Many people in Sierra Leone are still living in displaced camps or in shanty-towns in Freetown because they lost their houses and properties. The fighting factions used looting of property to finance their war effort, thereby transferring the fiscal costs of the war to the civilian population. 8.2 Extortion: 94. Extortion is as an incident during which perpetrators use intimidation and/or threats to attempt to compel the victim to surrender goods, cash or services, including sexual services. 95. The armed factions used checkpoints to extort property from civilians. Instances include the NPRC looting petty traders’ merchandise in Freetown, and the ubiquitous RUF check points wherever they entered. “In
November 1998, the RUF rebels attacked my house in Yengema. They
demanded Le500,000 from me or else I would lose my life. I gave them
half of that money and I begged them not to kill me as that was the
only cash I had. Because there was an argument among them on whether
they should accept the money or kill me, they decided to cast a vote.
Fortunately for me, they accepted the money.”
96. Numerous incidents of extortion occurred along the roads in ambushes: “I
was stopped by RUF rebels on the highway towards Gbetgbo. I was removed
from my car and my money amounting to Le500,000 was taken from my
pocket. I was asked by the rebels to choose between my life and my car.
My driver who resisted was beaten. I chose my life and left the car.”
97. Extortion was also common place when fighting factions invaded or occupied villages. Corporal punishment was used to compel people to give money or other goods: “When the RUF came, they started
writing letters for contributions in cash and kind. They also used to
lock up people in a box for failing to contribute. One of such people
was X. He was placed in the box for almost three hours. He was only
released after the sum of Le 5,000 was paid.”
9. Forced displacement: 98. Forced displacement is s the forced/unwilling departure or movement from one's property/home by threat, intimidation, force, violence, fear, suspicion or due to conflict. The move may be due to perception of danger, rather than actual abuse. It was the most frequently reported violation to the Commission. There were 7983 instances reported. Of these violations 63.8% and 12.5% were attributed to the RUF and ‘rebels’ respectively 99. The climate of fear created from attacks by all the combatant factions all over the country made thousands of people flee their homes. Upon hearing rumours that the “rebels” were planning an attack or gaining ground, villagers would pack some of their property and leave their houses. They would either run to hide in the bush, or escape to a neighbouring village. On many occasions, they would be attacked in the bush, or an attack would be launched on the village they escaped to, forcing people to flee again and again. The following account describes this climate of fear created by the RUF: “The war spread rapidly. Civilians fleeing the war
from Tongo Fields and Dodo began to enter Boajibu with bundles on their
heads. We began to feel concerned about our security. Letters were
often found on the streets about the rebels’ intention to attack
Boajibu. All the roads leaving the town became vulnerable so we
remained to live in fear. On the 17th of March 1994, the RUF attacked
Boajibu.”
100. Some civilians were permanently displaced or at least displaced for several months or years at a time. After the RUF had stayed in the community of Gofor (Pujehun) for three months in 1991: “One
day, the chief who was in charge of this community called us all and
told us that the government soldiers will be coming around to fight the
rebels and whosoever they meet here will be considered as rebels. This
was a very big shock for the community and we all vacated the town, I
was partially paralysed, so the community people helped by groups to
convey me. We went as far as Dia. There we were stopped not to cross
[the border to Liberia]. We spent 6 days and later were allowed to
cross. We stayed at Gbaoma Lumeh where the ULIMO soldiers met us and
brought us back to Sierra Leone. We were taken to Kenema because our
town Gofor was a complete bush. My house and all the houses in the town
were burnt.”
101. On many occasions, the destruction of people’s houses led to their being displaced, sometimes outside of Sierra Leone: “The
day following the attack, I was told by fleeing civilians that my house
in Falaba had been burnt down by SAJ Musa’s men. I found that the area
was not safe and I decided to head for Guinea.”
102. But crossing the border did not mean being safety, because of cross border attacks and disastrous living conditions in the refugee camps: “We
decided to seek refuge in Shekia in neighbouring Guinea. At about 3 am,
the rebels launched an attack on the village of Shekia. They arrested
my nephew and, using their bayonets, they impaled his throat. They also
shot my elder brother in the foot. I fled the village into the bush. I
later decided to take my family to the supposed safe haven of the
refugee camp at Forecariah. It was there that my son fell ill and
passed away.”
103. Many of these refugees stayed abroad in refugee camps for years. Some of them are yet to return. One of the most dramatic and painful experiences involved in the events surrounding forced displacement is the separation of family members. The Commission received numerous testimonies of people losing their children, their parents or their siblings while escaping an attack. Many of these family members left behind are dead, and many others are yet to be reunited with their family. 104. The following statement giver left his village because of fears of RUF attack and stayed in the bush for two months, carrying his blind brother who was an old man. After two months, they went to Levuma: “Two days
after our movement to town, the RUF rebels launched an attack on
Levuma. I again ran into the bush. I was not able to carry my brother.
He was blind and could not find his way. He was left in the town. When
I went back to see what had happened, I saw my brother lying dead with
seven other people.”
10. Killing: 105. The Commission considers a killing as causing death. In addition to intentional killing, a person’s life was taken in the course of other abuses and violations. 106. Many civilians were killed in crossfire through encounters between government and “rebel” forces which occurred on numerous occasions within villages and towns. While killing arising from cross fire is generally regarded as collateral damage and therefore not a violation, the Commission considers that collateral damage in the context of the Sierra Leonean conflict was in many respects arbitrary. The combatants were in the main reckless and negligent in avoiding civilian casualties. 107. Sometimes people were killed intentionally to satisfy the innate desires of the combatants: “I
came across a pregnant woman who had strayed into our camp. At first I
threatened to stab her with my knife. Then the others came around and
asked what we should do with her; they were curious to know the sex of
the baby she was carrying. I suggested male while others said female.
The boys opened her up in front of me and brought out a baby boy. I
jumped with joy that I had won.”
108. Killing or the threat of killing was used extensively to punish disobedient civilians and terrorise the population into obedience by “giving the example” of what happened with those who failed to obey orders. 109. The following witness’ brother in law was in hiding. He was punished when he was caught: “My
brother in law was captured from his hiding place and was brought to
town. He was placed before us and shot. He fell down and one of the RUF
men went closer and fired at his head. He died on the spot and was
thrown into the bush.”
110. People were killed as human sacrifice to bring luck to the fighting factions. The following account relates events that happened in Koinadugu town in August 1998. The CDF had attacked the town but were repelled by the AFRC forces: “When
the fighting ceased, Superman called on the civilians and informed us
that he was about to make a sacrifice. Many people were then forced to
be present, although in fear. At first, he maintained that he was
making the sacrifice in the name of peace while he had planned to
massacre civilians. He blamed the civilians for giving intelligence
information to the CDF at Kabala, which resulted in the attack of
Koinadugu.
Several people were locked up in a room and burnt
alive. They included my wife, my uncle, my grand-mother and several
other people.”
111. Another account relates a similar event in Bumpeh Tabbay, Bo district, in 1997. The AFRC massacred about 50 people in the same way: “The rebels went from house to house searching
for people. They got hold of my grandfather and grandmother who were
too old to run away, and also of other old and young men and women,
nearly 50 people. They were all put inside our house and locked up.
They sprinkled petrol on the house and set it on fire. They went afar
to watch the house burning so that no one could attempt to put off the
fire. Everyone in the house was burned down to ashes.”
112. Ritual killings were practised on enemy fighters or on civilians, including children: “The most fearful event I saw was when fifty babies were punched on an iron alive, as sacrifices for the war.”
113. Another account, was of killings by the AFRC in Kono in 1998: “They
decided that one person should be sacrificed. I was pointed out to be
slaughtered. They brought one Limba woman who could not speak Krio; she
was just crying and begging them in Limba. Since the woman was crying,
they said the woman was causing noise so that ECOMOG could hear her.
For that, they will release me and slaughter the woman in exchange. The
woman was stripped naked and slaughtered and a pestle was inserted into
her vagina.”
114. The Commission received reports of the killing of 4514 people. The RUF were named as perpetrators of 58% of the deaths, and AFRC were identified in 11.3%. Killing were concentrated in 1991, 1994-1995 and in 1998-1998 with relatively less violent periods in between. 11. Cannibalism: 115. The first emergence of the practice of cannibalism the Sierra Leonean conflict appears to have been attributable to the contingent of Liberians, predominantly from the Geio and Mano tribes, who fought for the NPFL, under the auspices of the RUF, in the first two years of the conflict. A woman who witnessed the killing of her husband narrated the incident to the Commission: “I had to hide myself in the nearby bush from
where I could see the body of my husband where he lay. I then saw
Johnson coming up to him, he came to where the body was, stood by it
and with the knife he had opened up Kamanda’s stomach. He removed most
of the internal organs and gave them to some of the captives to cook.
Johnson rubbed Kamanda’s blood all over his body. They cooked it for
him and ate every thing.”
116. Some members of the RUF/SL were vehemently opposed to the practice and upon that premise there developed severe hostility between the two component factions of the original incursion force. 117. The Commission recorded instances from Kailahun District in 1991 of the establishment of ‘eating areas’ in which fighters would gather habitually to devour the flesh of their victims. Killings were committed in order to acquire ‘human meat’. Even in instances where those who subsequently cannibalised the corpse were not the killers, the families were deprived of their right to respectful burial of the deceased. 118. The Kamajors, who constituted the CDF of the Southern and Eastern Regions, founded their existence partly upon a ceremony known as ‘initiation’, in which recruits were marshalled through a rigorous series of physical and psychological challenges. This veiled form of psychological torture bears striking parallels with the RUF/SL’s strategy of ‘de-institutionalising’ its forced recruits. 119. Organs, tissue, blood and flesh from the bodies of dead persons - some of them relatives of Kamajors - were used in the ceremony of initiation. Civilians from communities surrounding the initiation site and even would-be recruits were killed for the express purposes of ‘sacrificing them to the cause’. 120. The Commission recorded testimony that pregnant women were killed by the Kamajors in order to extract parts of their bodies for use in initiation ceremonies. Furthermore some Kamajors carried ‘charms’ or ‘fetishes’ with them which were constituted of human remains, including the mutilated genitalia of women. 121. In some of the cases recorded by the Commission, the Kamajors who participated in initiation ceremonies that involved the eating of human flesh were unaware of the ‘materials’ that had been used in preparing the ‘ceremony’, or indeed the manner through which they had been acquired. Thus, added to the incidence of human sacrifice, some Kamajors participated unwittingly in cannibalism. Testimony before the Commission indicated that they became aware of this only subsequently, yet they also didn’t do anything to stop the practice. This was a perversion of people’s perceptions of the ‘justness’ of the cause, or the nature of the initiative, and smacks of deceit and exploitation by the leaders of the Kamajors. 122. The ‘Initiators’ of the Kamajor Society in concert with their assistants, or ‘apprentices’, prepared the ‘food’ for initiation ceremonies and also indoctrinated the ‘initiates’, most of who were illiterate, with the ‘belief’ that certain supernatural powers would be bestowed upon them through the practice of cannibalism and human sacrifice. “In fact, some AFRC ‘sobel’ captives who were held in
prison were at the same time handed over to the Kamajors. One AFRC
captive was brought out of his prison cell and laid on the ground; he
had his chest split open with a cutlass, divided into two halves. The
Kamajors took out his heart, kidney and liver, which I saw
‘respirating’ or beating, and I saw the Kamajor man starting to eat the
above-named organs, and the intestines, raw - without cooking them or
roasting them - publicly, in the open, before everyone. This induced
the town and chiefdom elders into making arrangements for the feeding,
transportation and all other necessary logistical support for the
Kamajors so that all courage would be given to them to defend the
township. From this point, things started going on fine, as normal,
everyday activities were resumed.”
123. In particular, the High Priest of the Kamajor Society, self-styled King Dr. Allieu Kondewah, played a key role in the practice of cannibalism and human sacrifice. Evidence available to the Commission indicates that these violations were carried out with the full knowledge of the National Co-ordinator of the Civil Defence Forces (CDF), Chief Samuel Hinga Norman, who appears in fact to have actively encouraged them. 124. Witnesses told the Commission that the practice of such violations by the Kamajors was brought to the attention of the President, Alhaji Dr. Ahmad Tejan Kabbah, who neither sanctioned nor condemned those responsible, and who in fact continued to endorse the activities of the CDF thereafter. The witnesses stated that the President organised a meeting at his office after his restoration to power in 1998 where members of the War Council at Base Zero gave him a comprehensive briefing of their activities. Furthermore, many of them subsequently came to see the President privately where they notified him of the terrible practices going on within the Kamajor camps. The witnesses claimed that the President lamented his inability to call Chief Norman to order for fear that he might incite the Kamajors to revolt against the Government. However, the president was alleged to have issued an order banning further initiations within the Kamajor movement. The order was however largely ignored by the initiators. 125. A woman testified to her husband being eaten by the Kamajors: “The
Kamajors brought the head of my husband, gave me the head cut off and
said I should give them money to buy tomato paste, magi, onions for
them to cook the head and eat. I gave them the sum of one thousand
Leones. They hit my hands, stripped me naked and took from me the sum
of 50,000 Leones. I have the scar marks on my left hand near to my
wrist. Further more they went with the head to town dancing with it
while his flesh was in the pot in front of my house cooking for them to
eat.“
126. All the combat groups engaged in cannibalism. The RUF had demonstrated a clear propensity for attacking the very people in whose name it claimed to be carrying out the revolution. It was no surprise to the people that the RUF also engaged in cannibalism. What was shocking to the people was that the Kamajors also engaged in it, for no ostensible reason. A group within the Kamajors, called the “yarmotor” is reputed to be a cult of warriors in traditional Sierra Leonean society. Witnesses claim that this group carried out most of the cannibalism violations. As legend has it, eating the remains of a conquered foe imbued the warrior with the strength of the vanquished. This fable has existed from ancient times, providing the basis for cannibalism in some of the great wars in different parts of the world. It has no scientific basis and remains unproven. The leadership of the Kamajor militia and of the RUF were grossly remiss in preventing their members from participating in cannibalism or punishing those who did. THE IMPACT OF THE CONFLICT ON FAMILIES 127. As the smallest unit of social organisation, the family felt the most impact of the war in Sierra Leone. Household heads were targeted, brutalised and killed in the presence of their children. Young girls most of them not yet at puberty were raped and taken away to become “bush wives”. Boys, some of them as young as eight years old, were taken away to be trained to fight for the combat groups, some of them never to return. In most cases, their links with their families were deliberately severed through forcing them at the pain of death to commit incest and horrendous atrocities against family members. The following testimonies before the Commission capture the tragedy that befell the average family during the war. 128. A witness from Magbotoso village was forced to watch the rape and killing of his blind mother by “men in combat attire” in January 1999. “As we reached
the town my mother was raped right in front of me. I covered my face so
as not to see, but one of them gave me a slap saying I should see what
was happening. Three of them raped her, one after the other. The fourth
one was about to rape her when my mother pushed him. He immediately
removed a knife from his pocket and stabbed her in the chest. They were
in disarray when they heard the helicopter gunship. I carried my mother
on my back to a nearby village. She died later that day.”
129. Nothing seemed to attract the respect or deference of the RUF soldiers. Even pregnant women were beaten and raped. “During
the war in 1999 the rebels captured me. At that time I was pregnant.
The rebels stabbed me in the leg with a bayonet. They beat me with a
stick on my head until I bled from the nose. The rebels took me back to
their base at Burkina in Kailahun district. The rebels raped me on the
way to their base. I was with them when I gave birth, but I lost the
child because of the serious pain. When I gave birth I was seriously
sick because of the way the rebels beat me when I was pregnant.”
130. John Lamboi was a resident of a village that was attacked by the RUF on January 4 1995. He was detained at gunpoint, denied food and water. His house was burnt and he witnessed the raping of his young daughter: “My
daughter was a small girl and knew nothing about sexual affairs. But it
was that night that the rebels inaugurated her against her wishes. She
was shouting and crying but they didn’t listen to her and went ahead
and raped her in my presence.”
131. Adama Gribow, of Moyamba town, fled to the bush with part of her family when the RUF first attacked her town. They stayed in the bush for two months until the rebels captured them and other displaced women. She was forced to watch the torturing to death of her mother and aunt. She was also made to sing and dance as the atrocities were taking place. “One morning
the rebels met us in the forest. They threatened to shoot anyone who
attempted to run. We were asked to line up in groups, children in one
line, women in another. They later separated pregnant women from us. My
mother’s younger sister, Moinya, was pregnant. She was made to stand in
front of all the pregnant women. An argument erupted among the rebels.
One rebel argued that Moinya was carrying a baby boy, while the other
denied and maintained that the baby was a girl. They bet 10,000 Leones
on who was correct. The argument lasted for nearly twenty minutes. A
young rebel boy was appointed as a judge, and four other young rebel
boys were appointed to split the stomach of Moinya. The rebels split
her stomach and removed the baby while my aunt was crying in pain.
While they were splitting her stomach they told us to sing and dance.
My mother refused to dance. She too was arrested. She was forced to lie
on the ground. They beat her with sticks. They also kicked her in the
stomach until she started bleeding. We stood around them singing and
dancing until both my mother and her sister died. No reasons were given
as to why my mother and my aunty were killed.”
132. The AFRC soldiers who had revolted against the elected government were no different from their RUF colleagues in their treatment of civilians. AFRC soldiers abducted Miss X during the January 6 invasion of Freetown. She was used as a slave after refusing to submit to rape. She watched her cousin being raped. “When we came back to their base
three of the men raped my cousin, but my elder sister and I refused.
They put my sister’s left foot into boiling water and later she could
not walk for days.”
133. Miss Y had a similar experience. She was forced to watch the rape of her elder sister by “soldiers” “During
the January 6th invasion we were also abducted. One soldier used to
rape Fatima (elder sister) every day in my presence. He said that I
should start to learn how to have sex.”
134. A paramount chief recounted the rape of his nephew’s pregnant wife by members of the SLA in 1995: “In
early 1995 my nephew was passing by the brigade with his wife, when
they were intercepted by soldiers. Both were alleged to have passed by
without greeting them. They were taken into the brigade. The woman was
forcefully taken to a room and the husband was asked to stay outside.
The woman, who was a month pregnant, was raped. The husband informed
them of his wife’s pregnancy. Because of this statement he was severely
beaten and almost killed.”
135. According to Lamin Mauranay, his pregnant daughter was raped and murdered in his presence by AFRC soldiers in 1998: “Later
in the night another group of AFRC came from Sandia road on a mission
statement saying ‘operation no living thing.’ They killed 17 civilians,
raped one of my daughters who was pregnant at the time and later killed
her in cold blood.”
136. “Satu”, 32 years of age and a mother of four, was abducted by “Sobels” retreating from Freetown in January 1999. Pregnant at the time, she was repeatedly raped while in captivity. “I
was two months pregnant. During the time of my stay with the Sobels I
was appointed as one of their cooks. I was raped three times per night
by different Sobels. Three Sobels were raping me not even thinking I am
a pregnant woman. The Sobels forced me to have sex with them and if I
failed to do so I would have been killed, leaving behind my four
children. The Sobels were not allowing us to watch at their faces, they
only came from the Bengurnia barracks at night and they forced us to
have sex and later they returned to their barracks.”
137. The targeting of families was not restricted to the RUF and its allies. The pro government militia, the CDF also targeted the families of those they suspected of being collaborators to the AFRC/RUF. “The
Kamajors stormed our house again claiming that my brothers had dug a
hole [in the back of the compound] and had hid arms there. My brothers
denied this, telling the Kamajors that it was not arms they kept in the
pit but fuel and money. My brothers even told them that they would go
dig up the hole so that the Kamajors would believe what they were
saying. But the Kamajors did not listen saying that as long as they
have got that information [from an informant] they know it is true and
will act on it. It was then that they chopped off the ear of Abu, one
of my brothers. After that they put my brothers in a vehicle with five
other men and drove away. After sometime they appeared again in our
area and told us that everybody should come out and identify their
relatives. When we came out we were under gunpoint, and they took us to
the vehicle, where we saw seven human heads they had just chopped off.
We identified our brothers, and they told us that we should laugh over
their heads and dance, which we did for fear that we would be killed if
we refused.”
138. “Kadi” was hiding in the bush with her young son when 3 Gbethes stopped her. She was pregnant at the time. “One
of the men asked me where the people were hiding. I told him that I
didn’t know because I was a stranger in the village. They said that if
I failed to direct them to where the people were hiding they would kill
me. They were with me the entire day walking in the bush. One of the
men raped me in the bush. In the evening when they came to the town
with me another two men raped me. At the time I was five months
pregnant. They were about to give me some load to carry, but one of the
men who raped me in the bush appealed to his colleagues to set me free.
I was then released.”
139. The targeting of families was designed to remove all vestiges of respect and dignity in the people abused. Such conditioning makes people very malleable and easy to control. It however led to the break up of families, as the trauma was too great for many to bear. 140. One characteristic of the conflict was the familial connection between prominent actors on both sides of the conflict. One notable family was the Bio family of Tihun, Bonthe district. A prominent member of the family, Steve Bio was a reputed supplier of arms and ammunition to the RUF and the AFRC. His nephew Julius Maada Bio was the mastermind of the April 29th 1992 coup that brought the NPRC to power. An in law of the Bio’s, Ibrahim Deen Jalloh was a teacher at the Bunumbu Teachers College in 1993 when the RUF attacked the college and abducted him and his wife, Agnes. Subsequently, he was converted into a believer in the RUF cause. All through the conflict however, his wife was detained and compelled to provide sexual services to Foday Sankoh as a means of keeping her husband in check. After the AFRC was kicked out of Freetown, Steve Bio was arrested and detained at the Pademba Road prison. Steve Bio was in prison with Gibril Massaquoi and other associates of the RUF and AFRC including former President Joseph Momoh and Alex Minty. They all attempted to escape from Freetown following the January 6 1999 attack. Hiding around the Guma Valley premises in the days after the attack and looking for a safe exit from Freetown, Steve Bio was killed by an ECOMOG shell. Gibril Massaquoi subsequently took Steve Bio’s wife Edna under his wings to offer solace and protection and made her his “wife”. Because of the involvement of the Bio family with the different factions during the conflict, Brigadier Maada Bio was accused of colluding with the RUF. The Commission’s investigations demonstrate that this was not the case. When Maada Bio became Head of State, he sent photographs of his sister Agnes to all military formations to try and track her as they launched attacks on RUF positions. A witness reported to the Commission how he broke down and wept uncontrollably when he was finally reunited with his sister. Tihun, their home town, was attacked in January 1996 because Maada Bio was the Head of State. That attack has entered the conflict folklore as the ‘Tihun Massacre’. Several members of the family including Josepo Bio were killed in the attack. It is to the credit of Julius Maada Bio that he did not allow family tragedy to becloud his pursuit of peace with the RUF. 141. The linkage between family members and the different factions again came to the surface in the after math of the May 8 2000 demonstrations and attack on the residence of Foday Sankoh in Freetown. While all the leaders of the RUF were ordered to report to the nearest police stations or at ECOMOG headquarters, Gibril Massaquoi claimed to the Commission that he hid himself at the residence of the then Vice president, Dr. Joe Demby who he said is an uncle of sorts to him. Another prominent member of the RUF, Peter Borbor Vandy who became the Minister of Lands and Country Planning after the Lome Peace Agreement was married to Georgina Demby, daughter of the then Vice president. One of the accused officers during the treason trials of 1998 was one Lieutenant Commander Francis Momoh Duwai. He was convicted and sentenced to death. One of the members of the Court Martial Board that convicted him was his father, Lieutenant Colonel P. M. Duwai (Rtd.). His sentence was subsequently commuted to life imprisonment. He also broke out of Pademba Road prison following the January 6 1999 attack on Freetown, and is currently serving in the armed forces. 142. Another of the treason convicts was Reginald Halston, head of the military police during the AFRC regime. He was also sentenced to death. In the weeks after his conviction, his father was involved in a ghastly motor accident with ECOMOG at the Congo Cross Bridge in Freetown, from which he died. The Commission has received testimony that then Head of the Sierra Leone Armed Forces, Nigerian born Brigadier Maxwell Khobe lobbied very hard for his sentence to be reduced to avoid the double tragedy that would result for the family. His sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. The Commission does not consider it part of its mandate to interrogate the exercise of the discretionary power of prerogative of mercy by the president. 143. One of the leaders of the NPRC regime whose roles in the conflict is discussed in the chapter on military and political history is Captain Tom Nyuma who claimed that he is a nephew of Foday Sankoh. After the overthrow of the government on May 25 1997, a lot of effort was invested by the government in exile, in bringing him back to Sierra Leone from the United States to take over from Chief Hinga Norman as commander of the CDF forces. All testimonies received by the Commission about Tom Nyuma point to a relationship between him and the different combat groups and a multiplicity of roles by him in each of them. THE IMPACT OF THE CONFLICT ON COMMUNITIES 144. The RUF “revolution” was launched to dislodge the dictatorial regime of the All Peoples Congress from power. During the early contacts with people in the Kailahun and Pujehun districts, the movement tried to explain its purpose, promising emancipation for the people. Their tactic of co-opting support and forcibly appropriating property belonging to the people as well as the targeting of prominent and educated people showed the people that this was anything but a revolution. Communities were captured for the basis of plunder, where the movement sought to replenish its stock of food and other materials from community resources. In the targeting of communities lay the basis for the widespread displacement of people that took place during the conflict. 145. In many respects this strategy by the RUF speaks volumes about the misconstrued platform on which the ‘revolution’ was launched. The very acts that the attackers believed to be emancipatory were received by the populace as oppressive and offensive. Moreover, such acts contributed significantly to the siege mentality prevalent in many communities of the Southern and Eastern provinces. One of the most direct manifestations of the siege mentality was the subscription to the concept of civil defence and the consequent mobilisation of local militias. 146. ‘Rebels’ held Loretta Sesay held captive in her house for three days, beginning on January 6, 1999. “They
put us under gun point and asked us to sing and dance for them. The
song they asked us to sing was ‘we want peace’. They also forced us to
use obscene language on the Tejan Kabbah government. They rebels took
all my belongings. They tortured me with guns and sticks. They also
restricted my movement by putting me under siege for three days. They
forced us to sing and dance for them both day and night. On the third
day, the rebels told me and the others who were under siege that they
were going to amputate people’s hands. Upon hearing that I and others
started begging them to have pity on us…As God would have it, one of
the rebels decided to take pity on us and told his colleagues not to
implement their plans, but that they should let us evacuate the house
so that they could burn it. Before they finally freed me and the others
they gave each of us forty strokes.”
147. Sei Tham witnessed abuses committed by the Kamajors against the people of his village, “I
cannot remember the dates of all the events, but Kamajors visited us at
8.00pm and gathered all the people in our village, locked the women up
in a house and then asked the men to come outside and dance for them.
The men were beaten up while dancing.”
148. John Abdallah, son of Lebanese and Sierra Leonean parents, was a resident of a township in Kailahun, which was attacked by the RUF on 27 April 1991. “About
thirty six people jubilated and came out to stand for peace since the
APC was overthrown. Sankoh who was the RUF leader instructed his boys
to boil palm oil and dump it on all thirty six people who jubilated for
peace.”
149. One of the communities to feel the direct impact of the war was Koribundo in Bo district. There was a military garrison in the town, which during the AFRC regime was occupied by the renegade soldiers. The town was fought over between the CDF and the AFRC several times with control seesawing between the groups. The Kamajors accused the towns’ people of supporting the AFRC. When the AFRC finally evacuated the town, several contingents of the Kamajors led by Joe Timide and Joe Nunie came on revenge missions. The Commission’s investigations revealed that the Kamajors committed so many atrocities during this and subsequent visits to the town. The Commission therefore decided to organise a public hearing on the destruction of Koribundo by the Kamajors. 150. Koribundo residents told the Commission that the SLA soldiers who occupied the town treated the towns’ people decently. This was to change when the RUF joined them in a “peoples’ army” in 1997. “Sincerely the soldiers didn’t do much
destruction, but the people’s army did most of the looting in
Koribundo. They were violent with us. They took our property without
respect. They said they are not paid by the government. Anywhere they
go they will just take what they want.”
151. Interviews and testimonies reveal that the order to attack and destroy Koribundo was given by no other than the National Coordinator of the CDF himself, Chief Hinga Norman. The attack was led by Joe Timede. Other Kamajor commanders who participated in the attack included Tommy Lahai, Bockarie Beloko, Slagie Rogers. They were alleged to have committed wicked and inhuman acts, ordering the deaths of many people who challenged their activities in the town. “The Kamajors occupied
the town and started firing or shooting for the rest of the day while I
was inside my house. Heavy machine guns were used for the rest of the
day. At 4.15 in the evening I got up ad peeped. I saw more than 4000
Kamajors. They entered from one house to another. When they entered my
house they cleared everything, including 15 bags of rice and 10 bags of
groundnuts…they stayed for 2 months. Everyone ran away…majority of the
houses were burnt, about 106 houses.
My blood brother was killed
by the Kamajors. I was arrested and charged with making radios for the
soldiers. They started dropping [burning] rubber on my body. They said
that I should die.”
152. Following complaints by the chiefs and people of Koribundo, a meeting was subsequently called at which Chief Hinga Norman was to address the people. “So majority of us went
for that meeting. When everybody reached, both civilians and Kamajors,
he [Chief Norman] said that the Kamajors didn’t do their work for which
he sent them. He asked them, ‘what happened? Are you afraid to kill?’
he asked the Kamajors in front of everybody. He told the Kamajors that
Kapras kill people, nothing come out of it; Tamaboros kill, nothing
happened; the soldiers killed nothing happened; the rebels the same
thing. Why if Kamajors killed. ‘Why are you afraid to kill?’ He said
further, ‘look these rebels, why are you afraid to kill them?’ Then the
Kamajors started shouting, ‘pa-pay pa-pay!’ I was afraid. I thought
that the Kamajors would open fire at us. So I dived down and moved off
from the barray. Many people didn’t sleep in that town because of that
speech by Hinga Norman.”
153. Following the speech, a regime of terror was established in Koribundo. The Commission during the public hearing heard harrowing tales of atrocities committed against the towns’ people. The most notorious of the kamajor commanders was Tommy Lahai. He converted the hospital in the town to a “high court”. A high court judgement usually meant death for the unfortunate victim. The Commission was told that Lahai’s other name is Halai and that he is presently a member of the armed forces. THE PARTICULAR SUFFERING OF THE ELDERLY, THE AFFLUENT AND THOSE OF STATUS 154. In terms of material loss, it is perhaps inevitable that people of affluence and status suffer inordinately in a conflict of this nature. The more one has, so the theory goes, the more one stands to lose. In a conflict in which forced displacement and looting violations were rife and constant throughout the period of fighting, property owners and those with assets such as expensive motor cars and large numbers of livestock were deliberately targeted by each of the fighting factions as they sought to accumulate wealth for themselves. 155. The particular suffering of the affluent and those of status attests to a great deal more about the dynamics of the conflict as a whole than simply the idea of material loss, however. In view of the character of the majority of the fighting forces, which appears to have been young, disgruntled and poor, the Commission considers that violations such as looting and destruction of property were as much an expression of the wretchedness of the plight with which so many of the perpetrators were familiar as it was any reflection of the particular identity of the victims themselves. Through those violations, they strove for a material existence better than that to which they had been conditioned. 156. From the evidence available one conclusion could be that it was a recurring tendency on the part of marginalised groups in Sierra Leone to harbour resentment against those who did not seem to have struggled like they have for whatever small gains they can gather. Thus, when a poor farmer has lived on a knife's edge for many years, possibly even decades, and has watched as those in positions of power and privilege enrich themselves at his expense, then he will lash out when he attains the means to exact revenge, which during the conflict came through the barrel of the gun. 157. The members of society who were perceived to 'have everything' were therefore often the ones destined to 'lose everything'. Equally, those that took them to task for their wealth and status were those who perceived themselves to be the silent victims of their self-enrichment. It was not so much a case of targeting the individual as lashing out against what that individual symbolised. 158. From the statements made to the Commission, it becomes evident that the aggressor sometimes creates justifications for his actions in his own mind - including allegations of collaboration or support for the corrupt system. The attacks represented an attempt to “bring down the system”. The system was perceived as oppressive and enabling only the well connected and affluent to prosper. By “bringing down the system”, the attackers hoped to make a statement that the playing field was not equal and that a new and egalitarian system needed to be constructed. 159. On the part of those who carried out such violations, there is little sense of the moral outrage of his act. He perceived himself, in fact, to be acting out a divine justice, by 'equalising' the disparities that society had thrust unfairly upon him. In this regard, one can perhaps begin to understand the utterance of the abusers of an elderly lady in the Bonthe District that "it is only because you have called the name of God that we are going to spare you". 160. The stories of loss are plenty and pitiful. Foday Kamara lost all his property, which he values at millions of Leones, after fleeing his town of Kamasondo, following the arrival of “men in combat dress.” “I ran into the bush together
with my wife and children. The following morning I went into the
village to check if they had left. Indeed, none of them were around,
but my two houses were burnt down to ashes. Also, my two stores with
two hundred bushels of rice kept there, containers of palm oil, bags of
groundnuts and bags of flour were burnt down. My twenty goats and ten
sheep were looted too. Properties worth millions of Leones couldn’t be
recovered. Everything in my two houses was burnt down. My rice farm
that was to be harvested that month was again burnt down. I was left
with nothing except the clothes I had on.”
161. Cecilia Caulker, mother of Victor Caulker, former Secretary General of the SLPP, recounts the arrest and murder of her son at the hands of “the junta” on October 14, 1997. “They said, ‘You are our bitterest enemy,
both you and your son, because you worked so hard against us that it
was announced on the radio that Bonthe District scored the highest
percentage [during the elections], so you are the greatest enemies of
us and when the enemy catches the other enemy that enemy must die’.
They took us to the base and imprisoned us. Then they took us out and
separated us…. They said, both you and your son have gold, diamonds and
a lot of money in your compound. Therefore, we have come so that you
can show us where they are because it isn’t yours any more because your
son is dead.”
162. Bankole Isaac George Vincent is a retired senior civil servant who was forced to hand over all his money to the ‘rebels’ and to subsequently flee his house. “I went into my
room under escort and removed the 500,000 Leones I had in my box. Under
great shock, I handed the money over to them. The Commando ordered one
of his men to give me two slaps, which he did very brutally. The
commando ordered his men to lock my family and myself in one room
whilst they ransacked all the six rooms of the house and store. All the
articles they looted were loaded inside of a lorry; before they
departed they ordered me to dance and laugh and express my gratitude to
them for looting my house and destabilizing my Mercedes Benz car beyond
repairs. The rebels promised to come back in two days time and ordered
me not to vacate the house as they would bring me some good gifts.
However, knowing the notorious character of the rebels and the advice
which an old lady gave me, my family and myself immediately left our
house and sought refuge in different places.”
THE IMPACT OF THE CONFLICT ON BELIEF SYSTEMS 163. The RUF forces showed scant regard for the institutions and symbols of the people’s belief systems and cultural heritage. Barrie’s, which were the community meeting places and served all kinds of purposes including as places for the settlement of disputes were randomly attacked and destroyed. Faith and community institutions were desecrated. Belief systems were mocked and people were forced to commit religious and other sacrileges. Modibor Kaikai was present in Sahn Mahlen when the RUF arrived in 1991: “The rebels then requested the townspeople
to give them drinks (rum). At first the townspeople told them that they
are Muslims and they don’t have alcoholic drinks. But these elders were
highly molested by the rebels and were forced to give them a “batta” of
moley (rum). The rebels were so happy with this offer and said that
they were going to dance with the town (bamba) people for the whole
night and this they did. But before the dance started they asked those
who could not drink to identify themselves. We were all given alcohol
forcefully. A good number of elders and Muslims were disgraced that
night since that was the first time they would take alcoholic
beverages.”
The ‘rebels’ who forced the villagers to drink the
rum were dressed as civilians. They proclaimed their mandate to be
“fighting for the comfort of Sierra Leoneans”. Such ironic
representation of the “revolution” was not lost on the ordinary people
in whose name the “revolution” was being carried out. These attacks
shocked the collective conscience of Sierra Leoneans who began
mobilising within the communities to find ways of resisting the
invaders.
The targeting of Chiefs and figures of traditional authority 164. Acts carried out against Chiefs, Speakers and their fellow elders in fact account for only a minute numerical percentage of the abuses inflicted on the civilian population during the conflict. Their suffering does not impact statistically to the same degree as, say, a consistent pattern of violations recorded against a certain ethnic group or an age group would do. Whilst there are several instances of deliberate targeting that are statistically more perceptible, however, there is none that is wrought with more symbolism than the singling out of social and cultural figureheads for humiliation and brutal maltreatment. 165. Essentially, the Commission has discovered two trends pertaining to the plight of local traditional authority figures whose communities were attacked in the opening year of the conflict. First, the attackers actively sought them out upon arrival in a town or village. Second, where they were found and identified, they were typically subjected to a particular and peculiar nature of abuse. 166. Tragically, most of the instances recorded by the Commission in which this category of persons fell into the hands of their attackers culminated in their being tortured to death or otherwise killed. The responsibility for these acts rests squarely with the advancing troops of the NPFL contingent who formed the bulk of the incursion force that entered the country at its Southern and Eastern borders with Liberia. Accordingly the brunt of this apparently deliberate targeting strategy was borne by those holding positions of authority in the Kailahun, Pujehun and Bonthe Districts. 167. Such was the impact of just a handful of killings of Chiefs and elders by the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), one might legitimately reflect upon why the numbers killed were not much higher. Rather than mercy or a change of heart, though, this anomaly is mostly attributable to the fact that there were very few Chiefs in Sierra Leone in the first place, and even fewer who remained in their Chiefdoms long enough still to be there when the vicinity was attacked. News of early atrocities - and the identities of their victims - spread quickly through the country with the flow of displaced persons from the border areas towards the interior. The leadership elite, with finances and transportation at their disposal, was in the privileged position of being able to take flight almost at will, quite often out of the country. Thus, if the objective of such targeting was indeed to rid the territories captured of any effective traditional ruler (as a precursory step to putting in place alternative structures to fit with RUF/SL objectives), then it succeeded without reaping as high a death toll as its architects might have imagined would be necessary. 168. Nevertheless, attacks on Chiefs’ properties and estates in their absence were commonplace. It is not surprising that Chiefs’ compounds were among the first properties to be looted and destroyed when one considers that in any given township they are among the largest and most decorated residences. To a great extent, extortion and destruction violations against Chiefs followed an almost identical pattern to those against the foreign, affluent and well-heeled members of a community. 169. More significantly, when a Chief was physically abused, tortured and killed, often consecutively rather than in the alternative, the impact tended to be more profoundly and enduringly felt by his community than when similar abuses were meted out to less-exalted citizens. One statement giver Brima Amara Davowa witnessed the abuse carried out against the town chief of Sandayallu when the RUF first arrived in April 19991. The towns people were asked to gather at the barrie.. “There was
one lady in the group who was forced to show them the town chief,
otherwise they would kill her. So with fear, she pointed at the town
chief. Immediately, he was stripped naked in front of his subjects,
including his wives and children. He was asked to run from where we
were gathered to his store which was about 50 metres away. As an old
man, he became exhausted and asked to lie down on the ground. He laid
down, they asked him to open his mouth, he did, the commander took a
single barrel gun loaded with bullets, put the gun in his mouth and
pulled the trigger. His brains scattered all over the street.”
170. Sally Katta was recruited by the SLA as a “vigilante”. She found herself involved in the commission of atrocities: “Chief
Sanuka was asked to bring us fish two times a day. It was an order from
me. He told us he had no fishermen. I said that we were only interested
in fish, not excuses. One week later, he discontinued. I undressed him
naked with his wives, took them to the riverside and told them to
dance. One of us came and thought they were rebels. He shot the chief
and released the women. I had no alternative but to jubilate over the
chief’s death. I get confused and don’t feel like eating whenever I
think of Chief Sanuka.”
171. Haja Isata Mattia was “sick and confined” in her home in Sumbuya when the RUF attacked her town on May 4 1991. She witnessed the humiliation of her paramount chief “The
Paramount Chief Amidu Nallo was dancing before them under duress and
the moment he proclaimed that he was the chief, they showered abuses
and insult on him.”
172. Al Haj Alpha Amaou Mansaray lost all his property to the RUF. He had anticipated being targeted because of his status as a Section Chief and a wealthy businessman: “Being
as I was the section chief I knew that I might be a possible target.
This is also because I was a big business man with three houses, a very
big shop and 272 cows. When they came, they set my houses ablaze,
including other houses as well. I could not see a single cow later as
all had been destroyed. My shop was completely looted. Even my safe was
vandalised. They took away everything. So finally I was left with
nothing.”
173. The fate of the regent chief of Makayrembay was no different from that of other chiefs who were attacked. He was killed by ‘rebels’ in 1997, after being presented with a false choice between amputation and death. He was later hacked to death with a machete. 174. A Kono Chief, Kai Sarquee, lost his life when an SLPP identity card and a traditional dress was found in his possession as he was escaping fighting in his home town. He was stopped at a military checkpoint manned by soldiers and when searched, these things were found in his possession. He was tortured and burnt alive. 175. In 1991 Chief Kallon-Kamara, Section Chief of Bomaru was arrested by SLA soldiers after a counter offensive in Bomaru to dislodge the ‘rebels’. He was accused of being a rebel collaborator. He was beaten and tortured till his body was all swollen. He was eventually taken away on board an armoured car supposedly to Freetown and to this day he has not been seen and is presumed killed. 176. In 1996 Chief Lagbenyor Lebbie of Konboya was killed by soldiers. Chief Lebbie was very outspoken about his doubts of the army and this made him a target. Most people in the chiefdom suspected that the army was unable to protect them and they preferred the Kamajors. He and his bodyguards were ambushed by SLA soldiers and shot dead. 177. The attacks on chiefs and other local authority figures gave the civilian populace the inescapable impression that their attackers had embarked on a calculated programme to destroy the tenets and symbols of their local culture. In many of the cases recorded by the Commission, the outcomes of such murderous missions - either the corpses or dismembered body parts of the victims - were then paraded through the communities themselves as a chilling confirmation of the terror that had struck. 178. There is little doubt that many of the Chiefs and elders killed in the early phases of the conflict had themselves been responsible for the systemic suppression of their townspeople during the preceding decades of bad governance under the APC, although the Commission was not able to substantiate such a supposition in any individual case. The evidence before the Commission suggests that the attackers harboured an ill-conceived notion that |
