The case of Hawa Hunt (H.H), a Calgary woman who was detained since December over past social media criticism of Sierra Leone’s President and First lady, (Calgary Herald, 23rd Feb, 2025) took a dramatic turn after a former Canadian politician, David Pratt tendered a resignation from his role as Honorary Consul for Sierra Leone, in protest of HH’s continued detention. The case is centred on the accusation and charges under the Cybersecurity and Crime Act, for allegedly “transmitting insulting messages via a computer system”. Since her arrest which apparently took place during a live reality television show, Hawa has reportedly apologised publically to the First family.
Despite this, she remains in detention and had been denied bail, because she was apparently considered a flight risk, among other reasons. However, in his resignation letter, David Pratt wrote, “I believe very strongly that Sierra Leone needs to have a higher regard for human rights and fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of speech, than has been on display recently. Under the circumstances, I feel I can no longer continue as the honorary consul for Sierra Leone and hereby tender my resignation” (Calgary Herald, 23rd Feb, 2025). He described Hawa’s continued detention as “overkill”.
It can be very difficult to comment on cases that are reviewed or going through the judicial conveyor belt; hence the reluctance to comment and risk contempt of court. However, the resignation of a high profile individual, though an honorary consul in a facilitative capacity might just give this case some diplomatic resonance, which makes it difficult to ignore. At the right, left and centre of this case are issues revolving around the concept of freedom of speech, justice and mercy, to name but a few.
It is obvious that this case has garnered a lot of opinions across the country. It is unquestionable that the opinions are expressed with alternative versions along the way. However, it is also obvious that there are those who side with Hawa and others who relate/support President Bio and his wife. Sadly, a lot of these varying opinions could be generated, marinated, influenced and expressed along party political lines. However, if we are to look at this issue through the various prisms including journalism, constitutional rights democratic values, ethics and moral values, it becomes easy to see how difficult it can be to resolve or comment, without engaging in some batter system.
Let us look at the right of the individual to free speech. This is one of the most overused phrases on our political landscape. Freedom of speech has served and has been used as canopy to uphold our constitutional rights, against the backdrop of democracy. Hawa, like any other citizen has an unadulterated and inalienable right to exercise her freedom of speech. However, listening to some of the videos in question, does her freedom of speech give her the right to insult and cause harm to others? As a self-proclaimed blogger, a term that is misunderstood for journalists these days, it is worth noting that some of the ethics ,principles or codes of journalism include harm limitation principle, slander and libel considerations, accuracy and standards for factual reporting.
Some would say that as the President, Mr Bio is open to criticism. In some of the clips, Hawa rightly criticised or commented about the high cost of living, which is a universally open secret. But did Hawa have the right to use the kind of language against President Bio and his wife? While others support her right to free speech, others have condemned her for using such language against her similar gendered Fatima. Others find it inexcusable to use insults as a refuge for the incompetent. Could her case be one example too many?
As Sierra Leoneans, we cannot hide away from the fact that while the Chinese use their social media platforms to trade, show inventions and innovations, our social media platforms have been used/misused as a cesspit of immorality, to the detriment of free speech. We have all witnessed how “mammy cuss” had been normalised and glorified simply because of differences of opinions. Ironically, how can one preach the right to free speech, but resort to insults when those opinions (free speech) differ or are expressed as alternative opinions? Irrespective of where you stand, it is our collective responsibility to protect, promote and defend free speech. Equally, it is in our interest to collectively ensure that the right to free speech is not abused and misused. For freedom of speech belongs to those who own it.
Let us look at the issue of justice and mercy in this matter. Where a crime is said to have been committed, it is natural that justice would take its course. Hawa has been charged with a crime under the Cyber Security and Crime act. Interestingly, prior to the advent of the internet and all its associated media, Hawa’s case might have been dealt with under the Public Order Act, 1965. Guess What? It was President Bio who amended it in an attempt to decriminalise the seditious libel side of the act. We know that this had been a bone of contention between successive governments and the media since the beginning of time (pardon the exaggeration). Although President Bio had amended the Public Order Act, 1965, wouldn’t it be a shame and an irony to see more people fall foul of, and caught within the paradoxical web of free speech under his watch?
Irrespective of where you stand on the matter, insults and abuse of such manner should not be normalised or glorified. We know that as President, uneasy lies the head that wears the crown. President Bio and his wife can be criticised by virtue of their positions as public officials. Some of us vote so that we get someone to blame. But does that mean that they deserve the kind of insults that were traded? You be the judge.
Hawa has since expressed her unreserved apology and remorse. She has admitted her mistakes and folly. We know that folly can be more cruel in the consequences than the malice can be in the intent. We know that the law is taking its course as a matter of justice. President Bio and Fatima are feeling aggrieved, and rightly so. They might want their pound of flesh, but Hawa Hunt regrets her action and is asking for MERCY. Shakespeare reminds us in The Merchant of Venice, that “the quality of mercy is not strained”. In other words, mercy should not be squeezed out of us but must come naturally in bits and like rain drops. In this book we feel the strange marriage between Justice and mercy, and God’s justice and God’s mercy should never quarrel.
Some people believe that Hawa should be made an example of, to address the level of bad language that had been permeating especially our social media platforms. However, Justice does not only deal with the fairness in the way people are dealt with, but also by the system of laws by which people are judged and punished under morally correct and fair conditions. Although many innocent people see this case as exemplary and express their love for justice, some can be wicked but naturally prefer mercy. So, let us remember that mercy is twice blessed; it blesses the giver and blesses the receiver.
Sometimes, mercy surpasses justice and can sometimes bear richer fruits than justice. In another video, Hawa expressed her regrets, debunked rumours about ill treatment in detention, and spoke about how she sold up in Canada and returned to Sierra Leone. That sounds like the dream of many Sierra Leoneans in the diaspora. The dream to return home and serve their country moving forward should be seen as both a laudable and honourable feat. According to Hawa, with her background in mental health, she was hoping to help open a rehabilitation centre for the mentally disadvantaged. Irrespective of your views about her, that is a noble desire or dream. She might have just taken the wrong exit on the information highway.
So, If one of the country’s children, Hawa should benefit from the mercy of the father and mother of the nation, President Bio and Fatima Bio, and if that child Hawa should go on and help facilitate an establishment that will benefit a vulnerable group in the country, there could be no better demonstration of Abraham Lincoln’s saying, “I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice”. No one is saying that her desire to help should be an excuse to “tear abuse”. But maybe, just maybe, there could be a redeeming feature in this saga. Hawa could just be a goodwill ambassador for free speech; I mean proper free speech without the adjectives, but more like “hands off our girls”.
Since his second coming which he blasphemously compares to the expected coming of Jesus Christ, (Isa- alayhi al- salaam), Trump has taken steps to ban, muzzle and cheery pick media outlets that would be allowed during his White House press conferences. The Associated Press (AP), Reuters, Huff post and other media have been banned because they refused to follow his agenda. He banned them for failing to christen the Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America. Now you know why the French President Emmanuel Macron visited Trump recently; to ask for the return of the Statue of Liberty, back. That’s for another story.
Over to you Ngor Maada, sir and Nnatorma. We ask that truth and justice be tempered with mercy. Lessons might have been learnt.
Don’t forget to turn the lights out when you leave the room.
Be the first to comment