Member of Parliament for the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP), Hon. Hindolo Moiwo Gevao, has defended the parliamentary process leading to the passage of the Constitutional Amendment Bill, insisting that the reforms are the product of years of national consultations, political engagement and constitutional review.
Speaking at the Government of Sierra Leone’s Weekly Press Conference held at the Miatta Civic Centre on Tuesday, 18 August 2026, Hon. Gevao said the current constitutional reform process did not emerge suddenly, but was rooted in several previous reviews of the 1991 Constitution.
He traced the process to the work of the Peter Tucker Constitutional Review Committee, whose recommendations were later followed by the establishment of the Dr. Edmond Cowan Constitutional Review Committee.
The 80-member Cowan Committee brought together representatives from civil society, the media, teachers, political parties, the Inter-Religious Council, the Labour Congress and other stakeholders. According to Hon. Gevao, the committee produced a comprehensive report containing recommendations aimed at strengthening Sierra Leone’s constitutional and democratic institutions.
Although political parties disagreed on some recommendations, he said there was broad agreement on several key issues, including electoral reforms, proportional representation (PR), the electoral threshold and increased participation of women in politics.
Hon. Gevao said the reform process continued under successive APC and SLPP administrations, both of which produced White Papers outlining their respective positions on the recommendations.
He noted that among the recommendations accepted by the APC administration of former President Ernest Bai Koroma were the Proportional Representation system and the 50 percent plus one threshold for presidential elections, which the APC now opposes.
Turning to developments following the disputed 2023 elections, Hon. Gevao said the Tripartite Committee was established with representatives from the APC, SLPP and the international community to examine electoral and constitutional concerns and identify areas of agreement between the two major political parties.
He explained that proportional representation was among the issues considered by the committee and was not a new concept, having featured prominently in earlier constitutional review processes.
According to him, the Tripartite process also produced agreement on several other reforms, including reducing the electoral threshold from 55 percent to 50 percent plus one, measures to enhance women’s political participation and other constitutional and electoral provisions.
Hon. Gevao further explained why some proposed amendments were separated from the broader constitutional review process.
He said the decision was informed by concerns that changing electoral laws too close to an election could create uncertainty and raise questions about fairness. Consequently, provisions that could directly affect the 2028 elections were treated through a separate legislative process, while the wider constitutional review was expected to continue thereafter.
On the parliamentary process, Hon. Gevao said the Constitutional Amendment Bill underwent the required stages, beginning with its First Reading in February 2026.
He said Members of Parliament were given opportunities to study the provisions, consult their technical teams and legal advisers, and propose amendments before the bill proceeded through subsequent stages.
He particularly highlighted the Committee Stage, during which the proposed constitutional provisions were examined clause by clause. Issues considered included proportional representation, the electoral threshold, women’s participation, dual citizenship, eligibility to contest elections, nomination committees and consultation requirements.
Addressing concerns over the voting procedure, Hon. Gevao referred to Section 108 of the 1991 Constitution, which requires constitutional amendment bills to secure a two-thirds majority at the Second and Third Readings.
He, however, distinguished the voting on the bill itself from the consideration of one of the contentious clauses during the Committee Stage.
According to Hon. Gevao, the particular clause considered at Committee Stage did not require the same two-thirds majority applicable to the bill at the relevant constitutional stages.
He also defended the continuation of parliamentary business after APC Members of Parliament walked out of the chamber.
He said Parliament’s Standing Orders provide that parliamentary business may continue once the required quorum is established. According to him, the House needed 38 Members to form a quorum on the day in question, while 96 Members were present.
He added that the number subsequently increased to 97 following the arrival of a Paramount Chief who had been ill.
Hon. Gevao argued that the number of Members present, together with the absence of three APC MPs, meant that the constitutional threshold required for the passage of the bill was achieved.
He therefore maintained that the Speaker’s ruling allowing the parliamentary process to continue was correct.
The SLPP lawmaker said disagreements and walkouts during parliamentary proceedings should not be interpreted as evidence that the constitutional reform process lacked consultation or scrutiny.
He stressed that Members of Parliament had spent considerable time debating, reviewing and consulting on the proposed amendments, describing the Constitution as the foundation of Sierra Leone’s governance system.
Hon. Gevao concluded that the constitutional amendment process reflected years of consultations, recommendations from previous review committees, political negotiations and parliamentary scrutiny.
He called for greater public understanding of the process, stressing that informed public participation remains important as Sierra Leone continues to reform its constitutional and electoral framework.