Special Court for Sierra Leone
Outreach and Public Affairs Office
PRESS RELEASE
Freetown, Sierra Leone, 21 March 2013
Appeals Chamber Upholds Contempt Convictions Against Former AFRC Leaders
A three-judge panel of the Appeals Chamber has rejected the appeals by three former AFRC leaders convicted in September
2012 of contempt for interference with Prosecution witnesses. The appeal was heard by Justice Emmanuel Ayoola
(presiding), Justice Renate Winter, and Justice Jon M. Kamanda.
Ibrahim Bazzy Kamara and Santigie Borbor Kanu (aka: “Five-Five”) each appealed against their convictions and sentences
of one year and fifty weeks for “knowingly and willfully interfering with the administration of justice” in violation of
Rule 77(A) (ii) and (iv) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by interfering with prosecution witnesses who had
testified against them in their trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Kamara was convicted on two counts of
otherwise interfering with a prosecution witness, and for knowingly disclosing the identity of a protected witness. Kanu
was convicted on two counts of offering a bribe to a witness and otherwise interfering with a witness.
Samuel Kargbo (aka: “Sammy Ragga”), who pleaded guilty to two counts at his initial appearance in July 2011, appealed
what he alleged was the trial judge’s failure to order protective measures for him. A fourth defendant, Hassan Papa
Bangura (aka: “Bomblast”), did not fil
In the summary of the decision read out in court by Presiding Judge Justice Emmanuel Ayoola, the Chamber found that
many of Kamara and Kanu’s grounds of appeal failed to comply with the Special Court’s Practice Direction for Certain
Appeals, noting that both their form and contents did not satisfy the standard of review for appeals from judgements.
The Judges dismissed Kamara’s appeal as “incompetent” on the grounds that his Notice of Appeal failed to stipulate “the
grounds on which the appeal was made” (Article I.1 of the Practice Direction), or “clearly delineate which filing or
part of the filing constitutes grounds and which part of the filing constitutes submissions based on those grounds”
(Article I.2).
“The Appeals Chamber is unable to overlook the fundamental flaw in the Notice of Appeal brought about by the manifest
non-compliance with Rule 106(A) and the 2004 Practice Direction,” Justice Ayoola said.
The Judges also dismissed Kanu’s 27 grounds of appeal against conviction and three grounds of appeal against sentence,
finding that “several, if not all, of his grounds of appeal suffer from similar deficiencies to those outlined in Kanu’s
grounds of appeal.
The Judges dismissed Kargbo’s appeal as “incompetent” on the grounds that it was not an appeal either against conviction
or against sentence, and thus did not fall with the appellate jurisdiction of Appeals Chamber.
“For the foregoing reasons, the Appeals Chamber…dismisses all the grounds advanced by Defence of Samuel Kargbo, Brima
Bazzy Kamara and Santigie Borbor Kanu, affirms the sentences imposed on Samuel Kargbo, Brima Bazzy Kamara and Santigie
Borbor Kanu by the Single Judge, and orders that the Judgement be enforced immediately pursuant to Rule 102 of the
Rules,” Justice Ayoola said.
#END