Powered By EmbedPress ScanAfrik Forbundet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHOmBV4js_Ehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHOmBV4js_E
Impunity on the Rise in Sierra Leone Impunity in Sierra Leone is becoming an increasingly troubling, affecting governance, human rights, and law enforcement. Despite the country’s progress since the end of its brutal civil war, many feel that accountability is slipping, with those in power seemingly above the law. From high-level corruption to suppression of free speech, and even connections to international criminal networks, the rise of impunity is fueling frustration among citizens and eroding trust in institutions. A Government That Protects Its Own? One of the most striking examples of impunity in Sierra Leone is the case of Lara Taylor-Pearce, the country’s highly respected Auditor General. In November 2021, President Julius Maada Bio suddenly suspended her after years of exposing corruption, including fraudulent spending during the Ebola pandemic. Despite an investigation that found no wrongdoing, she has remained sidelined. Many suspect her removal was a way to silence a whistleblower, raising fears that the government is more interested in protecting itself than ensuring accountability. Corruption is not just an isolated case but deeply entrenched in Sierra Leone’s system. Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index ranks Sierra Leone 114th out of 180 countries, highlighting the widespread problem. The lack of consequences for corrupt officials fuels a culture where those in power act without fear of repercussions. Freedom of Expression Under Threat The government’s control over freedom of speech has also tightened. A chilling example is the case of Hawa Hunt, a social media influencer arrested in December 2024 for allegedly making critical comments about the president and the first lady. Her arrest, which happened live on television, shocked many. Even more disturbing is that she has been denied bail, and there are growing concerns about her health while in custody. The heavy-handed treatment of Hunt is seen as a warning to others: speak against the government, and you could face the same fate. On March 11, 2025, Sierra Leone’s Parliament passed the Counter-Terrorism Act of 2024 to bolster national security by preventing and responding to terrorist activities. Facebook+1Facebook+1 Concerns Over Potential Misuse Opposition leaders and civil society groups have expressed apprehension regarding the Act’s broad definitions of terrorist acts, which encompass violence against persons, property damage, and other serious offenses. They fear that, without explicit exemptions for acts of advocacy, protest, dissent, and industrial actions, the law could be misapplied to suppress opposition groups, protesters, and individuals voicing dissent against the government. Cocorioko Notably, the 2011 African Union model counter-terrorism law includes specific exemptions for such acts to protect democratic freedoms. The absence of similar provisions in Sierra Leone’s legislation has raised concerns about potential infringements on fundamental human rights. Cocorioko+1Instagram+1 Implications for Civil Liberties The enactment of the Counter-Terrorism Act adds to concerns about impunity in Sierra Leone, particularly regarding government accountability and freedom of expression. Critics argue that, without proper safeguards, the law could become a tool for the government to silence dissent and target political opponents under the guise of combating terrorism. Cocorioko In summary, while the Counter-Terrorism Act of 2024 aims to enhance national security, its broad definitions and lack of explicit protections for legitimate forms of protest and dissent have raised fears about potential misuse, further exacerbating issues of impunity and the erosion of democratic freedoms in Sierra Leone. For a country that prides itself on democracy, this crackdown on free speech is alarming. Citizens fear Sierra Leone is moving towards authoritarianism, where even mild criticism is met with harsh retaliation. International Crime Thriving with Local Connections Perhaps one of the most shocking recent revelations is that Sierra Leone was unknowingly harboring one of Europe’s most wanted criminals—Dutch drug lord Jos Leijdekkers, known as “Bolle Jos.” Leijdekkers, a key figure in the notorious Mocro Mafia, was convicted in absentia for drug trafficking but was living freely in Sierra Leone, socializing with high-ranking officials. The scandal led to the dismissal of the country’s immigration chief, Alusine Kanneh, after footage surfaced showing him mingling with the fugitive. This incident has sparked serious questions: How did such a high-profile criminal operate in the country unnoticed? And more importantly, who else is benefiting from these connections? The fact that there is no extradition treaty between Sierra Leone and the Netherlands means that bringing Leijdekkers to justice remains challenging. His presence in the country is a disturbing sign that criminals with money and influence can easily escape accountability. A Justice System That Fails Its People For years, Sierra Leone has struggled with weak law enforcement and a judiciary plagued by corruption. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), set up after the civil war to investigate human rights violations, was supposed to bring justice and healing. However, many feel it fell short, leaving behind a system where criminals, corrupt officials, and human rights abusers continue to walk free. People have little faith that the courts will deliver justice, especially when cases involve powerful individuals. The police, often accused of bribery and excessive force, are seen as enforcers of the ruling class rather than protectors of ordinary citizens. When justice is only for the rich and powerful, what hope is left for the average person? Where Does Sierra Leone Go From Here? The rise in impunity is more than just a political issue—it affects the daily lives of Sierra Leoneans. When leaders act without consequences, speaking up can land you in jail, and when criminals can buy protection, the entire country suffers. The erosion of trust in institutions means that more people feel hopeless about real change. But all is not lost. Civil society groups and activists continue to push for reforms. International organizations are paying attention, and some brave individuals still speak out despite the risks. The question now is whether Sierra Leone’s leaders will listen or continue down a dangerous path where impunity becomes the norm. Read More: Sierra Leone’s immigration chief fired after drug lord scandal Concerns for social media influencer arrested on live TV Boss of Europe’s drug mafia found in Sierra Leone If Sierra Leone is to
A Historical, Cultural, Political, and Economic Analysis The role of chiefs as arbitrators and trustees of resources in Sierra Leone is deeply rooted in historical, cultural, political, and economic contexts. This paper explores the multifaceted rationale behind this authority, tracing its origins from pre-colonial governance to contemporary political structures. Utilizing historical documentation, cultural anthropology, and political economy perspectives, the article examines how traditional authority, colonial legacies, customary land tenure systems, political decentralization, and economic management have shaped chieftaincy roles. Challenges, including political interference and corruption, are analysed alongside the potential for ethical stewardship and sustainable resource governance. Recommendations for enhancing transparency and community trust are provided. In Sierra Leone, chiefs have historically played crucial roles as arbitrators and trustees of communal resources, including land, forests, and minerals. Their authority is deeply embedded in historical, cultural, political, and economic systems, shaping local governance and resource management. Understanding the rationale behind this role necessitates an examination of the historical legitimacy of chieftaincy, the cultural significance of traditional authority, the political frameworks supporting local governance, and the economic strategies for resource control. This paper explores these dimensions, contextualizing the enduring relevance of chiefs in Sierra Leone’s socio-political landscape. Historical Legitimacy and Traditional Authority Pre-Colonial Governance Structures In pre-colonial Sierra Leone, governance systems were decentralized yet organized through chieftaincy institutions. Chiefs were recognized as custodians of land and natural resources, governing through consensus with councils of elders and secret societies such as the Poro and Sande societies. Their legitimacy was derived from spiritual authority, lineage, and communal trust, allowing them to mediate conflicts and allocate land. This historical role established chiefs as the primary custodians of communal resources, creating a legacy of trust and authority that continues to influence modern governance (Fyfe, 1962; Rodney, 1970). Colonial Reinforcement of Chieftaincy The British colonial administration institutionalized the role of chiefs through the system of indirect rule, which recognized chieftaincy as a tool for local governance. By aligning traditional leadership with colonial authority, the British reinforced chiefs’ control over land and resources. This strategic collaboration ensured political stability and efficient tax collection while preserving indigenous governance structures (Crowder, 1968). The Hut Tax War of 1898, led by Bai Bureh, highlighted the complexities of this relationship, as some chiefs resisted colonial exploitation while others collaborated for political survival and economic benefit (Abraham, 1978). Post-Independence Continuity and Change After independence in 1961, Sierra Leonean governments continued to acknowledge chieftaincy as a legitimate institution. The 1991 Constitution and the Chieftaincy Act of 2009 reaffirmed the role of chiefs as custodians of land and culture, maintaining their authority in resource arbitration and local governance. However, political interference and elite capture have challenged traditional leadership, raising questions about transparency and accountability (Tangri, 1976). Cultural Significance and Community Trust Chiefs as Embodiments of Indigenous Values Chiefs are more than political leaders; they are cultural symbols representing continuity with ancestral traditions. Their authority is rooted in indigenous values, customs, and identity, making them the embodiment of communal welfare and moral leadership. In rural communities, chiefs mediate conflicts using customary laws, which are often more accessible and relatable than statutory laws. This cultural legitimacy reinforces their role as trusted arbitrators of resources and land disputes (Mamdani, 1996). Mediation and Conflict Resolution Chiefs play a pivotal role in maintaining social harmony by mediating land disputes, resource conflicts, and communal tensions. Their knowledge of customary laws and local traditions enables them to provide culturally relevant solutions that formal courts may overlook. This function contributes to social stability and national peace, positioning chiefs as indispensable agents of local governance (Ribot, 2002). Customary Land Tenure System Communal Ownership and Trusteeship In Sierra Leone, particularly in the provinces, land is governed by customary law rather than statutory law. Chiefs oversee land allocation, ensuring equitable distribution among community members. Land is considered communal property, held in trust by chiefs on behalf of their people. This system reinforces the role of chiefs as trustees, balancing individual land rights with communal interests (Unruh, 2008). Challenges and Controversies Despite its cultural relevance, the customary land tenure system faces challenges, including elite capture, gender discrimination, and political manipulation. Chiefs have been accused of exploiting their trusteeship roles by selling communal land without community consent, leading to conflicts and social unrest. These controversies highlight the need for transparent and accountable land governance systems that balance tradition with modern legal frameworks (Fanthorpe, 2001). Political Decentralization and Local Governance Legal and Constitutional Recognition Sierra Leone’s governance structure includes chieftaincy institutions legally recognized under the Chieftaincy Act of 2009. Chiefs serve as intermediaries between the government and rural communities, ensuring that development policies reflect local needs. Decentralization policies have reinforced their role in managing community resources and development projects, maintaining political stability in rural areas (Fanthorpe, 2006). Political Influence and Accountability Issues However, political interference has undermined the independence of chiefs. Successive governments have manipulated chieftaincy elections, appointing loyalists to secure political influence in rural constituencies. This politicization of traditional leadership has compromised accountability and community trust, necessitating reforms to protect chieftaincy institutions from political manipulation (Jackson, 2006). Economic Management and Resource Control Trusteeship of Natural Resources Chiefs oversee the distribution of natural resources, including land, forests, and minerals. In some cases, they negotiate agreements with investors, ensuring that local communities benefit from resource extraction. By acting as trustees, chiefs can advocate for sustainable resource use and protect communal interests from exploitation. This economic role enhances their political influence and reinforces their traditional authority (Richards, 1996). Economic Challenges and Corruption Allegations However, economic mismanagement and corruption have plagued chieftaincy institutions. Chiefs have been accused of misappropriating resource revenues and engaging in exploitative land deals with foreign investors. These practices have fueled social conflicts and economic inequalities, undermining the credibility of traditional leadership (Reno, 1995). Conclusion and Recommendations The rationale for chiefs as arbitrators and trustees of resources in Sierra Leone is deeply rooted in historical legitimacy, cultural significance, legal recognition, and political decentralization. However, challenges such as political
Lumary RGBAI Lighting systems
African News Facebook Twitter Youtube Whatsapp Instagram
Decentralization has become a widely adopted governance strategy worldwide, particularly in post-colonial African states. Historically, these nations have suffered from centralized power structures that have resulted in governance inefficiencies, corruption, and lack of political participation at the local level (Olowu & Wunsch, 2004). In Sierra Leone, decentralization is a crucial aspect of post-war governance reconstruction, aimed at enhancing service delivery and empowering local authorities (Fanthorpe, 2006). Despite the enactment of the Local Government Act (2004) and efforts to restore chiefdom and district councils, decentralization in Sierra Leone continues to face structural challenges, including conflicts between local and national authorities, financial mismanagement, and lack of transparency in land governance (Fanthorpe, 2005). The persistence of these challenges has hindered the intended benefits of decentralization, raising critical concerns about governance and development at the local level. This study seeks to analyse the historical evolution of decentralization in Sierra Leone and examine the roles of chiefdom administrations, district assemblies, and provincial assemblies in governance. It also assesses major governance challenges related to local administration and resource management while providing policy recommendations based on successful decentralization models in Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana. Addressing decentralization requires an understanding of the historical factors that have shaped governance in Sierra Leone, the role of traditional and district-level authorities in governance, and the key challenges that decentralization efforts continue to face. This research also explores how Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana have successfully implemented decentralization and offers policy reforms to strengthen local governance in Sierra Leone. The study adopts a qualitative research approach through historical document analysis, focusing on colonial and post-independence governance structures. Comparative case studies of Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana provide insights into best practices in decentralization. Interviews with policy experts, traditional leaders, and governance specialists complement the research, along with secondary data analysis from government reports, academic articles, and legal frameworks. The Historical Evolution of Decentralization in Sierra Leone Decentralization in Sierra Leone has undergone multiple transformations, marked by four key periods: pre-colonial traditional governance, colonial indirect rule (1896–1961), post-independence centralization (1961–2004), and the Local Government Act (2004–present). Before colonial rule, governance in Sierra Leone was structured around chieftaincy institutions, where chiefs functioned as custodians of land and natural resources, arbitrators of justice, and political and administrative leaders (Kilson, 1966). Governance structures included paramount chiefs who were supreme rulers overseeing regional territories, village chiefs and elders responsible for dispute resolution, and secret societies such as Poro and Sande, which regulated customary laws and cultural practices (Mamdani, 1996). With the introduction of indirect rule by the British colonial administration (1896–1961), chiefs were granted administrative power but remained accountable to colonial authorities. This governance model strengthened hierarchical power structures, allowing chiefs to serve as intermediaries between the colonial government and local populations (Fanthorpe, 2006). However, indirect rule institutionalized elite capture, weakened local governance, and reinforced inequalities, leaving a legacy of governance inefficiencies that persist today. After gaining independence in 1961, Sierra Leone’s governance system became highly centralized, resulting in the dismantling of local governance institutions. The national government gained increased control over traditional authorities, which led to governance inefficiencies and escalating land disputes due to the lack of decentralized decision-making (Ladner, 2016). These governance challenges were exacerbated by the concentration of power within the executive branch, limiting the autonomy of local governance structures. Following the devastating civil war (1991–2002), governance reforms were introduced to rebuild state institutions. The Local Government Act (2004) sought to reintroduce district and municipal councils, improve service delivery, and enhance participatory democracy by re-establishing the authority of local governments and traditional leaders (Government of Sierra Leone, 2004). However, despite these reforms, decentralization continues to face challenges, particularly in terms of financial management, land governance, and political interference. Chiefdom Administrations and Local Governance Chiefdom administrations remain central to governance in Sierra Leone, particularly in rural areas where customary land tenure systems dominate. These administrations play an essential role in managing land, mediating conflicts, enforcing traditional laws, and negotiating with investors in sectors such as mining and agriculture (Acemoglu, Reed, & Robinson, 2014). Despite their importance, chiefdom administrations face significant challenges. Corruption and the misallocation of resources have weakened their effectiveness in governance (Logan, 2013). Chiefs are often accused of lacking transparency in land deals, leading to disputes and conflicts among local communities. Political interference in the selection and appointment of chiefs further complicates governance, as chiefs frequently become aligned with political elites, compromising their neutrality and governance roles. District and Provincial Assemblies: Roles and Challenges District and provincial assemblies are responsible for coordinating governance efforts between chiefdom administrations and the central government. These assemblies are intended to enhance decentralized governance by allowing greater local participation in decision-making. However, they face significant challenges that undermine their effectiveness. One of the primary challenges is the conflict between chiefs and elected officials, as power struggles often emerge over control of land and resources. Budgetary dependence on central government allocations limits the financial autonomy of district and provincial assemblies, reducing their ability to implement policies effectively (Mokonzi, 2016). Furthermore, bureaucratic inefficiencies and weak policy enforcement mechanisms make it difficult for local governments to function independently and deliver essential services (Ladner, 2016). Comparative Case Studies: Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana A comparative analysis of decentralization in Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana offers valuable insights into best practices that Sierra Leone could adopt to strengthen its local governance system. In Ghana, the establishment of the National House of Chiefs has facilitated the integration of traditional leadership into governance. Chiefs serve as advisors in policymaking and contribute to land governance within legal frameworks (Ray, 2003; Ubink, 2007). Rwanda has implemented a structured, community-led decentralization model that emphasizes participatory governance. Through initiatives such as Umuganda, a community service program that fosters civic engagement, Rwanda has strengthened local governance by promoting community participation in decision-making (Chemouni, 2014). The decentralized resource allocation system has also improved service delivery at the local level. Botswana’s Bogosi Act (2008) has provided a legal framework that defines the role of chiefs in governance. This law has facilitated transparent revenue-sharing models, particularly
Caste-based social stratification has been a defining feature of Mande-speaking groups in Sierra Leone, particularly among the Mandinka, Susu, and Vai. These societies historically organized their communities into hierarchical castes, which dictated individuals’ economic roles, marriage prospects, and access to political and religious authority. While the traditional caste system was rigid, economic, political, and religious transformations have reshaped its dynamics over time. This paper explores the historical development of caste among Mande-speaking groups, its impact on religious practices, and how contemporary socio-political changes continue to challenge and redefine these social structures. The interplay between caste and religious practices in Sierra Leone reflects deep-rooted historical traditions. Among the Mande-speaking groups, caste divisions have structured social organization for centuries, influencing access to economic opportunities, governance, and religious leadership (Kaba, 2009). While caste has been central to maintaining social order, religious syncretism has facilitated cultural continuity and adaptation, blending Islam, Christianity, and indigenous spiritual practices. This paper examines the structure of caste systems among Mande-speaking groups in Sierra Leone, exploring the roles of nobles, artisans, griots, and enslaved communities. It further investigates how caste shaped religious leadership in Islam and Christianity and the ways in which traditional secret societies reinforced caste hierarchies while integrating religious syncretism. The study ultimately considers how globalization, urbanization, and interfaith initiatives are reshaping caste-based structures in modern Sierra Leone. The Structure of the Caste System Among Mande-Speaking Groups Hierarchy of the Caste System Mande-speaking societies in Sierra Leone historically maintained a well-defined caste system that structured social, political, and economic life. This system divided communities into three primary caste groups: nobles (Hɔron), artisans and griots (Nyamakala), and slaves and descendants of captives (Jonw/Jongo). Each caste had distinct roles and responsibilities, with hereditary status determining access to power, land, trade, and religious leadership. Nobles (Hɔron) The Hɔron, or noble class, occupied the highest position in the caste hierarchy. Members of this caste were primarily rulers, landowners, warriors, and merchants, controlling political and economic power within their societies. Nobles held exclusive rights to: Political governance, serving as kings, chiefs, and judges. Land ownership and trade, overseeing commercial activities and diplomatic relations. Religious authority, controlling access to sacred knowledge and spiritual leadership. To maintain their dominance, noble families restricted inter-caste marriages, ensuring that wealth, power, and status remained within their lineage. Marriages were strategically arranged to preserve political alliances and reinforce caste purity (Davidson, 1992). Additionally, many noble families claimed descent from Islamic clerics or historical figures, using religious legitimacy to strengthen their rule (Rodney, 1970). This close connection between nobility and religious leadership further entrenched the authority of the Hɔron caste in both spiritual and political spheres. Artisans and Griots (Nyamakala) The Nyamakala caste encompassed artisans, blacksmiths, leatherworkers, potters, and griots. Each group within this caste had specific skills that were vital to the functioning of society: Blacksmiths (Numu): Skilled metalworkers who crafted weapons, tools, and ritual objects. Leatherworkers, weavers, and potters: Provided essential goods for daily and ceremonial use. Griots (Jali): Served as oral historians, musicians, and advisors to rulers, preserving ancestral knowledge. Despite their expertise, artisans and griots were socially subordinate to the noble class, often considered spiritually powerful but politically marginalized. Griots played a crucial role in preserving cultural memory, blending Islamic, Christian, and indigenous traditions in their storytelling (Shaw, 2002). Blacksmiths, on the other hand, were believed to possess supernatural abilities, as they could manipulate fire and metal—powers associated with transformation and spiritual protection. Due to these beliefs, blacksmiths frequently participated in initiation ceremonies and ritual practices, crafting amulets and sacred objects used in religious traditions (Tamari, 1991). Slaves and Descendants of Captives (Jonw/Jongo) The Jonw, or slave caste, comprised individuals who were either captured in warfare, born into servitude, or enslaved due to debt. Slaves were primarily responsible for labour-intensive tasks, including: Agriculture, working the fields and tending livestock for noble families. Domestic service, performing household duties and manual labor. Construction and military service, helping to build settlements and serving as warriors in conflicts. Although some enslaved individuals gained freedom and integrated into noble families, many remained socially marginalized even after the abolition of slavery (Rodney, 1970). Freed slaves often struggled with discrimination and limited opportunities, leading many to convert to Islam or Christianity as a means of social mobility. Religious piety and scholarly achievements occasionally allowed freed individuals to rise within religious ranks, offering an alternative pathway to status and community acceptance (Shaw, 2002). However, despite these efforts, historical caste divisions continued to shape social interactions and opportunities for generations. The Mande-speaking caste system in Sierra Leone played a fundamental role in determining social status, economic roles, and religious participation. While the noble class-controlled governance and religious authority, artisans and griots preserved cultural traditions, and enslaved individuals provided essential labor. Though the rigid caste system has weakened over time due to modernization, religious conversion, and economic changes, its influence remains visible in rural communities and traditional religious institutions, shaping identity and social mobility to this day. Social Implications of the Caste System Caste was hereditary, meaning social status was predetermined by birth, limiting economic and political opportunities (Davidson, 1992). However, colonial rule, urbanization, and globalization gradually eroded some caste barriers. Urban centers like Freetown and Bo became hubs for social mobility, enabling individuals from lower castes to achieve success in business, politics, and academia (World Bank, 2022). Among the Mande-speaking groups in Sierra Leone, griots (Jali) held a unique position as oral historians and religious custodians. As part of the Nyamakala caste, they were responsible for preserving and transmitting stories that blended Islamic, Christian, and indigenous traditions (Shaw, 2002). Their recitations included prophetic myths, genealogies, and moral teachings, serving both religious and social functions (Harris, 2013). Beyond storytelling, griots played a critical role in mediating between religious leaders and the community, often shaping public perceptions of spiritual legitimacy. In many cases, they adapted religious narratives to reinforce the authority of noble rulers, aligning historical accounts with the prevailing social hierarchy (Leach, 2008). Blacksmiths (Numu), another subgroup within the Nyamakala caste, were regarded as
The Malinke connection of Sierra Leone The country called Sierra Leone today has a history with a very strong Malinke connection. ● After the collapse of the Mali Empire which had it’s western borders close to the northeast of Sierra Leone and in Guinea to the north, there was a dispersal of people which saw some moving to the south and the west. ● Also, some northern coastal people who lived on the eastern fringes of the Mali Empire and were between what is today Guinea-Bissau and Guinea Conakry and known as Baga-Susu-Themne, affected by this collapse moved south along the coast. ● The people coming from the eastern hinterlands who were led by a man known as Farama Tami, formed an alliance with the coastal people who had moved south from the north. ● This is how in 1450 a decentralised governance was established and called the KOYA KINGDOM. The Koya Kingdom, which extended from Cape Mount in Bong County in present-day Liberia to far north Kamsar in present-day Guinea, was in existence when the Portuguese, Pedro Da Cintra, who came to the shores of Freetown in 1462. ● The Koya Kingdom existed up to 1898 with Bai Bureh of Kasse as the last king. Governing such a large area from Cape Mount in Liberia to Northern Guinea was not an easy task. So there were several regencies with heads serving as local chiefs. Each of those heads, Known s Gbana, sought protection from the king who was known as Bai. ● Later with the advent of Islam some Islamic regent heads took the title of Alimamy. Others used Malinke linguistic titles like Ba.Some in the Mende speaking culture had Manse for men and Massah for women heads. ● In Freetown was a Malinke head whose title was Ba Demba from whom the present day street name PaDemba road was taken. ● The Koya Kingdom had a strong Malinke background with all ethnic groups living in present-day Sierra Leone being part of the decentralised governance system and having their ethnic heads known as Gbana after the Poro Society a nationwide Fraternity and training ground for the the boy in transition into manhood, naming tradition.So also is the Bondo sorority a school for teaching girls going from adolescence into womanhood. They were taught home economics, child care and other basic medicinal and herbal knowledge to take care of the home. ● As a result of her Malinke background, there are commonplace and person name in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea today. These names and mostly Surnames are found in every area where there is a strong Malinke influence on culture. ● The Malinke influence is also reflected in the dress culture of the people to a very large extent. The country the cloth is woven by the Mendes, the Ronko dress woven by the Limbas, the Gara textile produced largely in West Africa and with which dresses are sown are all products originating from Malinke cultural dress modes. ● In music instruments like the drum called Tamballay/Tabulay, the Xylophone/Balanji instrument and wind instruments; String instruments like the Kora found in varied designs in the different ethnic groups in Sierra Leone as in other parts of West Africa are all similar in all the ethnic groups and have a common origin from the Malinke culture. ● Another common indicator of the strong Malinke connections are the common surnames across ethnic groups. Names like Kamara, Koroma, Conteh, Sesay, Kallon, Kanneh, Konneh, Turay/Troure, Fofanah, Tarawalie, Senesie are found across ethnic groups and are also common in most parts of Manding culture west Africa or Africa west of the Ashanti and other cultures of La Cote D’Ivoire, Ghana and Nigeria. ● Further, there is a place name that is common in every district of Sierra Leone called Sumbuya. Sumbuya is a Malinke word meaning a place that provides a source of livelihood or place of respite. · The Confederation we today called Mano River Union is the approximate equivalent of the Koya Kingdom as that governance entity had a similar but mostly coastal areal size. The Mane, the Decline of Mali, and Mandinka Expansion towards the South Windward Coast (link to a downloadable page) (To be continued)
