back to www.specialcourt.org

NPWJ SIERRA LEONE MISSION

Final Narrative Status Report July 2002 - October 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The project overall
2. Judicial Assistance Program
    2.a)    Special Court matters
    2.b)    Legal Advice and Capacity Building
    2.c)    International Criminal Court
    2.d)    Problems and solutions
3. Outreach program
    3.a)    Radio Programs
    3.b)    Public Lectures
    3.c)    Training Sessions
    3.d)    The Right Players
    3.e)    Support for the SCWG
    3.f)    Other activities
    3.g)    Publications/materials
    3.h)    Problems and solutions
4.  Legal Profession Program
    4.a)    Discussion Seminars
    4.b)    Training Seminars
    4.c)    NPWJ International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Library
    4.d)    Publications
    4.e)    Problems and solutions
5. Conflict Mapping
    5.a)    Selecting and training Conflict Mapping Recorders
    5.b)    Key people
    5.c)    Database
    5.d)    District level analysis
    5.e)    Problems and solutions
6. Submission of NPWJ to the TRC on 28 July 2003
7.  Results
    7.a)    Judicial Assistance Program
    7.b)    Outreach Program
    7.c)    Legal Profession Program
    7.d)    Conflict Mapping Program
8.  Conclusion
9. Staff on the Sierra Leone Project

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.    The project overall
The overall objective of the project was to strengthen the ability of Sierra Leonean society to address violations of human rights and humanitarian law. The aim underpinning the project was to increase awareness of human rights and humanitarian law norms within the Sierra Leone Government and other local stakeholders, including legal professionals, civil society and others, and therefore the full spectrum of people and interests they represent, to participate and influence the processes for re-establishing and maintaining the rule of law, peace and stability. An important aspect of this was to facilitate ownership by Sierra Leoneans of the accountability processes in Sierra Leone, by working with local organisations to formulate and disseminate accurate and timely information about the accountability mechanisms through an outreach program. In order to encourage long-lasting impact of these processes, this project aimed to strengthen domestic law through a process of national implementation of international instruments. Finally, the chronological and geographical mapping of violations of humanitarian law in Sierra Leone was aimed at helping to create an historical record of the truth, including individual and command responsibility.


2.            Judicial Assistance Program
The Judicial Assistance Program seconds experts in international law to the Office of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice in Freetown and to the Permanent Mission of Sierra Leone to the United Nations in New York.  These experts provide timely and accurate legal advice on issues that arise in relation to international law, in particular matters related to the Special Court.  As legal advisers are seconded to the Government both in Freetown and in New York, we are able to provide day-to-day advice on a range of issues that arise in the area of international law and assist both the Ministry and the Mission to formulate quick and coordinated responses.  This component of the Project addresses the consequences of the conflict in Sierra Leone by increasing governmental awareness of and commitment to accountability mechanisms, which is vital for the successful operations of these mechanisms. Increasing the awareness of the Government and Parliamentarians of the benefits of international human rights and humanitarian law increases the likelihood of legislation passing through Parliament, which in turn strengthens the rule of law by providing legal mechanisms by which to seek redress for its violation.

Our activities as legal adviser to the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice and as Focal Point for the Special Court were successful in terms of the provision of advice on legal matters arising from Sierra Leone’s cooperation with the Special Court and other activities related to international law. In addition, the Vice President of the Republic of Sierra Leone actively sought our advice on many of the same issues, which enabled us to contribute towards a consistent approach within the Government as a whole.  Further, NPWJ seconded a legal adviser to the Sierra Leone Mission to the United Nations in New York, who followed all meetings related to the Special Court and provided advice and assistance to the Mission on these issues and on matters related to international law in general.  As legal advisers were seconded to the Ministry of Justice and the Sierra Leone Mission to the United Nations in New York, we were able to provide day-to-day advice on a range of issues that arose in the area of international law and assist both the Ministry and the Mission to formulate a quick and coordinated response to issues that arose in relation to the Special Court.

2.a)      Special Court matters
According to the Special Court Agreement, 2002 (Ratification) Act, 2002, the proper channel of communications between the Special Court and the Republic of Sierra Leone is the Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice.  Therefore, in October 2002, the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice appointed the legal advisers seconded to his office as the Focal Point within the Ministry for Special Court matters.  In this capacity, we held a number of formal and informal meetings with persons, including the Registrar, within the Registry, which is the body within the Special Court responsible for liaising with Sierra Leone, and others on a number of different issues relating to the Special Court.

During November and December 2002, the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers worked closely with the Special Court Registry to plan and assist in the running of the familiarisation visit for the Judges of the Special Court.  As part of the Judges’ visit, the Attorney-General’s Office prepared for the Judges a “briefing pack”, consisting of various documents of relevance to their work, including the implementing legislation for the Special Court and the Government briefing paper on the relationship between the TRC and the Special Court.  During this visit of the judges, the Government hosted a dinner reception, which was organised by NPWJ-seconded legal advisers.  This incorporated a performance on the Special Court by the Right Players (see below) and speeches by various people, including the Vice President of the Republic of Sierra Leone, H.E. Solomon E. Berewa; The President of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, Geoffrey Robertson, QC; The Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, The Hon Eke A. Halloway; and the Chairman of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Bishop Humper.

The Judicial Assistance program was also heavily involved in the visit of the Management Committee in February 2003, liaising with the Special Court and the Office of the President and other people within the Government to assist in ensuring the visit went smoothly.  The Management Committee is the body composed of representatives of States who support the Special Court, particularly through financial donations, and is responsible for policy oversight on non-judicial matters related to the Special Court.  As such, the visit was particularly important, as it provided an opportunity to influence policy at the highest levels in relation to different aspects of the non-judicial issues related to the Special Court.  At that time, the NPWJ-seconded legal adviser to the Mission in New York accompanied the Sierra Leone representative on the Management Committee to Freetown, in order to provide advice and assistance and participate fully in all activities of the Management Committee. In addition, the legal advisers seconded to the Attorney-General’s Office also participated in most of the events organised for the Management Committee on behalf of the Attorney-General, including formal meetings between the Management Committee and the Attorney-General.

NPWJ-seconded legal advisers assisted the Government to produce a draft Headquarters Agreement for the Special Court, an international treaty supplementing the Agreement establishing the Court on matters relating to how the Special Court is to operate in Sierra Leone, which was presented to the Special Court on 10 March 2003 as part of the process of negotiations that had been ongoing since late 2002.  As part of the preparatory, drafting and negotiation work on this issue, we received and implemented instructions on the various issues involved, drafted the document and held informal consultations with the Special Court so as to produce a Headquarters Agreement that is in line with the Agreement establishing the Special Court, the Special Court Ratification Act and Sierra Leone’s other pre-existing international legal obligations.  Indeed, much of the first six months was taken up with this task, which also included providing advice to the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice on the different amendments proposed by the Special Court and trying to achieve the best possible text for the future operations of the Special Court within the territory of Sierra Leone, in full respect of Sierra Leone’s legal and institutional system. The negotiations proved very long and difficult and the Minister relied on our advice to a great extent.  The negotiation was completed after the end of NPWJ’s presence on the field and the document was finally signed 22 September 2003. 

As part of the discussions surrounding the negotiations on the Headquarters Agreement and other issues that arose during this time, the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers liaised on behalf of the Attorney-General with the Special Court, UNMASIL and other Sierra Leone authorities such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to deal with a variety of issues addressed in the Headquarters Agreement.  As such, we drafted legal advice on matters including international practice and relevant national legal provisions such as tax laws and other relevant bilateral and multilateral agreements. In addition, the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers were involved in the setting up of a formal coordination system between the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in order to facilitate the elaboration of a common position for the Government of Sierra Leone in its relations with the Special Court.

With the opening of the pre-trial hearings of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the NPWJ‑seconded legal advisers were asked by the Attorney-General to attend initial appearances and pre-trial hearings at the Special Court, both on Bonthe Island and subsequently in Freetown, in order to provide a expert reports and perspectives on the process. Thus to the extent possible, NPWJ-seconded legal advisers attended all initial appearances and pre-trial proceedings and provided the Attorney-General with a memorandum on those matters.  This was also a useful opportunity to attend the hearings with Sierra Leonean State Counsel, to assist them in becoming more familiar with substantive and procedural aspects of international trials. The Attorney-General agreed to and requested this dual presence, which allowed NPWJ the opportunity to prepare an exit strategy and to build the internal capacity that would assist the Ministry in its dealings with the Special Court after the conclusion of the NPWJ project in Sierra Leone.

Further, since some applications filed by defence counsel before the Special Court required an answer from the Government as a respondent, the Focal Point was requested to assist in the preparation and drafting of the Government opinions and positions to be submitted to the Special Court. The definition of the Government position and the drafting of the written responses from the Minister of Justice, representing the Government, were undertaken in collaboration with Senior State Counsel, who represented Sierra Leone at the hearings.

2.b)      Legal Advice and Capacity Building
As part of the capacity building aspect of the Judicial Assistance program, NPWJ-seconded legal advisers facilitated the establishment of a Task Force for the Special Court, composed of high-level officials within the Government and headed by the Office of the Attorney-General and Ministry of Justice.  The Task Force was necessary in order to make the flow of information and decision-making processes clear and to smooth the process of cooperation with the Special Court, which was problematic on some occasions due to contacts being made with different parts of the Government in the absence of a coordinated body to deal with requests.

As the initial step in creating this Task Force, those representatives of Ministries, departments and other national authorities likely to be involved in the cooperation with the Court were identified and contacted, including representatives from the Ministries of Justice, Foreign Affairs, Internal Affairs, Presidential Affairs and Finance; the Immigration Department; and the Sierra Leone Prison Services.  A workshop was then held on 21 August 2003 to mark the establishment of the Task Force and to provide information and training to its members, which was organised and implemented in cooperation with the Outreach program.  At that workshop, members of the NPWJ Outreach program provided general information on the Special Court, its nature and operations, following which the NPWJ-seconded legal adviser explained the purposes of the Task Force and what might be expected of members of the Task Force from the Special Court in the future.   This also provided the opportunity to engage interest at the top levels of Government in proper cooperation with the Special Court, the need for coordination of Government activities and its implementation of international obligations.

As part of this Task Force, two members of the Office of the Attorney-General were identified to act as Focal Points for the Special Court, thereby implementing one aspect of the Judicial Assistance program’s “exit strategy”. The people identified to act as Focal Points, who were subsequently so appointed by the Attorney-General, are Senior State Counsel who had been progressively involved in the cooperation process together with the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers. As part of this exit strategy, the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers also ensured that the folders and files relating to the Special Court were reorganised and a system of classification created in order for the Attorney-General’s Office to have all the necessary information easily available.

NPWJ-seconded legal advisers were also requested to work on some matters relating to cooperation between the Ministry of Justice and the TRC.  We therefore produced basic briefing papers on the TRC and the Anti Corruption Commission, both of which are important parts of the accountability process in Sierra Leone, as well as draft submissions requested from the Attorney General by the TRC. In addition, the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers also assisted in the transmission of the requests from the TRC to other authorities and the coordination of the various authorities involved in relation to their appearance before the Commission.

Finally, the NPWJ-seconded legal advisers were tasked with the drafting of most of the Attorney-General’s public statements relating to international law issues, the demobilisation and reintegration process, rebuilding of the judiciary and accountability mechanisms.  We also assisted with the preparation of background papers and speeches for conferences and events relating to legal or judicial matters in which the Attorney-General had been invited to participate.

2.c)            International Criminal Court
The Attorney-General has sought our advice on a range of issues, including matters relating to the International Criminal Court.  Given that there is no person within the Ministry of Justice who has expertise on the International Criminal Court, our presence came at a crucial time as the Government was under pressure to enter into bilateral agreements that would have limited their compliance with the ICC Statute.   Our advice, which was well received, enabled the Government to consider the relevant issue on legal, as well as political, grounds.

During the time period covered by this report, the Republic of Sierra Leone signed a so-called “Article 98 Agreement” with the United States of America, designed to prevent prosecution of US nationals and companies before the ICC, which was rushed through Parliament for ratification soon after.  We assisted the Attorney-General in drafting a speech which clearly underlines Sierra Leone’s continuing determination to fight against impunity and reiterates their commitment to comply with their obligations pursuant to the Rome Statute.  The signing of this Agreement and the speech of the Attorney-General on this matter highlights the need for Sierra Leone to adopt strong implementing legislation.

The Judicial Assistance program also worked on the preparation and preliminary drafting of the Sierra Leone implementing legislation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Although it was not possible to provide for a final draft text before the conclusion of the project, due to serious time constraints, a comprehensive and integrated set of material and a preliminary review of national legislation, as well as a detailed outline of the draft legislation, were prepared and discussed.  It should be noted in this respect that preparing the necessary documents for this implementation was time consuming, due to the crippling lack of resources within the Ministry and the consequent need to spend more time liaising with the Special Court on behalf of the Ministry and researching national law issues as well as international law issues.  Work on the implementing legislation is continuing and forms part of the follow-up activities of NPWJ in relation to the Judicial Assistance program.

2.d)            Problems and solutions
The lack of computer resources within the Ministry of Justice, including access to the internet and therefore access to research, was problematic in the sense that it added considerably to the time spent by NPWJ-seconded legal advisers in undertaking research on issues only tangentially touching international law.  While we were able to address this to an extent by installing a computer network within the Ministry, long term partnerships with external actors, such as UNDP or DFID for instance, would have more easily allowed for the creation of the material conditions allowing permanent training and long term availability of external resources for staff of the Office of the Attorney-General.
 

3.            Outreach Program
The outreach program increased awareness within Sierra Leone of the mandate and operations of the Special Court.  This included promoting knowledge about human rights and humanitarian law issues to the public at large.  The Outreach program worked through the medium of local organisations, in particular the Special Court Working Group (SCWG), by building the capacity of such local organisations to formulate and disseminate information coherently and in simple terms. Part of this process included working with local organisations to formulate the issues in language and ways easily understandable by the general public.  This fostered the role of civil society in promoting accountability within Sierra Leonean society and created a stronger civil society by supplementing them with potent means to raise the issues publicly, both in general and in terms of prompting the Government to ensure international standards are promoted.

The main activities of the Outreach program included supporting radio programs, organising and co‑hosting public lectures, running training seminars, supporting a drama group and supporting the work of the SCWG.  They also included participating in activities organised by our local partners.

3.a)      Radio Programs
The SCWG has hosted an hour-long radio program on Radio UNAMSIL since 2001, encouraged at that time by NPWJ. This was a regular and reliable program, which – according to Radio UNAMSIL – generated a considerable following nationwide. The program itself frequently had guest panelists from NPWJ, the Special Court and representatives from legal and NGO communities. The style of the program was mixed and varied between the presentation of information about the mandate and operations of the Court, presentations about specific issues and interviews with panelists. The SCWG used the program to update people on their activities and discuss how they thought things were going and where they should be going.

NPWJ assisted the SCWG in developing a program structure, comprising episodes on various issues about the Court, for a series of radio programs on networks outside of Freetown.  Thus in April 2003, the SCWG began running radio programs in Makeni, Bo and Kenema, thus guaranteeing that the SCWG had access to every major radio station in Sierra Leone. The Makeni programs started before programs in other areas, primarily due to the skills and commitment of the SCWG representative in that area, but by the conclusion of the project, programs were running in Bo, Freetown, Kailahun, Kenema, Kono, Makeni and Mile 91. 
 
The programs were aired on a weekly basis and, prior to our departure, the Special Court indicated their willingness to take over supporting these radio programs in collaboration with the SCWG so that they might continue after NPWJ had left Sierra Leone.

3.b)      Public Lectures
NPWJ, in collaboration with the Peace and Conflict Studies Department at Fourah Bay College, arranged three public lectures held at Fourah Bay College.  The first of these lectures, which took place in December 2002, was also the first public appearance of the newly-elected President of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, Geoffrey Robertson QC, who spoke on general issues related to impunity and accountability.  The panel on that occasion also included Judge Jallow, who subsequently left the Bench of the Special Court to become the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.  The second lecture, entitled “Presumed Innocent?”, focused on the rights of the accused and was delivered by Stuart Alford, an expert in international criminal law and a former prosecutor at the Serious Crimes Panel in East Timor.  Finally, a lecture was delivered on the topic of the International Criminal Court and State obligations by Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi, Chief of Staff of the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.  The panel on that occasion included Robin Vincent, the Registrar of the Special Court for Sierra Leone.  While we had hoped to arrange more than three lectures, the series depended very much on the availability of students at Fourah Bay College, which is far from the centre of town and would not attract a large audience outside term time, therefore we were unable to extend the series beyond these three lectures.

All three lectures were well attended and very successful. A major part of their success was the impressively thorough and candid audience question and answer sessions following each lecture. As part of the follow up, we arranged for the broadcasting of Judge Robertson’s lecture on the national television station, SLBS, which was viewed by a large number of people and generated discussion and debate on the issues he raised.

3.c)      Training Sessions
A special training session for performing artists was organised in Freetown in December 2002 and attended by over 120 actors, dancers, singers and writers. The workshop was a full day event, introduced by Mr Raymond De Souza-George, Lecturer and Acting Director of Department of African Studies, Fourah Bay College, Freetown, who spoke on the ways in which theatre could be used as an outreach tool and the responsibility of dramatists to educate the public about the Special Court.  During the workshop, four training sessions were held simultaneously on all aspects of the Special Court, conducted by Sierra Leonean facilitators who had previously attended NPWJ “training the trainers” sessions, with assistance from NPWJ foreign staff.  In the final session of the workshop, the four groups of participants put on 10-minute plays about the Special Court, which had been developed during the course of the workshop.  The sessions sparked numerous initiatives and provided the inspiration for the formation of the Right Players. 

In addition, in January 2003, a special training session for Chairladies and Secretaries of the Market Women’s Association was organised in Freetown.  Over 150 women attended this session, which was conducted in cooperation with the Special Court Working Group.

NPWJ organised 3 days of top-up training sessions for representatives of existing members and new members of the SCWG in March 2003. These sessions were conducted in cooperation with the Special Court Working Group and were attended by over 100 people.  Following these “top up” trainings, NPWJ, in cooperation with the SCWG, organised and implemented thirteen one-day training sessions in locations in every district headquarter town in Sierra Leone from March to May 2003.  Around 500 people representing over 220 different organisations, including traditional institutions, NGOs, ex-combatant groups and the government, attended these lively in-depth sessions. From these sessions, 12 District branches of the SCWG were formed, strengthening the regional network that had been in existence since 2002.  This fulfilled a key priority of both NPWJ and the SCWG, prompting steps to further develop a nationwide outreach program.

To consolidate these steps forward, in July 2003 NPWJ conducted an intensive nationwide round of consultations with the District SCWG Executives, as a result of which it was decided to hold conferences for the District SCWGs themed “Outreach Strategies on the Special Court – the Role of District Working Groups”.  In August 2003, as a result of these consultations, NPWJ conducted three “regional” conferences of the SCWG, one held on 18-19 August 2003 in Makeni for the Northern region; one held on 21‑22 August in Bo for the Southern and Eastern regions; and one held in Freetown on 28 August 2003.  Each conference, coordinated and chaired by the relevant Regional Coordinator from the National Executive of the SCWG, was attended by approximately 60 delegates from the District Working Groups and invited observers including traditional rulers, religious heads, members of security forces and civil society organisations.  These conferences were opportunities to exchange ideas about methods and messages for dissemination by members of the District SCWGs as well as ideas for institution building and fund raising.  In addition, NPWJ was able to present ideas for special outreach methods and messages to reach the youth audience, who had been identified as a specific target group.  Delegates divided into four working groups, which each reported on the second day of the conference to the Plenary, who adopted recommendations on how they would conduct outreach on the Special Court in the coming months.

Following these successful conferences, NPWJ embarked on a round of training seminars in August to October 2003 in cooperation with the Special Court for Sierra Leone.  These seminars were aimed at specific target groups, including women, police, military, youth, teachers, victims and ex-combatants.  These seminars, which lasted for one day, were held in locations across Sierra Leone and were designed to ensure that these target groups had information about the Special Court that was relevant to them and addressed their specific concerns.  In addition, one of our purposes for conducting this training in cooperation with the Special Court was to hand over full responsibility for outreach to the Special Court in a way in which we could pass on the knowledge and experiences we had gained conducting outreach on the Special Court since February 2001.  In total, we held 80 seminars in all the District headquarter towns and in Freetown, which were attended by approximately 2.000 people. 

As noted in the section on the Judicial Assistance Program, the Outreach Program participated in running a workshop on 21 August 2003 for the Government Task Force on the Special Court, at which the Outreach Program gave an overview on the mandate, structure and operations of the Special Court (see earlier).
NPWJ also co-organised a workshop on the International Criminal Court and its implementation in Sierra Leone law with the NGO Coalition for an International Criminal Court, the National Forum for Human Rights, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights and the International Centre for Transitional Justice.  The workshop was attended by over 50 civil society organisations, representatives of Government and members of Parliament.  The workshop concluded with the decision to create a Sierra Leonean NGO Coalition on the International Criminal Court to work on the effective implementation of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court.  As a follow up to this, NPWJ conducted a half-day workshop for Parliamentarians on the International Criminal Court, which had been requested by the Parliamentarians for Global Action – Sierra Leone.  Over 50 Parliamentarians, including the Minority Leader and all members of the Committee for Human Rights, attended the workshop, which provided a good opportunity for informed and thoughtful debate on issues related to the International Criminal Court, including mobilising support for domestic implementation of the Rome Statute, and international justice issues in general.

Special, personalised certificates were produced for every participant at our training workshops, with the exception of the workshops on the International Criminal Court and for the Government Task Force.

3.d)      The Right Players
As mentioned, from the training session for performing artists grew a 30-person troupe that became known as the Right Players. They had developed a play based on the training session we had given them and were eager to perform it in public. NPWJ worked with them to refine the content, in addition to conceptualising and organsing with the Right Players a series of tours for their play. Using our good relationships with the Market Women’s Association of Sierra Leone, we arranged for the play to be performed in Freetown’s markets. guarantee the accuracy of the information that they would provide. Prior to the tours, NPWJ produced over 10.000 flyers advertising the upcoming tours, which were distributed in the markets they were planning to visit and the surrounding communities in the days before the performance.  This was done by the Right Players themselves, who advertised their presence using a clown and a megaphone, which attracted a lot of attention and bolstered attendance and audience participation during the performance.  In addition, NPWJ sent copies of the flyer to all our major partners in Freetown, including the Delegation of the EC.

Overall, the Right Players performed in 16 markets across the Freetown area, from Kissy in the East to Goderich in the West. Around 6.000 market women and children attended the performances and senior members of the market community participated without exception in detailed question and answer sessions with SCWG members following each performance.  The play performed was as follows:

--------------------
The Special Court Has Come, performed by The Right Players
This brief play, concerning the arrival of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, has four scenes: ghetto, exodus, impunity and accountability. Scene One shows numerous youths talking about the hardship of life in Sierra Leone, corruption, the use of drugs and other aspects of life in the ghetto. An eloquent yet disgruntled student politician, freshly returned from abroad, persuades them that a revolution is the only way to solve these problems. Scene 2 shows these same youths trained as soldiers, followed by the population’s exodus from their homes. Scene three is a dialogue between a former war faction commander and one of his victims. The commander explains that he has got away with the crimes that he has committed, and that there is nothing anyone can do to stop him committing them again. The final scene is set in a village. The Special Court Working Group is holding a question and answer session on the Special Court. Traditional leaders are asking questions about the nature and jurisdiction of the Special Court. The play ends.
--------------------

The Right Players also performed at the Government reception for the familiarisation visit of the judges in December 2002. As part of this performance, NPWJ produced 200 A5-sized librettos, which consisted of a brief introduction to the Right Players, a short synopsis of the play they were performing and the words to some of their songs, in both Krio and English.

Following this, the Right Players continued to work on their plays and also worked with the Sierra Leone Police, informing villages across the Western Area of an initiative of the SLP called Operation Blue Wave.  In addition, in collaboration with Talking Drum Studios, NPWJ worked with the Right Players to produce a series of 10 brief radio slots (“spot messages”) for frequent airing in between shows on the syndicated and very prominent Talking Drum Studios radio network. We arranged two workshops for the Right Players and senior content and production professionals at the Talking Drum Studios. The quality of the content and of the recordings themselves was excellent. While we had hoped to use some of the Right Players in the up country training sessions, both to illustrate particular points and to stimulate interest in training local performing arts groups participating in an ongoing outreach program, this proved to be logistically impossible.

3.e)      Support for the SCWG 
Wherever possible, as noted, NPWJ conducted outreach activities in cooperation with the SCWG.  In addition, NPWJ continued its intensive support for the work of the Special Court Working Group (SCWG), including through the provision of office space, which was to double as their Resource Centre, together with assistance in office running and communications costs.   As part of the capacity building aspect of the Outreach program, NPWJ worked with the SCWG to produce a system of substantive and financial accountability within the coalition, including the development of guidelines for communications within its Executive and with its members.  For various reasons, this was slow to take off but by the conclusion of the project in Sierra Leone, the SCWG had developed to the point where internal accountability, including financial accountability, was becoming standard operating procedure.

In addition, NPWJ supported two Annual General Meetings of the SCWG, one held in October 2002 and one held in August 2003.  The first meeting was an opportunity to rekindle interest of members of the SCWG, comprised of local NGOs, in the coalition and to discuss a number of items that were of concern at that time.  For example, we discussed NPWJ’s plans for outreach activities, including the involvement of the SCWG in planning and implementing those activities, and the issue of whether the SCWG should change its name, which had been requested by the Special Court.  At that time, the SCWG decided to retain its name, following discussion and debate on the issues involved.  The second AGM was the occasion on which the SCWG held constitutionally-mandated elections for all executive positions, including for the regional coordinators, and discussed plans for the future, particularly in light of the impending departure of NPWJ.  Selected segments of the second AGM and interviews with the executive of the SCWG were broadcast on public radio and reported in the local newspapers.

3.f)       Other activities
The NPWJ Outreach team also worked on the visit of the Management Committee of the Special Court to Sierra Leone in February 2003, producing a memorandum entitled “Outreach for the Special Court: Ensuring momentum gained is not lost”.  The memorandum explains the differentiation between the public relations of the OTP and the need for a more wide-ranging and long-term outreach program. NPWJ distributed this memorandum, together with an information pack on outreach comprised of NPWJ’s leaflets and other educational material on the Special Court, to Management Committee members during an informal dinner hosted by NPWJ.

NPWJ attended a number of meetings of child protection agencies (CPAs), which introduced the Special Court to the various agencies working on behalf of children and discussed how CPAs could work with the Court so as to contribute to ending impunity for crimes committed against children.  During these meetings, an overview of the Special Court was given to the representatives of the child protection agencies and discussion took place on how best the Court and the agencies could interact, particularly given that CPAs have already collected a lot of information that could be useful to the Court, and that the Court will be looking for cases that are the most representative of what children have suffered.  At these meetings, NPWJ distributed copies of International Criminal Justice and Children – an NPWJ publication undertaken in cooperation with UNICEF – to the representatives of the child protection agencies.  We subsequently distributed over 100 copies of this book to interested NGOs throughout Sierra Leone, including to the Special Court for Sierra Leone and to public libraries.

NPWJ attended meetings of the Human Rights Committee, held at UNAMSIL and consisting of local and foreign NGOs interested in human rights issues, during which we have met with a number of local and foreign NGOs now working on the issue of the Special Court. This enabled us to build up a large contact base, including potential partners for the implementation of outreach activities, and increase our visibility within civil society.  This is evidenced by our participation in sensitisation trips to the provinces, notably in Port Loko and Kambia, to participate in public meetings organised by UNAMSIL-Port Loko.  Two NPWJ staff members took part in these public meetings, one in each town, which consisted of explaining what the Special Court is and how it is working together with answering questions from the audience. The Registrar of the Special Court, Robin Vincent, also attended the public meeting in Kambia.  UNAMSIL Radio both broadcast and taped both sessions, of which we now have a copy in the archives at our office in Freetown.  NPWJ used the opportunity to meet with local organisations and undertake some preparatory work for setting up regional offices of the SCWG in the provinces.   

NPWJ also participated in various workshops organised by civil society in Freetown, including a workshop on strengthening coalitions organised by the National Forum for Human Rights and the International Human Rights Law Group and a workshop hosted by the National Collaborative Peace Building Network (WANEP), in which discussions were held on networking of peace building and human rights organisations.  NPWJ also participated in a workshop on peer mediation organised by Green Scenery, a workshop presented by the Special Court, a panel discussion on the Special Court organised by the National Union of Students, the UNAMSIL Human Rights Committee meetings and the Jubilee Lecture by Kevin Metzger of the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales, which was organised by the British Council.  NPWJ also attended the opening ceremony of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and has been regularly, if infrequently, attending the public hearings of that body. 

As a result of these undertakings, NPWJ solidified our relationship with a number of other local and foreign organisations, including Search for Common Ground’s “Talking Drum Studio”, UNAMSIL, Amnesty International – Sierra Leone, the Women’s Task force on the Special Court and the TRC and others.  NPWJ also spearheaded the movement within the Human Rights Committee against the signature and, subsequently, against the ratification of the Article 98 Agreement.  NPWJ provided assistance to the Human Rights Committee in organising press releases and public information about this issue, as well as leading the demonstration outside Parliament against the ratification of the agreement, which received considerable press attention in Freetown and elsewhere.  While this campaign was unsuccessful in preventing the ratification of the agreement, NPWJ has continued to work with civil society to develop methods for limiting the impact of the agreement and, ultimately, on convincing the Government to utilise the termination clause in the agreement when the time is right. 

NPWJ hosted a celebration for World Justice Day 2003, which took place on 17 July 2003, the 5th anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court.  Prior to the event, NPWJ held a press briefing to inform members of the print and electronic media about the ICC and surrounding issues, which was followed by a panel discussion broadcast on national television on issues related to the International Criminal Court.  The World Justice Day reception itself consisted of an evening reception in the International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Library, with addresses on the importance of international criminal justice in the Sierra Leone context by the Registrar of the Special Court, the Chair of the Human Rights Committee in the Sierra Leone Parliament, a representative of the Ministry of Justice and by NPWJ’s Senior Outreach Associate.  NPWJ also used this opportunity to disseminate materials on the International Criminal Court and on the Special Court for Sierra Leone, as well as to promote knowledge about NPWJ’s activities in Sierra Leone and worldwide.

3.g)            Publications/materials
* Training the Trainers manual
Around 1000 copies of the NPWJ “Training the Trainers” manual were produced in house, updated periodically to take into account developments relating to the Special Court and to international justice in general.  The manual consisted of a detailed explanation of all aspects of the Special Court and was designed to act as a template for trainers to refer to during the training seminars, in order to ensure the information they were giving was correct and that they were providing to participants complete and relevant information on the Special Court.  This manual also formed the basis for the training manual produced by the Special Court for Sierra Leone for their trainers, which NPWJ contributed to extensively.
These manuals were distributed during the training sessions organised by NPWJ and the SCWG, both to the trainers themselves (who had copies prior to the training) and to interested individuals who were participants during the training.  They were also given to representatives of District SCWGs and other NGOs for use in the provinces to ensure adequate access to relevant materials were available at offices of the SCWG across the country. Throughout the duration of the project, copies of these leaflets were freely available in the NPWJ library and at the offices of the SCWG.

* Fact sheets on the Special Court (single sheet and leaflets)
These leaflets consisted of simplified information about the Special Court for Sierra Leone and covered all aspects of the Court, including its background, jurisdiction, practical information and its operations.  A separate leaflet was produced on the Special Court Ratification Act, to explain its purpose, scope and how it operated in practice.  Over 100,000 of these leaflets were produced during the course of the project.

These fact sheets were distributed at the market tours, in training seminars and at special events hosted by NPWJ, including the public lectures and the informal dinner with the Management Committee of the Special Court in February 2003.  In addition, many copies of the leaflet were given to representatives of District SCWGs and other NGOs for use in the provinces to ensure adequate access to relevant materials were available at offices of the SCWG across the country.  Throughout the duration of the project, copies of these leaflets were freely available in the NPWJ library and at the offices of the SCWG.

* Special Court Times
The Special Court Times was a broadsheet-sized newsletter on issues related to the Special Court and international justice in general, consisting of articles on different aspects of these issues, together with an update from the Special Court Working Group (SCWG).  During the time of the project, we produced three issues of the Special Court Times, each print run consisting of 5.000 copies.

The Special Court Times was distributed in a number of ways, designed to facilitate as wide distribution to as diverse a group of people as possible.  When we received the final printed publication, we set aside a number of copies for the SCWGs in Freetown and in the Districts, to ensure country-wide distribution and access.  In addition, we kept some for NPWJ in Freetown to distribute at various events, including at World Justice Day.  We also ensured there were copies available for our local partners, including the Ministry of Justice, the Sierra Leone Bar Association, local NGOs and others.  The bulk of distribution, however, was carried out in cooperation with local newspaper vendors, who handed out free copies as part of the bundle of Freetown newspapers purchased by people on a daily basis.  This enabled us to ensure the messages contained in the Special Court Times were being made available to the general newspaper-reading population.

* Pocket edition of the Special Court Times
This publication was intended to mirror similar size school textbooks and popular publications and was produced in A5 format, such that it fit easily into people’s pockets.  The publication contained a revised “Frequently Asked Questions” article and a “Key Dates” section. The initial run consisted of approximately 1.000 copies and a second run was done for the training seminars in March 2003, consisting again of approximately 1.000 copies.

The pocket edition was initially produced for distribution by the Right Players during their market tours in December 2002 and January 2003.  Copies were handed out to the audience, consisting primarily but not solely of market women and people doing their shopping.  What feedback we did receive about this publication was primarily anecdotal, but overwhelmingly positive, as a result of which we began producing more copies which we distributed at training sessions organised by NPWJ and the SCWG.

* Materials booklets on the Special Court
Around 1000 copies of a materials booklet containing the Agreement, Statute and Act were produced in house.  In addition, around 500 copies of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence were also produced in house.  These were printed to ensure that participants at training seminars had access to copies of the relevant instruments discussed during the workshops.  Both publications contained a brief explanatory note both of the substance of the publication, and our intent in publishing it.

These booklets were distributed during the training sessions organised by NPWJ and the SCWG.  They were also given to representatives of District SCWGs and other NGOs for use in the provinces to ensure adequate access to relevant materials were available at offices of the SCWG across the country.  From the time of first publication, copies were made freely available in the NPWJ library, and in the offices of the SCWG in Freetown.

* Materials booklet on the ICC
Around 200 copies of a materials booklet on the International Criminal Court were produced in house, consisting of the Statute for the ICC, a short paper on domestic implementation of international law in Sierra Leone produced by an NPWJ legal expert, simplified information about the ICC and other relevant materials.  In addition, around 750 copies of the Rome Statute of the ICC were produced, initially distribution at the NPWJ public lecture delivered in Freetown by the Chief of Staff of the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC.

These booklets were distributed during the training sessions on the ICC organised by NPWJ and others.  They were also given to representatives of District SCWGs and other NGOs for use in the provinces to ensure adequate access to relevant materials were available at offices of the SCWG across the country.  The copies of the Rome Statute were distributed to everyone attending the public lecture delivered in Freetown by the Chief of Staff of the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC. Additional copies were distributed to District branches of the SCWG and were made freely available at the offices of the SCWG in Freetown.

* Briefing packs
NPWJ produced two briefing packs, one for the Office of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice to distribute to the newly-appointed Judges of the Special Court in December 2002 and one for the visit of the Management Committee in February 2003.  The first set of briefing papers, consisting of the Statute and Agreement for the Special Court, together with the Special Court Ratification Act 2002 and a message of welcome from the Attorney-General, was limited to 12 copies.  The second set of briefing papers, of which we produced around 50 copies, consisted of information about NPWJ programs in Sierra Leone, together with memoranda produced specifically for the occasion on different matters of interest to the Management Committee, primarily on the nature and concepts of outreach and conflict mapping.

The first set of briefing packs, for the Office of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, was distributed to the Judges of the Special Court on their arrival in Sierra Leone (with the exception of Judge Gelaga-King, who was already in country).  The second set of briefing packs was distributed to the members of the Management Committee for the Special Court during an informal dinner with NPWJ in February 2003 and additional copies were made available for other interested parties, including the SCWG and other NGOs.

* Assistance on other publications
NPWJ provided extensive comments on the ICTJ/NFHR/Human Rights Clinic “Citizens Manual on the TRC and the Special Court” and attended a workshop to discuss the contents of the manual.  While many of our suggestions were not taken on board, and the resulting manual contains a number of errors that would have been easy to correct and some structural problems that would not, our participation in the consultation process of the manual helped to curb some of the more obvious mistakes that had been contained in previous drafts.  This publication proved to be a big success and has been distributed widely throughout Sierra Leone.  NPWJ’s contribution is acknowledged in the forward to the publication.

In addition, we worked closely with the outreach section of the Special Court for Sierra Leone on the production of a simplified booklet on the Special Court entitled “Wetin Na Di Speshal Kot: The Special Court Made Simple”.  This booklet is comprised of information about the Court, explained in simple language, together with illustrations by a local artist.  NPWJ personnel provided extensive substantive and technical support in the drafting, preparation and publication of this booklet, which was officially launched on Friday, 14 November, when it was distributed to students representing 50 secondary and primary schools.  The support provided by NPWJ was acknowledged at the launch, which was attended by former Sierra Leonean NPWJ outreach personnel.  NPWJ’s contribution is also acknowledged in the “acknowledgments” section and is the only NGO thus mentioned, the remainder of acknowledgments being for other sections within the Special Court itself.

3.h)            Problems and solutions
The main difficulty we faced in working with the Right Players centred on monetary and organisational issues. They lacked someone who could put together a good plan and, while we were able to provide initial logistical support for them - in particular when we were implementing programs together such as the market tours - they had difficulties organising their own logistics and in finding a third party to provide support.  We attempted to overcome this by putting them in touch with people who would be able to provide this type of financial assistance and produced 1.000 copies of Right Players letterhead for them, including a digital version of that letterhead, so they could produce their own in the future.

In terms of the SCWG, the major difficulty we encountered was logistical.  Due to our long absence from Sierra Leone and our inability to provide them with financial resources during that time, it was at times difficult to re-establish the relationship.  Indeed, the large lapse in time between the end of our project, which had not been funded by the EC, in September 2001 and when we recommenced full operations in September 2002 had a number of consequences, in particular on our local partners.  The SCWG was founded early in 2001 and was in a position to begin implementing outreach activities from July 2001.  However, our inability to sustain support for this organisation meant that there was a 12-month period during which the SCWG lacked the resources to capitalise on the momentum built in 2001, with consequent adverse implications on commitment and morale; in many ways, we had to start from the beginning in 2002, particularly in terms of strategic planning and institution building.  In addition, the SCWG had the idea that NPWJ was somehow acting as an “intermediary” for funding and, rather than us working together to implement outreach activities, thought that we would be giving them the money that we had received for them to implement their own outreach activities independently.  We attempted to overcome this by explaining the nature of our funding and this project and by encouraging them to work with us on activities, which was eventually successful, as evidenced by the large number of activities we implemented together with the SCWG, in particular the training sessions held in the provinces.

Another difficulty we encountered was resource restraints for the SCWG Resource Centre.  Initially, we had hoped that there would be duplicate copies among the material received for the International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Library, which did not turn out to be the case.  While we were unable to provide sufficient materials to make the SCWG office a fully-functioning Resource Centre, we attempted to mitigate this by giving the SCWG materials produced by NPWJ, including all the publications outlined above as well as copies of International Criminal Justice and Children, which we had produced during 2002 in cooperation with UNICEF. 
 

4.         Legal Profession Program
The Legal Profession program promoted knowledge of human rights and humanitarian law norms within the legal profession in Sierra Leone.  A robust legal profession with knowledge about human rights will lead to a profession capable of defending human rights through various means, including legal means.  This in turn strengthens the rule of law by enabling the Sierra Leone legal profession to ensure they have the knowledge required to work effectively with and within Sierra Leone’s accountability mechanisms. 

The activities undertaken within the Legal Profession program included training seminars, roundtable discussions, the production of explanatory and critical documents and participation in the activities of partner organisations.  It also included access to relevant library resources, which has been facilitated through the establishment of the NPWJ International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Library in Freetown. The program also encouraged the Special Court to involve itself in the legal community so that the Court may make a sustainable contribution to the rule of law in Sierra Leone.
 
4.a)            Discussion Seminars
* Seminar on the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Special Court for Sierra Leone
In October 2002, NPWJ began discussions with the Special Court Registry and the Sierra Leone Bar Association regarding a seminar for the members of the Sierra Leone legal community and the Special Court Judges on the Court’s Draft Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

Throughout October and November of 2002, planning meetings regarding the seminar were held with the Special Court and the Bar Association.  Training on the draft Rules and on related issues was conducted for members of the Sierra Leone Bar interested in leading the discussions at the seminar.

In December 2002, during the familiarisation visit of the Judges of the Special Court, a half-day seminar was held on the Draft Rules.  The two main results of the seminar – aside from the substantive comments on the Rules – were that the legal profession became substantively involved in the set-up of the Court and the Judges realised that the Sierra Leone legal profession could make a serious contribution to the operations of the Court.
 
* Seminar on the Structure of the Defence at the Special Court
In February 2003, NPWJ invited Sylvia de Bertodano, an expert in international criminal law with experience as defence counsel before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the Special Crimes Panel in East Timor, to Sierra Leone to discuss plans for the structure of the Defence with several interested parties.  As a result, several successful meetings were held with, among others, Special Court staff, members of the Special Court Management Committee, the Sierra Leone Attorney-General and Minister of Justice and members of the Sierra Leone Bar Association.

Based on lessons learned from these meetings, NPWJ, in cooperation with the Special Court Registrar and the Sierra Leone Bar Association, coordinated and participated in a discussion on the structure of the Defence at a meeting of the Bar.  As a consequence, the Bar was able to provide comments directly to the Registrar on plans for the Defence in advance of his meetings in March 2003 with the Special Court Judges.
 
4.b)      Training Seminars
* Seminar for Defence Duty Counsel at the Special Court for Sierra Leone
In February 2003, in cooperation with the Special Court Registry, NPWJ organised a training seminar for defence duty counsel at the Court.  NPWJ, with the assistance of Ms de Bertodano, assembled basic, written training materials for the duty counsel and held an informal discussion seminar with them at the Special Court regarding their roles and responsibilities.

* Seminar on the Initial Responsibilities of Special Court Defence Counsel
In April 2003, Stuart Alford, an expert in international criminal law with substantial experience as a defence counsel in England and a prosecution counsel at the Special Crimes Panel in East Timor, was invited to Sierra Leone to conduct further training on the initial responsibilities of defence counsel at the Special Court.  Mr Alford spoke to members of the Special Court about the current state of play and undertook a day trip to Bonthe Island to observe conditions at the temporary Special Court detention facility and courtroom, which was useful for the preparation and implementation of the seminar.  The Sierra Leone Bar Association and NPWJ co-sponsored two lecture and discussion sessions and NPWJ assembled further training materials, which were distributed at the sessions.  Both sessions included not only interested members of the Sierra Leone Bar but also members of the Special Court Defence Office and the Office of the Prosecutor.
 
* International Humanitarian Law Training Seminar
In early 2003, NPWJ and the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (BHRC) began discussing cooperation on an intensive seminar on international humanitarian law for the legal profession in Sierra Leone.  Throughout May and June, NPWJ and BHRC held planning discussions with the Sierra Leone Bar Association and the Special Court for Sierra Leone and in early July, the BHRC and NPWJ concluded a memorandum of understanding to cover financial and other aspects of this cooperation. 

In late July, NPWJ-SL and the BHRC conducted a five-day training seminar on international humanitarian law for interested members of the Sierra Leone Bar Association and legal staff of the Special Court for Sierra Leone.  The training seminar, which took place at the Special Court for Sierra Leone, combined morning lectures and afternoon workshops.  Each of these sessions was led by one or more members of a team of experts in Sierra Leone law and international humanitarian law, many of whom have practiced at the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Prior to the seminar, extensive written materials were prepared and distributed to the approximately fifty participants.  These materials included not only the basic documents of the Special Court but also an indictment, witness statements and proofs of evidence for a hypothetical prosecution that was discussed in the workshops.

4.c)      NPWJ International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Library
In September 2002, NPWJ began the process of establishing an international human rights and humanitarian law library as a resource for increasing the awareness of human rights and humanitarian law norms among members of Sierra Leone’s civil society so that they might become more involved in and monitor the proceedings of the Special Court and Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

From September through November, efforts toward the establishment of the NPWJ International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Library focused on securing the delivery of approximately 70 boxes of books and other materials from their collection point in New York, which was generously provided by the Sierra Leone Mission to the United Nations.  NPWJ had collected these materials over the preceding months in anticipation of using them to create a library in Sierra Leone.

During this period, advertisements were placed for a librarian, applications were reviewed and candidates were interviewed.  Bookshelves, tables and computer workstations also were constructed in anticipation of the arrival of the print resources.

In December 2002, the boxes of books were delivered to the site of the library and a librarian was hired and began working part time together with a part time assistant librarian, who was hired to clean and organise the print materials.

In January and February 2003, work continued on the organisation of the library.  In particular, NPWJ focused on the indexing and labelling of books and on the creation of a digital catalogue.  Regular subscriptions for the delivery of periodicals and newspapers were arranged, additional print materials were solicited and obtained, library procedures were developed and discussed, a digital library was created and Internet access was provided.  During this period, the library began to welcome users on a test basis, and training was conducted for the librarian on the Special Court, international humanitarian law in general and the work of NPWJ.

In March, the library officially opened to the public and activities began to include promotion of the library and its services.  NPWJ created and distributed posters and handbills advertising the library to the legal profession, including the Ministry of Justice, civil society organisations, schools, the University and other libraries in Freetown.  A reception also was held to celebrate the establishment of the library.  Attendees included the Deputy Prosecutor of the Special Court, who officially opened the library, and the Executive Secretary of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.  At the same time, organisation of the library continued and the digital library was expanded.

From April through July 2003, the library’s operations included continued promotion of the library, maintenance and organisation of the collection and development of user services.  To promote the library, NPWJ sent letters to local schools inviting them to visit the library and use its resources.  Special introductory lunches were also organised for the staff of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, including the Special Court Judges, Registrar and defence and prosecution counsel.  The library also became a setting for special events, such as the reception for World Justice Day.

As part of the continuing maintenance and organisation of the collection, NPWJ completed the digital catalogue and the library acquired additional print and digital materials from private and institutional donors.  These materials included print and digital copies of the non-confidential documents filed in each of the cases before the Special Court for Sierra Leone.

To develop user services, NPWJ created library cards and distributed them to users.  Research services also were provided, including specialised assistance to the Special Court and Truth and Reconciliation Commission.  In addition, a system for the collection of data on the needs of users and the patterns of library use was implemented.

By August 2003, the library was stocked with over 3.000 print volumes and a wealth of digital resources.  Moreover, hundreds of members of the community – including lawyers, human rights activists and students – had made use of the library.
 
4.d)            Publications
* Report on the Special Court Rules of Procedure and Evidence Seminar
Following the Seminar on the Special Court Rules of Procedure and Evidence, NPWJ-SL and the Sierra Leone Bar Association agreed to cooperate on the production of a seminar report.  In January and February of 2003, meetings were held with the seminar discussion leaders and written comments on the Draft Rules were compiled and edited, with publication of the report taking place in February 2003.  Around 200 copies of this report were published in hard copy.

The Report on the Rules of Procedure and Evidence Seminar was published and distributed by hand to the members of the Sierra Leone legal community and the staff of the Special Court.  Importantly, copies were delivered to the Judges of the Special Court as part of their official preparatory materials for their plenary meetings in March of 2003 at which the Rules were reviewed and adopted.  The Report also was made available on the NPWJ-SL website.

* Report on the Structure of the Defence at the Special Court
Based on the meetings and discussion seminar in February of 2003, NPWJ contracted an independent legal expert to draft a report on the structure of the Defence at the Special Court, which was completed in early March.  Around 100 copies of this report were published in hard copy.

The Report on the Defence Structure at the Special Court was distributed by hand to the Special Court Judges and Registrar in advance of their meetings in London on the structure of the Defence.  NPWJ also distributed the report by hand to the Sierra Leone legal community and other interested persons.  The Report additionally was made available on the NPWJ-SL website.

* Booklet of Lecture Notes from the International Humanitarian Law Seminar
During the international humanitarian law seminar in July of 2003, several participants expressed a strong interest in obtaining available notes from the lectures.  Consequently, NPWJ and the BHRC agreed to produce a booklet of lecture notes that would serve as an immediate resource for counsel who were at the beginning stages of a case or were generally interested in the proceedings at the Special Court.  In August, NPWJ compiled the available notes from the lecturers and edited these materials into a booklet, around 200 of which were published in early September.

The booklet was distributed to all of the participants in the seminar, as well as members of the Sierra Leone legal community and staff of the Special Court for Sierra Leone who were unable to attend.

* Lawyer’s Guide to the Special Court for Sierra Leone
In early 2003, NPWJ-SL began discussions with members of the Sierra Leone legal community regarding the Lawyer’s Guide to the Special Court for Sierra Leone.  Based on the outline developed following these discussions, the Guide is intended to orient a lawyer to the Special Court’s unique legal basis, jurisdiction, organization and relationship with States.  It then takes a lawyer step-by-step through the workings of the Special Court, from investigations through appellate proceedings.  Lastly, it reviews practical issues for counsel at the Special Court.
   
In May 2003, NPWJ also began soliciting written contributions to the Guide from the Sierra Leone legal community and international legal experts.  In particular, written contributions were sought from those who had participated in other activities of the legal profession program, either as trainers or students.  Following an extensive editing process, 2.000 copies were published to be distributed for review and comment at the opening of the Courthouse of the Special Court in March 2004. 

4.e)            Problems and solutions
The large number of books we had gathered, namely 70 boxes, and shipped to Sierra Leone at the start of the project were a higher number than we had anticipated and would have taken one person considerable time to catalogue, which would have meant that the opening of the library would have been delayed until towards the end of the project.  We overcame this logistical problem by hiring a part time librarian in addition to the full time librarian and engaged other people to assist in the cataloguing, sorting and stacking of the books.  As a result of this, we were able to have the formal opening of the library in March 2003, although it was already being used for some weeks before that by students, human rights activists and legal professionals.
 

5.            Conflict Mapping
The Conflict Mapping program reconstructed the chain of events during a conflict through gathering information in the field and analysing the decision-making processes to ascertain the role of those who bear the greatest responsibility for policies of systematic and massive violations of the laws of war.  This analysis is based on testimonial and other data overlaid with order of battle and command structures of the various forces as they evolved over time and space.  This chronological and geographical mapping of the conflict, including reconstructing the order of battle and chain of command, serves to prevent denial of those events.  An analysis of events according to international law establishes prima facie accountability for violations of international humanitarian law.  In so doing, it both serves to strengthen the rule of law and to promote and defend human rights by publicising the price for violating them.  In addition, establishing the chain of command within the armed forces operating in Sierra Leone and assembling these disparate pieces of information to create the bigger picture of the decade long conflict in Sierra Leone enables the crucial first phase of establishing who bears direct and command responsibility for atrocities committed during the conflict. This will enable the people of Sierra Leone to establish who should be held accountable for the atrocities committed in Sierra Leone, thereby avoiding the trap of blaming a group or segment of society and promoting peaceful conciliation.  The results of this work, together with the work of organisations in Sierra Leone undertaking human rights reporting, will support the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Special Court in their investigation processes.

In the implementation of the Conflict Mapping program, NPWJ worked closely with local partner organisations, with whom we had built up a relationship over the previous two years. Beginning in 2002, the Outreach program increased its geographic spread, which also opened up new channels, networks and possibilities for collaboration and consequently increased the diversity and size of NPWJ’s network of partner organisations and individuals. In addition, the Outreach program deepened NPWJ’s pre-existing relationships with many key sectors of society. These factors made it possible to conceive of a field-based nation wide Conflict Mapping program in two main ways. NPWJ’s extensive and trusted network of partners would be essential in devising and implementing any system of collecting information. Following this, NPWJ’s network of partners embedded in communities through the country would also be essential in maximising the possible impact of the project:  in encouraging people to participate in the project, in promoting the underlying rationales of accountability and then in disseminating the results.

The Conflict Mapping program has therefore involved as much of the country as possible in conducting sensitisation and documentation in this manner, by providing victims and witnesses with the opportunity to recount their stories and the stories of others in such a way as to help them understand their personal and their communities’ experiences in the context of the war, so as to increase confidence and encourage a sense of ownership of the processes by the people of Sierra Leone.  Indeed, the process in itself is as important as the final report, because the direct involvement of Sierra Leoneans (both as interviewer and interviewee) in this project allows them to be at the heart of the accountability work being carried out in Sierra Leone.

5.a)            Selecting and training Conflict Mapping Recorders
The gathering of information in the field in Sierra Leone was conducted by experienced national human rights workers or "Conflict Mapping Recorders" (CMRs), trained and supervised by NPWJ personnel, in communities and villages throughout the country.

* Selection of CMRs
While the selection of the CMRs in the communities across Sierra Leone was one of the most important parts of the project, it also presented one of the greatest challenges from a quality control perspective.  In this process, NPWJ was heavily reliant on the judgment and expertise of its collaborating organisations and their representatives, with whom we had built a relationship of trust over the previous two years.   As a system of quality control, NPWJ tried to ensure the collaborating organisations selected their best people to nominate as CMRs by discussing with the organisations the purpose of the project and providing the a checklist for indicators that people could make good CMRs.

Following the initial selection stage by our local partners, NPWJ held a training workshop at which the final selection was made (see below), based on how the CMR responded to the training and their performance in the practical exercise of taking a record.  By the end of April 2003, the selection stage was complete and NPWJ had hired a total of 136 CMRs to cover 149 chiefdoms and the Western Area.   Twenty-two CMRs were hired to cover the Western Area, a densely populated area to which many IDPs fled during the war.  In each District we also appointed a focal point, who was our main contact and who assisted with logistical and other arrangements, including bringing the final records to Freetown for review purposes.  These CMRs and the focal points represented a broad cross section of civil society and included human rights activists, teachers and others.

* Training of CMRs
NPWJ conducted training workshops in various locations in the Western Area and in the 12 headquarter towns throughout the country.  In order to provide greater participation and information sharing, as well as due to time and logistical constraints, CMRs travelled from their chiefdoms to the headquarters town rather than NPWJ personnel travelling to each chiefdom. This also allowed the focal point to meet every CMR selected and identify possibly logistical obstacles.  The training was divided into three distinct components: the introductory workshop, the training workshop and the review process.

The first visit, called an “introductory workshop”, was dedicated to meeting with community leaders and collaborative organisations to introduce the project. This session was the final part of the “Training the Trainers” seminar held by the NPWJ Outreach Team and the Special Court Working Group. This placed the Conflict Mapping program in the context of the Special Court, accountability mechanisms and the difficulties faced in reconstructing accurately the events of the conflict in Sierra Leone. The introductory workshops laid the groundwork for the quality of the CMRs selected, following the considerations outlined above, as well as the relevance of the key persons identified. One of the main aims of this session was to engage the participants, so that over the following days they could identify potential CMRs for the training workshop and compile a list of potential key persons for reviewing at the end of that training workshop.  This stage was completed for the whole country by mid April 2003.

The second visit was the “training workshop”, a one-day session composed of sensitisation on the Special Court to ensure that CMRs would be well versed in crimes under international law, in particular those within the jurisdiction of the Court, to enable them to take all the relevant details from their key persons.  This sensitisation was followed by a workshop on the conflict mapping project itself, concluding with the selection of conflict mapping recorders to take records from key persons.  The training focused on explaining the Conflict Mapping program, how conflict mapping differs from human rights reporting, how to take a record, what type of information to focus on and discussed the fact that these interviews will be taxing and draining on both the CMRs and the key persons. The session culminated in practical exercises in record-taking.  In addition, this stage included training in the crucial first step of selecting appropriate key people who have a good general overview of the conflict in their area.  On the basis of performance during this training session, including perceived understanding of the process and principles and the quality of the practice record, NPWJ selected a limited number of individuals to work as CMRs.  NPWJ conducted 14 such workshops across the whole country, generally on four- to five-day trips and mostly from the end of March to the end of April.  This stage was completed for the whole country in the first week of May 2003, at which time we had trained over 300 people in the workshops outlined above and hired 136 people as CMRs.

The third stage consisted of reviewing the first records collected by the CMRs for content and organisation before the final two records were taken from key people selected by the conflict mapping recorders in consultation with NPWJ. This stage was essential to provide top up training (if necessary), to address problems the CMRs may have encountered, to ensure the quality of the records taken and to ensure that CMRs did not feel abandoned.  The fact that this process took place after the collection of each CMR’s first record and before the collection of subsequent records enabled NPWJ to implement a thorough system of quality control on an ongoing basis.  NPWJ conducted these workshops in 13 locations throughout the country, on trips lasting an average of four days per location, with the final stage for CMRs in Freetown being conducted at the NPWJ office.

By the end of May, the reviewing process of the first records was finished and progressively in June, focal points came to Freetown to hand over the records they collected from the CMRs. While they were in our office, we reviewed briefly the records with the focal points and when we were not satisfied with the work of a CMR, we issued a letter the focal point would give to the CMR requesting them to complete their work.  By the beginning of July, all the records were received and the CMRs were all paid.

The last visit to the Provinces was also an occasion to explain to the CMRs in more detail what would follow with the information they had gathered, including how we would process it and use it to publish a report. We anticipate that the network built up during the information‑gathering phase, as well as the District network of the SCWG, will be of great use to disseminate the public report through the Districts.  This stage was completed for the whole country in June 2003.
 
Thus each location was visited at least three times by NPWJ according to a schedule worked out in advance with local partners, in particular the SCWG and the NPWJ Outreach team.

The structure of the training was developed by NPWJ in consultation with local partners during October and November 2002 and was reviewed on an ongoing basis to incorporate lessons learnt during the training process.  The first round of training commenced in December 2002 in Freetown, followed by further meetings and the training of conflict mapping recorders in the rural Western Area, near Freetown.  Although this ran the risk of appearing we had a “Freetown bias”, we selected the Western Area as the first point of entry to enable NPWJ to perfect the conflict mapping training before taking it into the provinces, as logistically it is more difficult to perfect such processes in the provinces.  Lessons learned from the training in the Western Area were incorporated into the planning process for the provincial training and in late March 2003, following preparatory work undertaken in consultation with the SCWG and the NPWJ Outreach program, conflict mapping training began in the provinces.

In consideration of the time frame and the impending rainy season, which starts in May and during which many roads become impassable, NPWJ hired a Sierra Leonean team comprised of the best CMRs from the Western Area to undertake the training workshops and the collection of first records in some parts of the country.  This enabled us to have two conflict mapping training teams working simultaneously in different locations around the country, allowing full coverage of the whole country by the conclusion of the time frame for the gathering of records.

5.b)      Key people
The Conflict Mapping program was primarily based on the scrupulous selection and debriefing of selected individuals (“key persons”) whose profession, role in their community or in the forces involved in the conflict, placed them in a position to follow events as they unfolded.

To facilitate proper identification and selection of key people, CMRs were provided with guidelines for characteristics of people who would likely be best suited to being a key person, together with a list of persons who may make good key people, such as teachers, lawyers, youth leaders, women’s movement leaders and others. In addition, to facilitate and monitor the quality of the records and the key persons selected for interviews, the CMRs were asked to provide a report prior to conducting an interview, in order to maintain the focus of the process and the standard of the key persons selected.

Each CMR was to select three key persons in their chiefdom from whom to take a record, based on the time necessary to take a record and the time frame within which the record-taking phase had to be completed.  Nevertheless, the main emphasis was on quality and not quantity when identifying key persons to be interviewed. It was therefore the case that fewer key persons were selected for interviewing in some chiefdoms where the scale of the conflict was minimal or where there is a smaller population.

Following these criteria, the Conflict Mapping Program gathered records from 401 key persons across the country, who ranged in age between 19 and 82.  Of these, 6.7% were former members of one of the fighting factions; 6.7% were women; and 10.7% had been captured by one or more of the fighting factions and used either as forced labour or were recruited into a fighting faction.   The most common occupation of key people was a farmer, most of whom had occupied some position of authority during the conflict (such as town or section chief) and many of whom were members of a fighting faction, most commonly the Civil Defence Forces.  Other occupations included Paramount Chiefs, Town Chiefs and other chiefdom authorities, teachers, fishermen, housewives and retired military personnel and civil servants.

5.c)            Database
The information gathered by CMRs from key people comprised over 400 records, each containing an average of 30 pages, with a total of approximately 5.500 separate incidents, i.e. instances of an alleged violation of international humanitarian law or key strategic or other information.  Given the amount and breadth of information, it had to be collated and stored in such a way as to enable easy search and retrieval in order for it to be used by analysts.  Throughout the year, the conflict mapping team was in contact with Sensible Data, an Italian IT company with expertise in this area, concerning the design of the database that was to be used for the conflict mapping analysis. This database was finalised in July and operational for August, when the inputting process began.

Prior to the completion of the design and programming of the database, the records went through a three-stage process:
  1. Reviewing by a team of four people. The objective of this review was to make basic corrections to the grammar and the orthography of the handwritten records. It was emphasised that that corrections should be minimal so as not to reinterpret or give a different sense to the words used by the key person. This reviewing was also carried out to correct major errors, e.g. when a well known event was indicated at the wrong date and to pinpoint and redress major incoherence in the records.
  2. Typing the records in their entirety into digital format.
  3. Rigorous proof-reading of the typed copy against the original (handwritten), which was also carried out by the team of reviewers.

These documents then formed the basis of the data entry process and were used extensively during the analysis phase.  The data entry process was carried out in Freetown throughout August, by two teams working on shifts, six days a week. Each team was composed of international and national data entry operators (between four to six persons in each team). For the recruiting of the national data entry operators, we sought advice and assistance from the Campaign for Good Governance, a long term partner of NPWJ, and from other individuals with whom NPWJ was connected, whose anchorage in civil society and far-reaching and high quality networks enabled them to recommend people, who were then provided with training in the operation of the database and in data entry protocols and procedures.

For data entry purposes, each record was broken into incidents, which consist of discrete parts of information, usually chronological, containing examples of serious violations of international humanitarian law or other relevant information.  Each incident was classified according to what crimes were allegedly committed, who allegedly committed them, what weapons they allegedly used and other pertinent information.  To ensure accuracy and consistency in the classification of incidents, NPWJ personnel provided training to data entry operators in the basics of international criminal law and produced a manual outlining how different factual scenarios should be classified.  To ensure accuracy of the database as a whole and enhance its effectiveness for analysis purposes, each entry went through a thorough process of checking and crosschecking to ensure that it was consistent, complete and correct.

5.d)      District level analysis
The information was entered on a district level and as the inputting was progressing, we were able to start an initial analysis of the facts, drawing broad brushstrokes about what had happened in each District, which was used to focus further, more detailed analysis. It was of the utmost importance that an initial analysis on a District level was drafted in Freetown, since it allowed us to submit it to CGG field monitors, who are very experienced human rights activists with an in-depth knowledge about what happened during the conflict in the District for which they are responsible. By providing the CGG field monitors with a detailed outline of what happened in a District in terms of activities, movement of troops, violations committed, they were able to confirm or deny the information and to pinpoint areas where more research would be required, whether the information was incomplete or simply absent. We continued meeting with the CGG field monitors until our day of departure and their collaboration proved to be very fruitful, as it allowed us to proceed further and to undertake the drafting of the factual analysis. We specifically did not hire any CGG field monitors as conflict mapping recorders, so that we would be able to draw on their experience.  This ensured that there were no major errors or inconsistencies in our District-level analyses, thus providing a crucial first level of cross-checking.

Following this stage, our analysts began piecing together what happened during the ten years of war in Sierra Leone, using three tools: the incident database; detailed maps, mostly at District level, produced by the Sierra Leone Information System of the UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs; and the typed records.  The result of this stage, which involved collating and cross-checking vast amounts of information, was a more detailed outline of what happened in each District during the conflict, highlighting troop movements, chains of command and events, including acts likely to constitute violations of the laws of war, together with an overall picture of the conflict throughout the country. 

Once these stages were complete, experienced analysts began the long process of putting all the information together, which consisted of three stages.  First, we conducted a “first review” of the rough drafts, checking for internal sense and consistency.  Second, each rough draft went through a more thorough review, addressing potential problems in the analysis, often going back to the original records and maps to clarify issues.  Finally, the rough drafts for each District were put together and cross-referenced, which enabled us to put together a general overview of the conflict.  This led to the completion of the first draft factual analysis.  The next stage was to incorporate information from open sources and other materials, going back to the records when necessary to iron out inconsistencies and to fill in details.  This resulted in a second draft, which included all verified information from the first draft, with the addition of open sources and other material not gathered directly by us in the field, but that were useful in confirming or correcting the data.

This second draft went to “resource persons”, namely Sierra Leoneans and foreigners with expertise in the conflict in Sierra Leone, who agreed to confirm or deny information contained in the draft report.  This stage helped to clear up any lingering inconsistencies or unclear information.  The result of this consultation process will produce the third and final draft of the factual analysis.

While the factual analysis was being perfected with the assistance of “resource persons”, NPWJ put together a legal analysis of the events that happened during the conflict, which involved presenting and discussing the relevant principles of international humanitarian and criminal law.  These principles were then applied to the facts as analysed during the analysis phase, so as to ascertain what crimes under international law and selected crimes under Sierra Leonean law were committed during the conflict.  This draft was sent to NPWJ’s network of international law experts, many of whom have had experience working on similar projects, such as the one we ran in Kosovo, or practicing before international courts or tribunals.  These people are to the legal sections what the CGG field monitors and the resource persons are to the factual sections. 

An Executive Summary of the findings was published in October 2003, for distribution at the opening of the courthouse of the Special Court in March 2004, with the full Conflict Mapping Report consisting of some 600 pages of detailed analysis also being made available to the Office of the Prosecutor and the Defence Office of the Special Court.

In addition, over a six month period, NPWJ debriefed a former high-level member of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), who provided us with a great deal of information on the inner workings of the RUF and an overview of the conflict since it began in 1991.  From the hours spent working with him, we obtained a statement of over 100 pages, plus various documents and maps describing the structure, procedures and geographical locations of the RUF, which were of immense benefit during the analysis phases. A senior former member of the Kamajor militia, the mainstay of the Civil Defence Forces aligned against the RUF during the conflict, was also debriefed for the same purposes, although not as extensively.

The process as a whole enabled analysts to piece together the conflict as it happened across time and space and to draw out patterns of conduct that may constitute crimes against humanity, namely those crimes committed in a widespread or systematic manner.
 
5.e)            Problems and solutions
The question facing the project during the conceptual phase was which method to select in order to maximise both the quality of the information gathered and the impact of information-gathering on Sierra Leoneans, given the project’s resources and constraints.  The main constraints facing the project were limited financial resources; a limited amount of time; the size of the country and ease of movement, including the condition of the roads; and the fact that Sierra Leone experiences torrential rains for six months of the year, making many roads completely impassable.

NPWJ decided during the conceptual phase that the most appropriate conflict mapping to undertake in Sierra Leone was one that focused on the whole of the country rather than a limited geographical area was to use information gathered from people in Sierra Leone with a good general overview of the conflict in their area (“key people”), supplemented with open source materials.  In order to maximise community participation, enhance the quality of the information and overcome potential cultural and linguistic barriers, it was considered that the best people to take records from people with an overview were Sierra Leoneans from the same geographical area as the key people (“Conflict Mapping Recorders” or “CMRs”).  In addition, it was considered that in order to enhance community “ownership” of the accountability mechanisms, the Conflict Mapping and Outreach programs should as much as possible be conducted together.  Marrying the sensitisation and the documentation processes ensures that the perception of the communities reached is not that of being “told” about the accountability process as something that happens elsewhere and is relevant to others, but rather of truly taking part in it.

While this method was the most appropriate in the circumstances, it comes with its own potential drawbacks, which had to be addressed during the conceptual phase so as to minimise their possible impact during implementation.  There are seven major areas of concern of such importance that failure to recognise and address them would compromise the value of both the process and outcomes of the project, which we have called “critical areas”.

The first critical area is the quality of CMRs and their ability to draw out relevant information from the key person so as to compile a record that could be used during the analysis phase.   This was addressed through a rigorous two-fold selection process.  In the first instance, NPWJ outlined the program to partner NGOs in the regions, often members of the SCWG, who would nominate persons they considered suitable to be CMRs.  Following that initial nomination, NPWJ held a training session for the potential CMRs, including a practical exercise in record-taking, and selected CMRs on the basis of the results of that training.  In addition, CMRs were trained in recognising their own potential biases and how to overcome them or, at the very least, to identify those biases for the analysts.

The second critical area concerns the quality and usability of the records, which is distinct from the quality of the person taking the record, although the two often overlap.  This was overcome by rigorous training in how to take a record and what information might be relevant, which included practical exercises in taking a record before interviewing the first key person.  In addition, once the first record had been taken, NPWJ personnel reviewed the record with the CMR, to point out potential problems and provide advice on how to take a more comprehensive record.

The third critical area is the quality of the key people interviewed by the CMRs.  In order to overcome this concern, CMRs were provided with rigorous guidelines and criteria for ideal candidates for key people.  Once CMRs had made their initial selection of the key people they wished to interview, NPWJ personnel went through the list with them and discussed their choices, suggesting alternatives where the key people were inappropriate.

The fourth critical area is the accuracy of the information provided by the key people.  This was addressed by providing CMRs with guidelines and training in interviewing and how to take a record, including the importance of accuracy and not “making up” information to fill in gaps, as well as recognising potential bias in key people.

The fifth critical area concerns the accuracy of the information itself.  Given that the conflict ranged over the course of a decade and many key people were either relatively young when events happened or were relatively elderly at the time they gave their record, not to mention the potential effects of post traumatic stress disorder, even with the best intentions on the part of both the CMRs and the key people there is always the possibility that people are mistaken.  This was addressed by reviewing the first factual analysis with well respected local human rights activists who were not involved in the Conflict Mapping Program and who themselves had a good general overview of what happened in a particular district.  In addition, it was addressed by providing the factual analysis to other local and foreign experts, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and by cross-checking the information with open source materials.

The sixth critical area was geographical coverage.  In its original conception, the Conflict Mapping Program was to have one CMR per chiefdom, in order to have saturation coverage across the whole country.  However, time, financial and logistical restraints meant that this was not possible, as there are 149 chiefdoms across the country, plus the rural Western Area, not all of which are accessible at all times of the year.  In order to avoid making arbitrary decisions about which chiefdoms to cut and with a view to minimising the damage to the report as a whole, NPWJ therefore discussed this issue with the Campaign for Good Governance (CGG), the leading human rights NGO in Sierra Leone with human rights monitors in every district, and the SCWG.  We sought their advice on which chiefdoms could be covered by a CMR from a neighbouring chiefdom (termed “linked”) and which chiefdoms were not the scene of a great deal of activity during the conflict and could be cut altogether.  In addition, we discussed with CGG which chiefdoms they would be able to provide us with information about, on the basis of their regular human rights reporting work as well as a special human rights violations reporting project they undertook during 2001.

The final critical area related to processing the raw information generated by the program – in short, information management. Failure to secure, store and accurately break down the records into a practical format for analysis would undermine efforts to accurately reconstruct the events described in them. In November 2002, we began developing a customised database that would allow the narratives in the records to be broken down into incidents, storing simple information about the incident alongside data about the exact location and date of its occurrence. As soon we started collecting the first completed records in mid May they entered a process of digitisation. In late June, once all the records were collected, records were broken down into incidents by a team of specially trained database analyst. A thorough system of cross checking was implemented throughout to maintain the accuracy of information from record through to database.

An additional constraint related to planning for taking the Conflict Mapping Program into the provinces.  Four visits per District were initially planned for the conflict mapping team (introductory visit: meeting with civil society and local authorities to introduce the project; training workshop; first review workshop; and final payment). However, this would take a very long time to implement, as the road network did not allow for direct travel between major towns.  Often, a circuitous route had to be taken, which meant that we would not have sufficient time to implement the whole program across the country.  In addition, the rainy season was approaching, making many roads impassable and some parts of the country completely inaccessible.  It was therefore decided to work closely with the outreach team who were to undertake a Provincial “tour” for the “Training The Trainers” (TTT) seminars. As part of this collaboration, Outreach team introduced the Conflict Mapping program during these training seminars. Furthermore, a second conflict mapping team was set up, comprised of the best CMRs from the Western Area alongside an experienced trainer, so that the country would be divided between those two teams to ensure that this process was successfully completed on time, which we were able to achieve.


6.            Submission of NPWJ to the TRC on 28 July 2003
In February 2003, NPWJ was requested by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to make a submission to it on the issues of justice, the rule of law and amnesties for crimes under international law, including the Special Court for Sierra Leone.  The TRC was set up, following the Lome Peace Agreement, to establish an historical record of truth about the conflict in Sierra Leone, including the violations committed during that conflict, and to make recommendations for the future. NPWJ had been asked to make this submission on the basis of our close association with the Special Court since 2000 and the strong reputation built up in policy, legal, NGO and Government circles in Sierra Leone.  We therefore drafted a submission addressing these points, which was presented orally to the TRC on 28 July 2003 by the Country Director on behalf of NPWJ and in writing the following day.  The submission received some press coverage in Freetown and was also distributed by NPWJ to various people, including the EC Delegation in Freetown and interested academics and NGOs in Sierra Leone and abroad.


7.            Results
7.a)            Judicial Assistance Program
We engaged the interest in the top levels of Government for the implementation of international obligations, which facilitated engaging Parliamentarians, both indirectly when the time comes to pass legislation and directly in workshops related to the International Criminal Court.  Preparing the necessary documents for this implementation was slowed due to an incredible lack of resources within the Ministry and the consequent need to spend more time liaising with the Special Court on behalf of the Ministry and researching national law issues as well as international law issues. Nevertheless, liaising with the Special Court and providing advice to both the Ministry in Freetown and to the Mission in New York has enabled us to contribute positively to ensuring interest in the Court is maintained, both inside and outside the Government and assisting the Court to work as efficiently and effectively as possible.

7.b)            Outreach Program
Outreach formulation and dissemination was an ongoing process, adapting to the changing needs and circumstances and the need to ensure the long term capacity and sustainability of the program. It should be noted in this respect that in some cases difficulties were encountered in terms of engaging civil society to undertake outreach activities on a voluntary basis, i.e. we were required to provide payment for all expenses and a small reimbursement, which has taken up a lot of time in organisational matters and institution building, which was not foreseen to this extent.
 
Nevertheless, we have been able to engage many different sectors of Sierra Leone society, particularly the Market Women, in training and discussion on the Special Court. As a result of these training seminars, we trained over 600 people directly on matters relating to the Special Court.  In addition, we held special training and coalition-building workshops for the District Special Court Working Groups, which were themselves attended by roughly the same number of people.  As a result of these activities, the capacity of civil society to deal with the Court and to disseminate information about the Court to a wide range of people has increased, which is evidenced by the successful activities held both in Freetown and the provinces.

The public lecture of the President of the Special Court, which was broadcast on national television, provided an excellent opportunity for wider dissemination and stimulation of interest in this area. Other public lectures, all of which were held in conjunction with the Peace and Conflict Studies Department of Fourah Bay College, were attended by similar numbers of people and also generated much discussion and debate on the topics under consideration.

While NPWJ took the view that the key thing was the provision of accurate information, and not propaganda, the gradual and continuous building of political support for the SCSL process was an integral part of the outreach strategy. Engaging as many people and institutions as possible to participate in some – whether actively, or otherwise – would add value to the process of disseminating information. At the very least, our program cultivated much goodwill in communities across the country, which to an extent compensated for some of the negative sentiments built up in communities about the TRC and the Special Court.

Central to the fulfillment of our aims was increasing the geographical spread enjoyed by the SCWG. This involved stimulating the creation of SCWGs in the Districts and working with them to develop appropriate and inventive outreach programs, taking into account the logistical, cultural and linguistic differences experienced in each district. This approach allowed the SCWG in Freetown to gain a better understanding of the bigger picture and challenged them to be inclusive and flexible, which increased their capacity to run their own outreach programs once the NPWJ project had finished.

7.c)         Legal Profession Program
The legal profession program fostered greater awareness of international human rights and humanitarian law in the Sierra Leone legal community.  In particular, members of this community became substantially more familiar with the substantive law and procedures involving the Special Court for Sierra Leone.  As a result of this increased familiarity, Sierra Leonean lawyers have been able to become involved in all aspects of the operation of the Special Court.  Sierra Leonean lawyers are now members of the Office of the Prosecutor’s trial and appellate teams, the Defence Office, and the defence teams for almost all accused persons.  Members of the Law Officers Department of the Ministry of Justice also are more familiar with these issues.  As a result, they are able to represent more effectively the interests of the Republic of Sierra Leone in the proceedings of the Court.

In addition, the legal profession program helped the Special Court to realise that the Sierra Leone legal community could make a serious contribution to the operations of the Court.  The program also successfully assisted the Sierra Leone legal community in communicating its insights and concerns regarding the Court to the relevant Court officials.  A concrete example of this was the Rules Seminar, held with the Sierra Leone Bar Association and the Judges of the Special Court, which was an opportunity to take advantage of the presence of the Judges of the Special Court to bolster interest in the issues involved and give the Sierra Leone legal profession the opportunity to interact with the Judges and which had the added benefit of demonstrating to the judges that there is a vibrant legal profession in Sierra Leone.

The library enabled many interested people – including human rights activists, law students and legal practitioners – to undertake research on a wide range of human rights issues and a great deal of interest arose with the Government, the University and others, who saw this library as filling a gap within their own institutions.  We anticipate that this will continue, with the library being taken over by the Campaign for Good Governance, who have promised to uphold similar access levels, with some specialised titles going to specific institutions where they will be of most use, including the University, the Bar Association and the Ministry of Justice.

In the long term, it is anticipated that the information and skills learned through the legal profession program activities will positively affect the practice of law and the administration of justice in the domestic courts of Sierra Leone.

7.d)            Conflict Mapping Program
While the report is the main product of the Conflict Mapping program, the process is perhaps the most important aspect. By ensuring the people felt consulted and had an opportunity to tell their stories, the Conflict Mapping program brought the accountability mechanisms closer to the people for whom they should be working. Hence, the process of training – which included sensitisation on the Special Court as well as training in methodology of conflict mapping – was in itself beneficial for participants in terms of increased knowledge and capacity building to undertake this type of work, which involves a lot of attention to detail.

We eventually hired 136 conflict mapping recorders and received over 400 records. The goal to gather information from local people to be the basis of the final report was thus achieved. Even if this process was achieved in a time frame that was broader than that which had been originally envisaged, the process in itself was important as such. Furthermore, the more you speak with Sierra Leoneans in the country and the more you gather and compile information on the conflict, the more the added value of this report becomes obvious.

It is clear that these results could not have been achieved without the assistance of the SCWG Districts chapters. Their assistance, including through the establishment of a focal point for conflict mapping, was important in two regards. The first one was of a logistical nature, while the second aspect is related to the substance of the program itself, as they were involved in all aspects of planning and follow up.  This cooperation in itself increased the capacity of the SCWG District Chapters, both in the development of a substantive and logistical skill set as well as through increased awareness of the accountability mechanisms working for Sierra Leone.


8.            Conclusion
This project gained a lot of support from civil society, government and other institutions and organisations both in Freetown and abroad and filled gaps that were evident in relation to involvement of Sierra Leoneans in the accountability processes in their country. 

In all of our activities, we attempted to coordinate and cooperate with other actors in the field, in particular the Special Court Working Group (SCWG), UNAMSIL and the Special Court itself.  In addition, a main policy priority was to increase the geographical spread of our activities to encompass the whole of the country and not to be guilty of a “Freetown bias”, in particular in terms of the Outreach and Conflict Mapping programs.  The activities and planning of all of our programs were designed so as to reduce the need for our presence and to transfer gradually responsibilities to the appropriate people in Sierra Leone, in which we were ultimately successful.

Each program, while distinct in their specific aims, was conducted so as to reinforce the other programs and thereby increase the contribution of each program to the project’s overall aim of strengthening the ability of Sierra Leone society to address violations of human rights and humanitarian law.  The most striking example of this was the close cooperation between the Outreach and Conflict Mapping programs.  While the Outreach Program trained villages and towns on the Special Court, through “Training the Trainers” sessions and community events, these same communities continued to participate in accountability efforts by providing the Conflict Mapping program with their own views on and experiences of the conflict, by being consulted on the events and by directly taking part in the gathering of the information.  In addition, the project as a whole operated so as to maximise the participation of Sierra Leoneans in decision-making processes both in relation to project policy as well as the design, implementation and follow-up for activities.  This was premised on the belief that for Sierra Leone’s accountability mechanisms to make a meaningful impact and achieve their goals, there must be “ownership” of the processes by Sierra Leoneans.  It is also underpinned by the notion that, as a matter of policy, Sierra Leoneans are best placed to know what activities and approaches would be the most effective to reach the people of Sierra Leone.

NPWJ has found that this project was an interesting and unique approach to addressing all aspects of accountability mechanisms for violations of intern