Which influences shaped the 1999 Sierra Leone peace agreement? The peace accord is remembered for the blanket, unconditional amnesty granted to all warring parties, which met with strong international condemnation. This Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue and International Center for Transitional Justice article tracks the discussions and influences that resulted in the Lome Accord. It finds that the amnesty was determined by the incontestable political and military realities of the time. Focusing particularly on issues of justice and accountability, it also assesses the impact of the accord in succeeding years.
The civil war in Sierra Leone began in 1991, with rebels fighting as the Revolutionary United Front (RUF). The conflict was notorious for abuses inflicted on civilians by both the rebels and government-affiliated troops. During the signing of the peace accord the United Nations (UN) representative unexpectedly inserted a disclaimer; UN policy prohibited him from signing an agreement granting amnesty for serious international crimes. The implications of this disclaimer were left open.
There is now virtually unanimous agreement that a peace agreement would not have been possible without an amnesty:
- Two factors made it nearly impossible for the government to avoid granting an amnesty: its military weakness and the real threat of prosecution and punishment of the rebels.
- The amnesty appears to have been agreed quickly and easily, having been originally offered by the government. Those resisting it – national and international civil society groups and UN human rights officials – were largely kept out of the decision making.
- The near breakdown of peace in 2000 resulted from many factors, including the slow mobilisation of UN troops and weak RUF commitment to the peace process.
- The establishment of the Special Court was not a result of the amnesty. Other factors led to the conclusion that national courts were inappropriate for the proposed trials.
- Sierra Leone still faces enormous problems. These include the continuing prevalence of the causes of the war: public frustration at corruption, weak governing structures, limited public services, high unemployment and widespread poverty.
- Despite the importance of addressing these challenges for long term stability and peace, they received relatively limited attention whilst brokering the transition out of war.
Developments in Sierra Leone offer a number of lessons that may be useful in other contexts:
- Prosecutions can advance peace: the arrest of key protagonists who violate accords can boost peace implementation.
- Recent national justice and amnesty measures will frame the debate. The relative strength of parties, including military power, influences justice outcomes.
- Consider all options and create alternatives. It may have been possible to avoid a blanket, unconditional amnesty in Sierra Leone.
- Clarity is needed on international and domestic law in relation to justice obligations. Mediators should ensure full consideration of the issues, including the interests of broader society.
- The quasi-legal status of an accord and amnesty may result in later confusion, as demonstrated by the insertion of the UN amnesty disclaimer on only one copy of the accord.
- Justice issues are unlikely to be fully resolved with the signing of an accord. Some aspects may continue to be negotiated as new factors emerge or political realities shift.
