By Sahr Ibrahim Komba
Sierra Leone is once again at a critical moment in its democratic journey. The renewed debate over electoral reform is not just about choosing between Proportional Representation (PR) and the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system. It is really about how Sierra Leoneans want to be represented, how leaders are held accountable, and how trust can be rebuilt in a fragile post-conflict democracy.
The sharp disagreements between the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) and the opposition All People’s Congress (APC), alongside strong views from civil society groups, paramount chiefs, and religious leaders, show a nation struggling to balance inclusiveness with accountability.
At the centre of the debate is one big question: which electoral system best serves Sierra Leone’s long-term national interest?
Supporters of Proportional Representation, led by Deputy Speaker of Parliament Hon. Ibrahim Tawa Conteh and backed by the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Alpha Sesay, argue that PR offers a way out of the country’s long-standing winner-takes-all politics. According to them, PR promotes fairness by ensuring that political parties are represented in Parliament in proportion to the votes they receive nationwide.
In a country as diverse as Sierra Leone, this argument carries weight. Many citizens feel excluded when their votes do not translate into representation. The Attorney General has also linked PR to key moments in Sierra Leone’s peace and reform history, including the Lomé Peace Agreement, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and past constitutional review processes. From this perspective, PR is presented not as a political trick, but as unfinished democratic business.
PR is also defended as a tool for inclusion. With the Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (GEWE) Act now in force, supporters argue that party lists under PR can help increase the number of women, youth, and persons with disabilities in Parliament groups that FPTP has historically failed to adequately represent.
However, the experience of the 2023 elections has exposed serious challenges with PR that cannot be ignored.
Opposition Leader Abdul Kargbo, civil society groups, paramount chiefs, and religious leaders have raised concerns that go beyond party politics. Many argue that PR weakens the direct relationship between voters and their representatives. Under FPTP, people know their MP and can easily demand accountability. Under PR, that connection becomes blurred.
This concern is especially strong in rural communities, where leadership is closely tied to presence, accessibility, and traditional authority. Many voters feel disconnected from MPs selected through party lists rather than direct constituency elections.
There is also growing worry about the power PR gives to party leadership. Closed party lists and unclear candidate selection processes risk turning MPs into representatives of party elites instead of the people. The absence of by-elections under PR, although cheaper, has added to public frustration, as voters feel they lose control once elections are over.
These concerns were clearly reflected during the June 2025 national dialogue, where only 10.5 percent of participants supported PR, compared to nearly 58 percent who preferred FPTP. Confusion during the 2023 elections, the collapse of ward committees, and the marginalization of independent candidates have further weakened public confidence in PR.
In democracy, perception matters. Even a system with good intentions will fail if people see it as imposed, confusing, or designed to benefit only a few.
Supporters of FPTP argue that the system is simple, familiar, and transparent. Voters clearly understand how winners emerge, and accountability is easier to enforce. In a country where trust in institutions remains fragile, this simplicity is important.
Traditional leaders have been particularly vocal in rejecting PR. Paramount chiefs argue that it sidelines community leadership and independent voices, which clashes with Sierra Leone’s hybrid system of governance that combines traditional authority with modern democracy.
Still, FPTP has its own weaknesses. It often produces unfair outcomes, where parties win many votes but gain little or no representation. This has, in the past, fueled political tension and feelings of exclusion.
The debate has become even more complex with proposals to change presidential election thresholds. While the government says such thresholds can strengthen legitimacy, the opposition sees them as politically motivated. In a deeply polarized society, any rule that appears unfair risks undermining confidence in election outcomes.
What is becoming clear is that the debate should not be reduced to PR versus FPTP alone.
Many voices are now calling for a middle ground either reforming FPTP or adopting a mixed system. A hybrid model, where presidents and councillors are elected through FPTP while Parliament uses a more open and constituency-based PR system, could balance accountability and inclusion. Open party lists, lower thresholds, and strong civic education could also address many of PR’s weaknesses.
Most importantly, no electoral system will work without strong institutions. Transparent electoral management, civic education, internal party democracy, and fair campaign financing are essential.
Sierra Leone’s constitutional reform process is too important to rush. As leaders often say, constitutions are written for generations, not for one election. But for any reform to last, it must be trusted.
At this crossroads, Sierra Leone has a chance to choose dialogue over division and consensus over convenience. The real test of democracy is not who wins the argument, but whether the people feel included in shaping their future.
