By Mahmud Tim Kargbo
Wednesday, 14 May 2025
In a landmark legal challenge confronting the enduring grip of neo-colonial capitalism in Sierra Leone, the First Lady, Dr Fatima Maada Bio, has—through her legal team—issued a decisive rebuttal to defamation threats from Octea Limited, one of the most controversial foreign-owned mining entities in the region. The response is rooted in constitutional law, international human rights standards, and documented evidence of exploitation, deception, and abuse.
Far from merely countering legal threats, this letter defends civic integrity, labour justice, and the sovereignty of Sierra Leone. It may mark a turning point in the country’s struggle against predatory corporate conduct.
From Gratitude to Gaslighting: A Corporate U-turn
Annexures included with the legal response reveal that Octea executives initially welcomed the First Lady’s mediation during the Koidu mine labour crisis. A Joint Statement dated 7 March 2025, co-signed with the Ministry of Labour, records Octea’s agreement to reinstate dismissed workers and restore lawful employment conditions. The company expressly thanked the First Lady for brokering peace.
Weeks later, Octea reversed its stance, accusing her of interference, dishonesty, and sabotage. The letter dismisses this as “a deceptive joke taken too far”, citing it as a flagrant violation of Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which guarantees the freedom to impart and receive information in the public interest.
The shift from gratitude to hostility signals more than corporate fickleness—it reveals a calculated attempt to silence scrutiny.
Corporate Breach, Not Civic Provocation
At the centre of this conflict is Octea’s breach of its 7 March agreement. Rather than pay workers in US dollars as agreed, the company reverted to an obsolete exchange rate of Le6.50 per dollar—effectively short-changing its workforce. This move contravenes Clause 8.1 of employee contracts and violates Section 7 of Sierra Leone’s 1991 Constitution, which mandates the promotion of fair working conditions and adequate livelihoods.
It also violates provisions of the 2004 Labour Act and defies the ECOWAS Mining Directive (C/DIR.3/05/09), which obliges member states to ensure that mineral wealth directly benefits workers and host communities.
Baseless Accusations and Legal Red Herrings
Octea’s claim that the First Lady engaged in extortion is rejected outright as defamatory and unsupported. According to the legal team, all meetings were requested by Octea, with no evidence of solicitation or coercion. Such accusations, if unchallenged, endanger reputational rights protected under the common law in both Sierra Leone and Guernsey, where Octea is domiciled.
Defamation of this nature may carry civil liability across jurisdictions. Under the Companies Act 2009, Sierra Leonean regulators are empowered to investigate corporate behaviour detrimental to public welfare. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights likewise condemn retaliation against individuals who expose corporate misconduct.
Wage Theft, Pension Fraud, and Economic Apartheid
The legal response outlines a systemic pattern of abuse:
Workers are paid in devalued Leones, decimating real income.
NASSIT contributions are under-reported, defrauding the national pension system.
Sierra Leonean staff reportedly earn up to ten times less than foreign workers performing the same roles.
Such disparities breach the 2004 Labour Act and the ILO Equal Remuneration Convention No. 100, ratified by Sierra Leone in 1967. The African Mining Vision further insists that African workers be justly compensated and empowered in extractive industries.
The legal team describes this injustice as “institutionalised economic apartheid”—a phrase that captures both its structural cruelty and moral depravity.
Human Rights Abuses Beneath the Surface
Grave allegations have also emerged regarding working conditions underground:
No access to drinking water;
Absence of sanitation facilities, forcing workers to relieve themselves near machinery;
Prolonged exposure to hazardous substances without protective equipment.
These conditions violate Article 24 of the African Charter, which enshrines the right to a healthy and safe environment. They may also constitute forced labour under ILO Convention No. 29 and breach the UN’s guidelines on corporate accountability.
The legal team has cited the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme—which prohibits the export of conflict-tainted diamonds—as a potential avenue for sanctions against Octea. The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises similarly demand worker protections and responsible supply chains.
Neo-Colonial Arrogance and the Politics of Disrespect
Octea’s letter has been condemned by the First Lady’s legal counsel as “undignified, rude, and ill-advised,” raising the question of whether such language would ever be directed at a European First Lady. This rhetorical imbalance underscores a deeper pattern of neo-colonial disrespect, particularly against African women in power.
The sentiment echoes Kwame Nkrumah’s warning that “neocolonialism is the worst form of imperialism”—a system maintained not by military force, but by economic subjugation and institutional disrespect.
Octea’s actions reflect this modern colonial dynamic: exploiting resources, underpaying workers, avoiding accountability—and retaliating when challenged.
A Demand for Justice and Global Consequences
The legal demands include:
A public apology and retraction;
Payment of $50 million to the National Revenue Authority for economic reparations;
Legal proceedings in Sierra Leone and Guernsey if no response is received;
Immediate escalation to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
These demands are framed not as personal vindication, but as a defence of public interest. Civil society organisations—including Oxfam and the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre—have been invited to monitor compliance and expose malpractice.
Sierra Leone stands at a decisive crossroads. This is no mere defamation dispute—it is a broader reckoning with corporate impunity, labour injustice, and national dignity. Octea’s conduct exemplifies the high cost of foreign exploitation and the urgent need for accountability.
But the tide may be turning. The First Lady’s legal stance marks the emergence of a civic and political will no longer content to be pillaged and insulted. If pursued to its conclusion, this case may inspire a continental push for reform in extractive industries and the restoration of African agency.
Recommendations to Parliament, Regulators, and Civil Society
Parliament should initiate an immediate inquiry into Octea’s labour and tax practices;
The National Revenue Authority must audit historic exchange rate fraud;
NASSIT must recover unpaid contributions and pursue criminal charges where necessary;
Independent human rights monitors should be granted mine access;
Legal institutions must explore civil and criminal prosecutions under domestic and international law;
Civil society organisations should consider a national boycott of Octea pending reform.
Sierra Leone must not remain a silent shareholder in its own exploitation. This legal reply is more than a rebuttal—it is a patriotic declaration. The country’s natural wealth must no longer finance its oppression, but fund its dignity, equity, and development.
References
Constitution of Sierra Leone (1991): https://parliament.gov.sl/uploads/acts/constitution_of_sierra_leone_1991.pdf
Labour Act (2004): https://www.sierra-leone.org/Laws/2004-06.pdf
Companies Act (2009): https://www.sierra-leone.org/Laws/2009-05.pdf
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: https://www.achpr.org/legalinstruments/detail?id=49
ILO Equal Remuneration Convention (No. 100): https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C100
ILO Forced Labour Convention (No. 29): https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C029
ECOWAS Mining Directive: https://ecowas.int/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/ECOWAS-Mining-Directive.pdf
OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises: https://www.oecd.org/corporate/mne/
Kimberley Process: https://www.kimberleyprocess.com/
Amnesty International – Corporate Accountability: https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/corporate-accountability/
Human Rights Watch – Business & Human Rights: https://www.hrw.org/topic/business-human-rights
African Mining Vision: https://au.int/en/industry-minerals/african-mining-vision
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/