Calls for DNA Test Intensify as Controversy Surrounding Edwina Hawa Jamiru Deepens
Freetown, September 2025. The ongoing controversy surrounding 21-year-old law student Edwina Hawa Jamiru and Court of Appeal Judge Justice Alhaji Momoh (Momoh Jah) Stevens has taken a dramatic turn, prompting renewed calls for a conclusive DNA test to clarify the truth.
The saga began in December 2024 when Jamiru’s viral video accusing Justice Stevens of impregnating and abandoning her ignited nationwide outrage. Her emotional testimony drew widespread sympathy and sparked heated debates across social media, placing the judiciary under intense public scrutiny and raising urgent questions about accountability at the highest levels.
However, in September 2025, leaked videos allegedly filmed in Accra, Ghana, began circulating online, showing Jamiru in intimate encounters with other men. These revelations have cast serious doubts on the veracity of her initial claims, raising questions about possible manipulation and efforts to damage the reputation of a senior judicial officer.
Representing the principle of justice, Justice Stevens has chosen the legal route to defend his reputation. Court documents filed in August 2025 reveal that he lodged formal complaints against Jamiru under Sierra Leone’s Domestic Violence Act of 2007, citing intimidation and physical abuse. This legal action emphasizes his commitment to due process rather than evasion.
In response to public pressure, the Judiciary placed Justice Stevens on administrative leave and referred the matter to the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC). Legal experts note that this procedural step does not imply guilt but demonstrates the judiciary’s dedication to transparency and accountability. No official finding of misconduct has been made against the judge to date.
As the public continues to follow the case, opinion is increasingly shifting. What initially appeared as a young woman standing against a powerful figure now raises suspicions of a calculated smear campaign. The emerging evidence, combined with inconsistencies in Jamiru’s narrative, has left many Sierra Leoneans questioning her credibility.
With the matter unfolding in both legal and public spheres, a conclusive DNA test is widely viewed as the most definitive path to clarity, accountability, and justice. Media outlets, including DNA, are being called upon to responsibly report verified facts and document inconsistencies while highlighting that the case against Justice Stevens remains unproven.
This saga serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of trial by social media, where reputations can be irreparably damaged before the courts establish the truth. As the spotlight increasingly turns toward Jamiru, the nation watches closely, awaiting evidence-based resolution.
