Silencing a Journalist: Parliamentary Ban Raises Alarm
Saturday, January 10, 2026, marks one year since parliamentary journalist Melvin Tejan Mansaray was indefinitely banned from accessing the Chamber and precincts of Sierra Leone’s Parliament at Tower Hill, a decision imposed unilaterally by the Speaker of Parliament, Solomon Segehpoh Thomas.
One year on, the ban remains firmly in place, with no resolution, no closure, and no clear path to redress an outcome that media rights advocates say represents a troubling stain on Sierra Leone’s democratic credentials and commitment to press freedom.
The indefinite ban was imposed on January 10, 2025, during a parliamentary sitting, when Speaker Thomas accused Melvin Tejan Mansaray of “insulting conduct,” including allegedly referring to Members of Parliament as “useless” and accusing the Speaker of rigging a parliamentary election. These allegations were announced on the floor of Parliament without any evidence being presented and without the journalist being afforded the right to respond before punishment was pronounced.
In a move widely criticised as arbitrary, the Speaker ordered Mansaray’s immediate removal from the parliamentary precincts, declaring: “This is my Chamber. I have the authority to allow you to be here or not.” The decision took effect instantly, effectively ending Mansaray’s ability to carry out his professional duties as a parliamentary correspondent.
Critically, the ban was enforced before any investigation was conducted an inversion of justice that contravenes basic principles of natural justice and procedural fairness.
Subsequent efforts by the Sierra Leone Parliamentary Press Gallery and the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists to secure a swift and professional resolution proved futile. Despite calls for the matter to be referred to the Independent Media Commission, which has the statutory mandate to handle media-related complaints, the Speaker declined to lodge any formal complaint with the regulator.
Instead, the case was controversially referred to Parliament’s Privileges and Ethics Committee. According to Mansaray, the process that followed was not only delayed but hostile. His lawyer was reportedly denied the opportunity to speak on his behalf, and Mansaray himself was restricted from reading his full statement. He was further pressured to issue apologies across multiple platforms, including radio, social media, and the bar of Parliament.
Although the Ethics Committee eventually tabled its report, a motion moved and seconded by MPs from the ruling Sierra Leone Peoples Party resulted in the report never being debated. With the parliamentary session now elapsed, the ban remains in effect, locked in a state of legal and procedural limbo.
The impact of the indefinite ban on Mansaray’s life and livelihood has been severe and far-reaching. Over the past year, he has lost multiple professional opportunities, including a research role with a Japanese academic, a contract as a parliamentary correspondent with a leading radio station, and the chance to serve as ECOWAS Parliament Local Press Coordinator.
His work with the African Parliamentary Press Network has been significantly constrained, while his popular parliamentary reporting platforms have suffered from lack of access to real-time proceedings. Economically, the ban has cut off key income streams, while the financial burden of maintaining a legal retainer in an unresolved matter continues to mount.
Beyond economics, Mansaray has described the ban as psychologically torturous and professionally crippling, arguing that while Sierra Leone prides itself on not imprisoning journalists, an indefinite ban that destroys a journalist’s livelihood is a prison of another kind.
Media advocates warn that the continued ban goes beyond one individual. It has created a chilling effect within the parliamentary press corps, discouraging robust reporting, critical analysis, and scrutiny of legislative affairs. Journalists now operate under the shadow of potential reprisal, undermining transparency and the public’s right to information.
The Media Foundation for West Africa has strongly criticised the Speaker’s actions, describing them as heavy-handed, arbitrary, and inimical to press freedom. The organisation has stressed that Parliament, as the nation’s law-making body, must itself be seen to uphold the rule of law and respect due process.
Despite the prolonged ordeal, Mansaray has remained resolute, vowing not to be silenced. He has acknowledged the solidarity and support received from local and international media organisations, civil society groups, legal practitioners, and concerned citizens at home and abroad.
He has renewed his call for an immediate and unconditional lifting of the ban, or at the very least, a fair, transparent, and independent process that accords him his constitutional rights under the 1991 Constitution of Sierra Leone, particularly those relating to freedom of expression and the role of the media in democratic governance.
As Sierra Leone continues to position itself as a democracy committed to openness and accountability, the unresolved case of Melvin Tejan Mansaray stands as a critical test. One year on, the question remains: can press freedom truly thrive where a journalist can be indefinitely banned without due process and forgotten in silence?
