22/06/2026
A critical reflection on paramount chieftaincy election counting and result declaration procedures observed by Elections Observer Network, Sierra Leone(EON-SL).
Having observed several paramount chieftaincy elections sometimes as Chief Observer or Head of Delegation, I have become increasingly concerned about the post-election realities that emerge within chiefdoms once these elections have been concluded. While the ECSL's mandate is to conduct free, fair, and credible elections, I believe our responsibility should also extend to ensuring that our electoral processes and procedures contribute to long-term peace, unity, social cohesion, and effective traditional governance.
In my view, the ultimate success of a paramount chieftaincy election should not be measured solely by the declaration of a winner. Rather, it should also be reflected in whether the paramount chief-elect is able to govern a united chiefdom where relationships remain intact and the entire community is willing to work together for peace, progress, and sustainable development.
Having critically examined the current counting and result declaration procedures applicable to paramount chieftaincy elections, I strongly believe that this aspect of the electoral process deserves careful review.
Using the recently concluded Sahn Malen and then Mano Sakrim paramount chieftaincy elections, in which Kebbie and Kemoh Seiwoh Fawundo emerged victorious, as a case study, one issue became particularly evident. Under the current system, ballots are counted, and results are announced at each polling station. Since polling stations are organized around sections of the chiefdom, the detailed polling station results make it relatively easy for candidates, candidate agents and their supporters to identify which communities overwhelmingly supported them and which did not.This undermines the principle of secrecy already.
This creates unintended consequences. During election campaigns, candidates invest considerable time, effort, and resources engaging with communities and often receive assurances of electoral support. When polling station results reveal that certain communities voted differently from those expectations, the outcome can generate disappointment, resentment, mistrust, and, in some instances, retaliation, exclusion, or strained relationships after the election.
Unlike national elections, paramount chieftaincy elections are conducted within closely connected communities where people are bound together by family ties, traditions, cultural values, and long-standing social relationships. Once the election is over, everyone must continue to live and work together under the leadership of the newly elected paramount chief. In such an environment, preserving community cohesion is just as important as ensuring electoral transparency.
From my experience in observing several paramount chieftaincy elections, I have observed that announcing detailed polling station results has, on some occasions, contributed to divisions within chiefdoms. Communities become labelled as "those who voted for the winner" and "those who voted against the winner." Such perceptions have created lasting mistrust, weakened social cohesion, and made inclusive leadership more difficult for newly elected Paramount Chiefs.
This is not to suggest that transparency should be compromised. Electoral transparency remains fundamental to public confidence and the credibility of the electoral process. However, there is room to explore whether the ECSL can achieve the same level of transparency while reducing unnecessary post-election tensions.
One possible option would be to consider consolidating all ballot counts at a single central counting venue after the close of polls and announcing only the final chiefdom results, rather than declaring results at each individual polling station. Such an approach could preserve transparency and accountability through robust reconciliation procedures, audit mechanisms, and legally accessible polling station records while reducing the likelihood of communities being publicly identified according to their voting patterns.
The objective would not be to reduce transparency but to strengthen post-election reconciliation, promote inclusive leadership, and create an environment in which the paramount chief-elect can govern without unnecessary community divisions.
As the commission continues to improve its electoral processes, I believe the time has come to initiate a policy discussion on whether the current counting and result declaration procedures for paramount chieftaincy elections remain the most appropriate for the unique cultural, social, and governance context of traditional leadership elections.
Ultimately, the Electoral Commission's success should not end with the Provincial Secretary formally declaring the winner. It should also be reflected in creating an electoral environment that enables the successful candidate to govern in peace, foster reconciliation, strengthen community cohesion, and unite the chiefdom for the benefit of all its people.
The true measure of a successful paramount chieftaincy election is not simply that a winner has been declared, but that the electoral process leaves behind a chiefdom that remains united, reconciled, and prepared to move forward under the leadership of its newly elected Paramount Chief.
Samuel Patrick Mattia
Executive Director - EON
Mobile: +232 34 210118
