An analysis of how Sierra Leone’s rule of law was compromised when political influence trumped the legal process
Fatima Babih, EdD
In March 2025, Sierra Leone witnessed a troubling event that threatens the very foundation of its democracy and economic stability. Over 900 workers at Koidu Holdings Limited, a major diamond mining operation in the Kono District, staged what the company has deemed an illegal strike.
What started as a labor dispute quickly spiraled into a national controversy when the country’s First Lady, Fatima Jabbie Bio, who had directly involved herself in the matter, emerged as the leader of the strike, despite having no legal authority.
This post examines why this strike was unlawful under Sierra Leone’s legal framework and explores the dangerous precedent set by the First Lady’s interference in what should have been a structured labor dispute process.
The Koidu Holdings Context
Before diving into the controversy, let’s understand the context. Based on publicly available records, Koidu Holdings Limited, a subsidiary of Octea Limited, operates under a Mining Lease Agreement (MLA) signed with the Government of Sierra Leone in September 2010. This agreement, which runs until July 22, 2030 (with the option of a 15-year renewal), includes specific provisions including:
- Annual lease rent of $200,000 (increasing by 3% annually)
- Income tax of 35% on net profits
- Royalties of 8% on exceptional diamonds valued over $500,000 per stone
- Mandatory environmental compliance and community engagement
Profit Sharing with Local Stakeholders
Koidu Holding’s MLA includes a profit-sharing mechanism where the Kono community is entitled to a 10% share of the profits generated during each fiscal year. This profit share is distributed as follows,
- Kono District Council (3%),
- Koidu New Sembehun Town Council (2%), and
- Tankoro Chiefdom (5%).
This arrangement is to ensure that a portion of the mining profits directly benefits the local communities affected by the mining operations.
As a formal corporate entity operating under these legal terms, Koidu Holdings is subject to Sierra Leone’s labor laws, establishing clear procedures for addressing worker grievances.
The Labor Dispute
What Happened?In March 2025, workers at Koidu Holdings protested against the company’s wage conversion practices. Their primary grievance centered on the company’s use of an outdated exchange rate (Le6.50 to $1) for salary conversions, despite the official rate being approximately Le22 to $1, effectively reducing their real earnings.
However, instead of following legal channels, at the command of the country’s First Lady, Fatima Bio, a protest was staged, with Mrs. Bio as the leader.
The protest quickly escalated into an unauthorized strike. Reports indicate that the company’s property was vandalized. Mrs. Bio could be heard over a bullhorn, issuing threats against the company and promising that the workers would not return to work until her demands were met. The company claims that the strike significantly disrupted its operations. As a result of the strike, over 900 workers lost their jobs at Koidu Holdings.
The Legal Framework
Why was the strike unlawful?Sierra Leone has established a comprehensive legal framework for labor relations that the Koidu Holdings workers bypassed in this case. Here’s how the strike violated multiple laws:
Industrial Relations and Trade Union Act of 2023
This cornerstone legislation mandates specific procedures before workers can legally strike:
- Workers must submit formal grievances to management
- Negotiations must be conducted through legally recognized trade unions
- Prescribed dispute resolution mechanisms must be exhausted
- A 21-day notice must be provided before any strike action
According to the company, the Koidu Holdings workers did not follow any of these steps. The strike was spontaneous and lacked proper union representation or legal authorization.
Mines and Minerals Development Act, 2022 (Act No. 16 of 2023)
This act governs mineral operations in Sierra Leone and establishes obligations toward workers, communities, and the environment. It requires specific channels for addressing labor grievances in the mining sector, which were not utilized.
Companies Act, 2009: This legislation protects corporate entities from unauthorized interference while establishing corporate governance and labor practices standards. The direct intervention by a political figure (the First Lady) violated the principles of this law.
The Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991: Emphasizes,
- Section 5(2)(b): The rule of law must be upheld
- Sections 7 & 8: The government’s duty to provide social justice and secure workers’ rights
- Section 170: The supremacy of written laws and limits of authority for public office holders (including the First Lady)
The First Lady’s incitement of the workers to engage in a strike without union authority, ordering them not to return to work until she permitted it, and bypassing established legal processes, undermined these constitutional principles.
The First Lady’s Problematic Intervention: Fatima Bio’s interference in a labor dispute represents the most troubling aspect of this case. As Sierra Leone’s First Lady, she:
- Is not an elected official
- Holds no legal authority in industrial matters
- Is not a certified legal representative of the workers
- Has no standing in a labor dispute resolution process
Yet, reports indicate she directly influenced the workers, acting as a strike leader without legal authorization. She reportedly instructed workers not to return to work until she told them to do so, effectively usurping the role of legitimate labor representatives and sidelining appropriate government institutions.
Consequently, in May 2025, Koidu Holdings issued a legal notice to the First Lady, alleging unlawful interference and incitement leading to operational disruptions and significant financial losses. This notice could potentially lead to legal action against the First Lady, highlighting the serious legal implications of her actions.
The Devastating Consequences: This breakdown in the rule of law has far-reaching consequences:
- For the Workers: Over 900 Sierra Leoneans have lost their jobs in a country already struggling with high unemployment and severe economic hardship. Additionally, when workers engage in illegal strikes, it undermines their credibility and weakens their bargaining power. It creates distrust between labor and management, reduces public sympathy, and can jeopardize future negotiations, even when their concerns are legitimate.
- For the Company: Koidu Holdings has suffered operational downtime, financial losses, and reputational damage that may jeopardize its long-term viability in Sierra Leone, raising concerns about the stability of the nation’s economy.
- For the Nation: Foreign investors now view Sierra Leone as a high-risk environment where political influence can override legal agreements. This incident could deter future investment and economic growth, as it undermines the stability and predictability of the business environment in Sierra Leone. The country’s rule of law has been undermined.
A dangerous precedent has been set where political influence, not established process, determines contract outcomes. This precedent undermines the principles of fairness, transparency, and the rule of law in labor relations and sets a worrying example for future disputes.
What Should Have Happened
Legal pathways were available that could have protected the workers’ interests while respecting the rule of law: The workers could have,
- Submitted formal grievances through proper channels
- Engaged in a dispute resolution process with the Ministry of Labour
- Worked with their legally recognized union
- Followed the dispute resolution processes outlined in the Industrial Relations Act
The First Lady could have advocated for the workers’ rights through appropriate government channels, such as,
- Encouraging the Ministry of Labour to investigate the wage conversion issue
- Supporting the establishment of a formal mediation process
- Using her position to ensure transparency and fairness without directly interfering in the process.
The Path Forward: This incident serves as a wake-up call for Sierra Leone to strengthen the rule of law and prevent similar incidents in the future:
- Worker Education: Employees must be informed about their rights and responsibilities under labor laws, including proper grievance procedures.
- Institutional Integrity: Political figures like the First Lady must respect the boundaries of their positions and work through established laws and institutions to maintain the integrity of the nation’s governance.
- Corporate Accountability: Companies operating in Sierra Leone must adhere to fair labor practices while following proper dispute resolution processes.
- Legal Enforcement: The government must enforce existing laws consistently, regardless of who is involved.
The Koidu Holdings strike, and the First Lady’s interference represent a dangerous departure from the rule of law in Sierra Leone. When political influence overrides legal processes, everyone loses: workers, companies, and the nation.
Sierra Leone must demonstrate its commitment to the rule of law as it works to attract investment and build economic stability. Justice requires process; without it, we invite chaos that undermines peace, prosperity, and national progress.
The path forward must prioritize strengthening legal institutions, educating stakeholders about their rights and responsibilities, and ensuring that no one, regardless of position, stands above the law.
This analysis is based on publicly available information about the Koidu Holdings dispute as of May 2025. The author advocates adherence to legal processes in labor disputes to protect worker rights and national stability.
MAMA SALONE ~ Lioness of the West Coast 