Freetown, Sierra Leone – Legal representatives of Alhaji Amadu Bah (alias LAJ) and Ibrahim Koroma (alias Prezo Koroma) have issued a formal challenge against the validity of criminal proceedings initiated against their clients at the Bo Magistrate Court, arguing that service of the summonses via WhatsApp is irregular and without legal effect.
The Freetown-based law firm, Madieu Sesay & Associates, raised the objection in a letter dated March 27, 2026, addressed to the District Assistant Registrar of the Bo High Court, with a copy to the Presiding Magistrate. The firm contends that the criminal summonses in the matter of Thomas Baio v. Alhaji Amadu Bah (alias LAJ) & Ibrahim Koroma (alias Prezo Koroma), referenced as PCS/26, were never personally served on their clients as required by law.
According to the correspondence, the defendants first became aware of the proceedings through reports circulating on social media. The lawyers further noted that a legal practitioner representing the complainant had filed an Affidavit of Service in the court registry purporting to confirm service on the defendants via WhatsApp. The clients, however, categorically state they never received any such summonses through the messaging application.
The firm drew attention to Sections 21 and 22 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2024, which they say expressly mandate personal service of criminal summonses on a defendant. Where a defendant resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the issuing court, the Act further provides that service must be effected through the magistrate within whose jurisdiction the defendant resides.
At all material times, the lawyers stated, their clients resided in Freetown, in the Western Area of Sierra Leone, and were not within the jurisdiction of the Bo Magistrate Court. No attempt was made to effect personal service upon them, nor was any application made to route service through the appropriate magistrate in Freetown, the firm argued.
The Affidavit of Service filed in the registry purporting to confirm service via WhatsApp was therefore described by the solicitors as irregular, invalid, and of no legal effect. They submitted that any proceedings commenced or continued on the basis of such purported service are a nullity.
The firm called on the Registrar to bring the irregularity to the immediate attention of the Presiding Magistrate and to draw the court’s attention to the mandatory service requirements under the Criminal Procedure Act 2024. They urged that no further steps be taken in the proceedings until lawful personal service has been effected on their clients in strict compliance with the law.
