Zainab Sheriff Sentenced to 4 Years, 2 Months for Incitement
By: James Kamara-Manneh
Freetown Principal Magistrate Court has sentenced Zainab Yabu Sheriff to four years and two months’ imprisonment after finding her guilty of incitement and threatening language.
Presiding over the matter on Tuesday, 14 April 2026, Magistrate Mustapha Briama Jah of Court No.1 ruled that the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt. He ordered that the sentence run consecutively.
Sheriff was arraigned on two counts incitement contrary to law and threatening language contrary to Section 3(2) of the Public Order Act of 1965. The charges stem from statements she allegedly made on 31 January 2026 at the Brima Attouga Mini Stadium in Freetown, where she was accused of inciting violence against individuals accused of rigging elections.
In a 21-page judgment, Magistrate Jah said the accused pleaded not guilty, thereby placing the burden of proof on the prosecution. He emphasized that the court must acquit where reasonable doubt exists but convict where evidence is sufficient.
The prosecution opened its case with testimony from DPC 13164 Sheku Turay of the Cyber Crime Unit, Criminal Investigation Department (CID). Turay told the court that during routine online monitoring, officers discovered a video of the accused on Facebook platforms “Born2Blog” and “Liberty Television Online.” The video was downloaded onto a pen drive and later tendered as evidence.
According to the court, attempts were made to invite Sheriff for questioning, but these were unsuccessful. A second prosecution witness, DPC 18391, also testified, corroborating Turay’s account.
Magistrate Jah dismissed arguments by defence counsel Roland Wright that the charges were defective, ruling that they were properly framed under Section 49(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act of 2024. He further rejected claims that there was no complainant, stating that the Inspector General of Police, representing the State, was a valid complainant. He cited the 1954 case of Mohamed versus Commissioner of Police to support this position.
The magistrate also held that the unsworn statement made by the accused carried little evidential weight, as it was not subjected to cross-examination. He noted that Sheriff did not challenge the authenticity of the video evidence presented.
Delivering his final ruling, Magistrate Jah concluded that the prosecution had established its case and accordingly found Sheriff guilty on both counts.
During mitigation, Sheriff declined to make any statement. Her defence counsel left sentencing to the discretion of the court. State prosecutor Yusuf Isaac Sesay urged the court to impose a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment or, alternatively, a fine.
The court subsequently imposed a custodial sentence of four years and two months.
