LAJ's Lawyer Challenges Court Summons, Citing WhatsApp Service Failure

LAJ's Lawyer Challenges Court Summons, Citing WhatsApp Service Failure

The legal counsel representing prominent Sierra Leonean musician Alhaji Amadu Bah (professionally known as LAJ) has formally contested the validity of the court summons that precipitated the issuance of a bench warrant for his arrest. 

This legal maneuver follows the non-appearance of Mr. Bah and his co-defendant, Ibrahim Koroma, before the Bo Magistrate Court regarding allegations of defamatory remarks directed at the Mayor of Kenema City.

In correspondence directed to the District Assistant Registrar of the Bo High Court, the law firm Madieu Sesay & Associates asserted that their clients were not personally served with the criminal summonses. 

The defense argues that personal service is a mandatory procedural requirement under the Criminal Procedure Act of 2024. Furthermore, the defense contends that the complainant's reliance on WhatsApp messaging for service is legally unrecognized and insufficient to establish jurisdiction.

Counsel further noted that both defendants reside in Freetown, which falls outside the immediate jurisdiction of the Bo Magistrate Court. They argued that no attempts were made to facilitate service through the appropriate local magisterial channels. 

Consequently, the defense maintains that any proceedings initiated without adhering to these statutory service requirements are "irregular, invalid, and of no legal effect."

The defense has petitioned the court to stay all further proceedings until lawful personal service is executed in strict accordance with the law. The legal team emphasized that adherence to these procedural standards is essential to ensuring a fair trial and upholding the integrity of the criminal justice system.

The underlying litigation involves allegations that Mr. Bah made insulting and abusive remarks during a performance in Bo. Following the defendants' failure to appear on Friday, Magistrate Solomon James Brima issued a bench warrant and adjourned the matter to Wednesday, April 1, 2026.

This procedural challenge introduces significant legal questions regarding the rights of defendants and the necessity of strict compliance with service protocols in criminal litigation.