Three leaders of Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front were convicted of various charges including mutilation, terrorism, rape, forced marriage, sexual slavery, and the enlistment of child soldiers by the Special Court for Sierra Leone. The Special Court for Sierra Leone was set up jointly by the government of Sierra Leone and the United Nations to try leaders of the 1992-2002 civil war. Five other leaders were previously convicted but in the most recent trial, Issa Sesay, the leader of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), Morris Kallon, a battlefield commander, and Augustine Gbao, the RUF’s Chief of Security, were convicted of between 14 and 18 counts of crimes against humanity.

A sentencing date has not been set. In accordance with the polices of most countries the Court does not have the power to impose the death penalty and sentences must be for a specific number of years.

The stories are horrendous. Prisoners were given the choice, according to the Associate Press of having long sleeves or short sleeves, i.e. having their arms cut off at their shoulders or at their wrists. Women were forced to marry revolutionary leaders. After the revolution their communities refused to take them back so they were forced to stay with their “husbands.”

To convict the eight of these crimes Sierra Leone had to invent new crimes since the charged offenses did not previously exist. For example, while mutilation may have been against the law in Sierra Leone, there was no law making it a crime against humanity.

The acts were horrendous and few would doubt that the three should be put away for a long time. But questions are raised. Certainly under the US Constitution the charges would be considered ex post facto. We would find it an abuse of power to create crimes or raise possible penalties after the crimes had been committed. We would find it obnoxious to convict people and to sentence them to greater periods of imprisonment than they were eligible to receive when they committed the crime. We would say they did not have proper notice.

The second question is when do we convict revolutionary leaders for political acts. If the United States had lost the revolution should George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson been hung for treason. (Yes it probably would have happened.) If the north lost the Civil War should Abraham Lincoln been hung for the crimes at Andersonville. And more recently should George Bush be charged with crimes against humanity for Abu Ghraib. Perhaps in the case of torture or crimes against humanity it is appropriate. The crimes were atrocious. Can we as human beings tolerate such.

On the other hand in the words of Thomas Jefferson, “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another . . . it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Should Jefferson have been hung by his neck for writing this?