The Lawyers’ Society has raised concerns over the recent swearing-in of a tribunal set up to investigate alleged misconduct by Justice Allan B. Halloway, questioning both the delay in the process and the eligibility of the tribunal members.
In a press statement dated 10 January 2026, the Society acknowledged that Julius Maada Bio had sworn in the tribunal but noted that it took more than three months after Justice Halloway’s suspension for the panel to be constituted. According to the Society, this delay could have implications for fair trial rights and due process.
The Lawyers’ Society further argued that the three individuals appointed to the tribunal do not meet the requirements set out in Section 137(5)(a) of the 1991 Constitution. The provision states that members of such a tribunal must be persons qualified to hold, or who have previously held, office as a Justice of the Supreme Court.
In its explanation, the Society said one of the appointees, Justice A.M. Bangura, is currently a sitting Supreme Court justice and therefore does not fall within the category of persons “qualified to hold” or “who have held” the office, as he is neither a prospective nor a retired justice. The statement also raised concerns about the eligibility of the two other members, Oladipo Robin-Mason and Francis Gabbidon, saying both are believed to have exceeded the mandatory retirement age of 65 for judges under the Constitution.
While the Society welcomed President Bio’s public call for “a just and decisive hearing,” it warned that proceeding with a tribunal whose members may be constitutionally ineligible could undermine the rule of law and public confidence in the process.
The Lawyers’ Society has urged the Office of the President to reconsider the appointments to ensure that the investigation complies fully with constitutional provisions. It stressed that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.
