Paternity Matter In Court Of Appeal… A Test Case For Sierra Leone’s Justice System

The Sierra Leone Court of Appeal is currently deliberating on a landmark case involving a contested DNA test in an estate dispute, marking the first time the appellate court is addressing the legal implications of DNA testing in the country.
The case arises from a challenge to the paternity of children born during the marriage of a deceased man; whose estate is now at the center of a legal battle. The children’s legitimacy and right to inherit are being questioned by an alleged sibling of the deceased, prompting a fierce legal argument between the parties.
Representing the applicants, Counsel E.A. Tarawallie Esq argued that the children were born in lawful wedlock during the subsistence of the marriage and that the deceased never denied paternity during his lifetime. He submitted that the deceased celebrated the children’s first, second, and eleventh birthdays and at no point raised doubts about their parentage. According to him, the issue of DNA testing was only raised one year after the man’s death, allegedly at the request of the deceased, though no evidence supports this claim.
Mr. Tarawallie maintained that there is currently no statute in Sierra Leone specifically addressing DNA testing in legal disputes, and warned the court against making decisions based on a law that “is not in existence.” He challenged the admissibility of internet sources cited by opposing counsel, stating that such references do not qualify as legal authorities.
He further questioned the legality and practicality of compelling supposed siblings of the deceased to provide DNA samples without establishing a clear biological link. “There is no legal provision that allows siblings to be tested against children in order to determine paternity,” he stated, calling the attempt both unprecedented and legally unfounded.
Tarawallie also raised concerns about the proposed DNA testing being conducted in Dubai, highlighting the financial burden involved and the lack of reciprocal arrangements for such a procedure. “The court should not operate on probabilities, but on established scientific and legal principles,” he submitted, adding that in the absence of a primary DNA sample from the deceased, any DNA evidence must be supported by clear proof of biological connection.
On the opposing side, Counsel T. Kamara Esq, representing the respondent, defended the application for a DNA test, describing it as the only method to uncover the “nearest or purest truth” regarding the children’s paternity. He argued that objections to the DNA request should raise serious concerns, as the test would apply equally to all parties.
Kamara pointed out that the respondent had submitted himself for DNA testing alongside the applicants and is equally at risk of being disqualified as a beneficiary or administrator of the estate if the results are unfavorable. “Truth is paramount,” he stressed, “and DNA is the only reliable way to ascertain it.”
He also referenced the trial court’s order for the DNA testing to be conducted in a country with access to expert scientific analysis, stating that the respondent was merely seeking clarity about the true beneficiaries of the estate.
However, Counsel Tarawallie accused the respondent of casting doubt on the same children he had initially introduced to the court as legitimate heirs of the deceased. He further alleged that the respondent’s actions were driven by a desire to exclude the children and “strip will render the estate penny-less.”
The matter was heard before a three-judge panel consisting of Justices Momoh-Jah Stevens, Justice Tonia Barnet and Justice Alfred Ganda. The case has been adjourned for ruling.
Legal observers say the ruling could set a significant precedent for how DNA testing is handled in inheritance disputes in Sierra Leone.