A sharp contradiction over the whereabouts of Parliament Speaker Rt. Hon. Segepoh Solomon Thomas has added fresh drama to the ongoing Supreme Court proceedings challenging the controversial Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025.
The issue arose during Wednesday’s hearing before a five-member panel of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Komba Kamanda, after the Speaker’s legal representative, Hon. Hindolo Gevao Esq., reportedly told the Court that his client was unable to attend because he was suffering from diarrhoea.
The explanation, however, was subsequently challenged by Parliament, which issued a statement through its Public Relations Department describing the illness claim as “completely unfounded.”
According to Parliament, Speaker Thomas was not in Sierra Leone when the hearing took place but was instead on an official assignment in the Republic of Guinea.
The parliamentary statement said the Speaker had travelled to Conakry as head of a high-powered Sierra Leonean delegation to attend the State Opening of the 10th Legislature of the 5th Republic of Guinea.
Parliament further disclosed that Speaker Thomas departed Conakry for Freetown at 12:00 noon on Wednesday, following the official programme.
His departure, according to the statement, was marked by a full Guard-of-Honour mounted by the Guinean Republican Guard, followed by a standing ovation at the precincts of the National Assembly of Guinea.
He was also reportedly bid farewell by his Guinean counterpart, Hon. Dr. Dansa Kourouma, after leading the Sierra Leonean delegation during the official engagement.
The conflicting accounts have triggered questions over the circumstances surrounding the Speaker’s absence from the constitutional case, particularly because his counsel had presented illness as the reason for his non-attendance before the highest court in the land.
Parliament, however, maintained that the Speaker’s physical presence was not necessary for the proceedings, arguing that the State was properly represented before the Supreme Court.
The controversy comes against the backdrop of a major constitutional dispute concerning the passage of the Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025.
Speaker Thomas is listed as a defendant in the matter and was presiding over Parliament on 10 August 2026 when the Bill was declared passed amid a contentious sitting that followed the walkout of Members of Parliament from the opposition All People’s Congress (APC).
The Supreme Court is now examining whether Parliament satisfied the constitutional requirement for the passage of the Bill, particularly the two-thirds majority stipulated under Section 108(2)(b) of the 1991 Constitution.
The provision requires constitutional amendment bills to secure the support of at least two-thirds of the total membership of Parliament, translating to 100 Members in the current 149-member Parliament.
Among other proposed changes, the Constitutional Amendment Bill seeks to alter the presidential electoral threshold from the existing 55 per cent requirement to 50 per cent plus one vote.
It also proposes the return of Proportional Representation in parliamentary elections and seeks to introduce a requirement for women to occupy at least 30 per cent of executive positions within political parties.
The case has attracted significant national attention because of its potential implications for Sierra Leone’s electoral system, political representation and future presidential elections.
The proceedings have also entered a historic phase, with the Supreme Court allowing the hearing to be broadcast live on radio and television.
The live broadcast followed approval by the Chief Justice and has provided the public with unprecedented access to proceedings in a constitutional matter of considerable national importance.
As the legal arguments continue, the conflicting explanations surrounding the Speaker’s absence have introduced another contentious issue into an already closely watched case, with public attention now focused on the clarification of the circumstances that led to the two different accounts.