Interactive Map: Mass Graves and Other Sites

Mass Graves and Other Sites

In circumstances of war the dead all too often do not receive a standard burial. People die on territorywhere they are not known. Other times it may be too risky to perform the appropriate rituals and ceremonies. Occasionally the perpetrators simply wish to get rid of the bodies and “dump” them. All these circumstances result in the creation of “mass graves”.

Despite its limited resources the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission sent investigators to most districts in Sierra Leone in order to identify mass graves. These missions were not meant to produce an exhaustive survey of mass graves in the country. The goal was rather to give Sierra Leoneans a sense of what the conflict had wrought in different parts of the country. Behind every mass grave there is a tragic story.

The Commission also asked its investigators to identify certain other sites “that have a story to tell.” These included sites of mass killings, executions, tortures, amputations, etc.  

A general overview of all the sites the Commission identified in the districts can be found in the “Table of Mass Graves and Other Sites” contained in Part Three of the Commission's Report on Mass Graves and Other Sites, and shown above on the Mass Graves and Other Sites map. However, the Commission also provides a full account of certain of the stories behind those sites in the pages that follow. These stories have been chosen with the aim of illustrating the different circumstances which gave rise to the mass graves. 

While the list is principally illustrative in nature of certain violations, certain conclusions and recommendations have been made on the basis of the information collected, in particular with regard to the preservation of such sites. 

Most persons consulted by the Commission suggested that the dead be remembered through some form of community and symbolic reparations.

The Commission recommends that the Government of Sierra Leone and the NGO community consider the erection of basic community facilities in consultation with affected communities. Such facilities should be dedicated to the victims of human rights atrocities.

Simple shrines and monuments should be constructed at the more significant mass graves and other sites in consultation with local communities.  

Memorialisation

Establishing a successful memorial in Sierra Leone requires the integration of traditional and cultural methods of memorialisation. (See also, Memorials and Transitional Justice in the Final Report.) 

In discussions with the Commission, Sierra Leoneans emphasised that they are a hopeful people who like to remember the positive and not dwindle on the negative. Emblematic of this fact is that in many districts the dead are buried outside the town and that the area where they are buried provokes general fear. A stone is usually brought back to town from the area of burial to signify that the spirit of the dead person will not be forgotten. That stone is then placed in a small shrine that houses the spirit tokens of other deceased. In other words, the positive aspect of an event generally perceived as negative, is preserved. In creating new memorials, ideas should be discussed that would honour this scheme: perhaps through the reclamation of space once violated through the conversion of a site of mass atrocity into a school, a museum or a law court.

While memorialising should honour traditional and cultural methods, the magnitude of atrocities and human rights violations committed during Sierra Leone’s decade-long civil war makes this conflict a unique event that requires unique treatment. The raw violence and trauma of an event such as this that affects every stratum of society over an extended period of time cannot and should not be forgotten. 

One of the most astounding ideas for a memorial came from some of the key stakeholders in the conflict in Sierra Leone: the perpetrators. A group of perpetrators spoke of a memorial in which perpetrators would leave imprints of their hands on a cement wall erected in a public space (maybe around the Cotton Tree) signifying a tacit agreement with themselves, with other perpetrators and with the nation and the world that they will never use these hands again to pick up a weapon and strike a fellow human being. Such a memorial brings together many of the most powerful aspects of memorialisation. It incorporates civic engagement among key stakeholders (perpetrators and, through the agreement, victims, future generations and other humans) and links the past (their history in the conflict) to the present and to the future (their agreement to not pick up arms again). 

Mass grave sites and other sites such as massacre and torture sites serve as powerful reminders of the abuses of the past and the need to ensure that they never occur again. Steps must be taken to preserve the most significant sites in all districts.

Some Stories Told to the Commission during the Investigations of Mass Graves and Other Sites

Bonthe Site 1
One of the inhabitants of Tihun Town, Joseph Yanguba, made a statement to the Commission in which he related the same story of the RUF attack on Tihun. The following is an extract from his testimony: