© The Au ho (s) 2025. Published by AMO Publishe . This is an Open Access a icle dis ibu ed unde
he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License (h ps://
c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which pe mi s un es ic ed euse, dis ibu ion, and
ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
Pe o ming Pa liamen : Execu i e Sc ip ing, Symbolic In e ac ion,
and he Social Li e o Legisla ion in Sie a Leone
Mohamed Gib il Sesay
Depa men o Sociology and Social Wo k, Fou ah Bay College,
Uni e si y o Sie a Leone, Sie a Leone
Moiwa Momoh
Depa men o Sociology and Social Wo k, Fou ah Bay College,
Uni e si y o Sie a Leone, Sie a Leone
A icle His o y:
Recei ed: 23.08.2025 Re ised: 22.09.2025 Accep ed: 24.09.2025 Published:
01.10.2025
Abs ac
This a icle examines he dynamics o pa liamen a y pe o mance in Sie a Leone’s 4 h and 5 h
Pa liamen s (2012–2023), ocusing on he in e play o o mal ules, in o mal p ac ices, and symbolic
pe o mances. Mo ing beyond amewo ks o neopa imonialism, elec o al inancing, and co up ion,
he s udy explo es how execu i e sc ip ing, i ualized de e ence, and symbolic ac s such as walkou s,
silences, and applause s uc u ed legisla i e li e. D awing on heo ies o symbolic in e ac ionism and
in o mal ins i u ions, i demons a es how pa liamen a y beha iou o en e lec ed shadowboxing a he
han subs an i e delibe a ion, c ea ing an ins i u ional cul u e ma ked by dis us , agile alliances, and
i ualized obedience. The analysis highligh s he limi s o colonial-e a p ocedu al legacies when
con on ed wi h pos colonial in o mal logic o loyal y and su i al. I a gues ha Sie a Leone’s
pa liamen unc ions less as a delibe a i e policy a ena han as a con es ed s age o pe o mance, whe e
MPs na iga e a alis ic ou comes h ough make-belie p ac ices ha signal loyal y, secu e su i al, ye
e ode ins i u ional c edibili y.
Keywo ds: Sie a Leone, Pa liamen , Execu i e sc ip ing, In o mal ins i u ions, Poli ical pe o mance,
Neopa imonialism.
Sugges ed ci a ion: Sesay, M.G., & Momoh, M. (2025). Pe o ming Pa liamen : Execu i e Sc ip ing,
Symbolic In e ac ion, and he Social Li e o Legisla ion in Sie a Leone. Eu opean Jou nal o Theo e ical and
Applied Sciences, 3(5), 138-150. h ps://doi.o g/10.59324/ej as.2025.3(5).15
In oduc ion
Wha makes a pa liamen unc ion - o ail - is
mo e han w i en ules o elec o al a i hme ic. I
is also he e e yday, o en in isible,
cho eog aphy o in e ac ion among i s membe s.
In Sie a Leone, he 4 h and 5 h Pa liamen s
(2012–2023) p o ide a s iking case o how
legisla i e beha iou is shaped no only by
o mal s uc u es, bu also by in e pe sonal us ,
symbolic ac s, ac ional alliances, and unw i en
no ms o poli ical conduc . Cen al o his is a
cul u e o cogni i e sc ip ing aligned wi h
pe o ma i e de e ence, whe e MPs an icipa e
and pe o m he execu i e’s p e e ences. This
a icle examines how such in o mal and
symbolic elemen s a e s uc u ed legisla i e
p ac ice ac oss wo con as ing pa liamen a y
e ms. I explo es how MPs na iga ed c oss-
pa y in e ac ion, commi ee wo k, pa y loyal y,
and leade ship s uggles - o en in ways ha
s ain o mimic o mal p ocedu e. To do so, i
b ings oge he Symbolic In e ac ionism,
In o mal Ins i u ions Theo y, and Ins i u ional
Cul u e as analy ical lenses o unde s anding
how poli ics is pe o med, nego ia ed, and
some imes pa alyzed in he legisla i e chambe .
The 4 h Pa liamen , domina ed by he All-
People’s Cong ess (APC), p ojec ed cohe ence
h ough cen alized con ol and igid pa y
hie a chy, bu s i led plu alism in he p ocess. By
con as , he 5 h Pa liamen eme ged om a
igh ly con es ed elec ion wi h a nea -e en spli
be ween he APC and he Sie a Leone People’s
Pa y (SLPP), plus smalle pa ies. This balance
c ea ed s uc u al po en ial o collabo a ion bu
in p ac ice e ealed he agili y o us , he
e osion o ins i u ional no ms, and he
pe o ma i e na u e o powe s uggles.
Leade ship con es s, walkou s, and commi ee
b eakdowns became i uals o con on a ion,
placing symbolic posi ioning a he han legali y
a he cen e o pa liamen a y li e.
Much o he exis ing schola ship on A ican
legisla u es has ocused ou wa d, emphasizing
hei ela ionship wi h he elec o a e and
measu ing ep esen a i eness and
esponsi eness (Ma es, Appiah-Nyamekye
Sanny, & Aikins, 2024). These s udies igh ly ask
whe he legisla o s e lec popula aspi a ions, o
how e hnic p e e ences in luence elec ions
(Kandeh 2003) bu hey a ely examine he
in e nal mechanisms o powe and meaning
wi hin pa liamen a y ins i u ions hemsel es.
Whe e schola s ha e u ned inwa d, he
dominan amewo k has been
neopa imonialism, which explains A ican
poli ical ins i u ions as ex ensions o pa onage,
clien elism, and eli e ba gaining (E dmann &
Engel, 2007; Chabal & Daloz, 1999; Lindbe g,
2003). In Ghana, Bob-Millia (2012) and
Acheampong (2021) show how ac ionalism and
clien elis ic ies shape pa liamen a y ca ee s,
while Ichino and Na han (2022) demons a e
how pa y p ima ies hemsel es ep oduce
clien elis ic logics. This s udy acknowledges
hese insigh s bu goes beyond hem. Ra he
han ea ing neopa imonialism only as a mac o-
s uc u e, i u ns inwa d o he chambe o show
how in o mal ules and symbolic ges u es
cons i u e a pa imonial mic o-poli ics o
execu i e sc ip ing - whe e powe is enac ed
h ough silences, walkou s, applause, and bodily
pe o mance, no only h ough pa on–clien
ne wo ks ou side he legisla u e.
Ano he s and o esea ch emphasizes he
ma e ial and inancial dimensions o pa y–
pa liamen ela ions. A iola e al. (2022),
Dema es (2022), Ko e (2017), Wahman and
Seebe g (2022) and La ali (2017) highligh how
elec o al campaigns and pa liamen a y su i al
depend on MPs’ abili y o mobilize esou ces
and con ibu e o pa y and pa imonial
machines. Lindbe g and Mo ison (2008)
simila ly ame elec o al ou comes as d i en by
esou ce exchange. While hese analyses
illumina e how money s uc u es poli ics, his
a icle shows how in Sie a Leone pa y–
pa liamen a y ela ions we e enac ed less
h ough inancial lows han h ough symbolic
pe o mances o i ualized de e ence,
cho eog aphed applause, and sc ip ed silence,
and how hese pe o mances secu ed MPs’
loyal y in he eyes o pa y eli es, pa icula ly
unde he shadow o Sec ion 77(k). In his sense,
in e ac ional pe o mances o en complemen ed
and some imes e en subs i u ed o inancial
con ibu ions as he cu ency o su i al.
Classic accoun s o A ican poli ics ha e also
ea ed co up ion as cen al o domina ion, a
mechanism and so bond ha ies eli es
oge he (Reno, 1995; B a on & an de Walle,
1997; Lema chand & Legg, 1972). Such analyses
cap u e how co up ion p o ides he glue o
pa imonial ne wo ks. This s udy d aws om
ha aming, bu shi s ocus on o he o ms o
bonding and hei agili y. In Sie a Leone’s
Pa liamen , us , di e ence, and pe o ma i e
obedience ope a ed as symbolic cu encies ha
s uc u ed inclusion and exclusion. Ye , as will
be demons a ed, he 5 h Pa liamen e ealed
hei limi s: walkou s, i ualized e usals, and
hea ical dissen show how hese bonds could
collapse e en when pa onage and co up ion
channels emained in ac .
Alongside hese pe spec i es, o he schola ship
eminds us ha A ican pa liamen s ope a e
unde o mal ules oo ed in colonial legacies o
ins i u ional design and poli ical cul u e (Opalo,
2019). Pa liamen a y p ocedu es, modes o
add ess, and leade ship i uals e ain he imp in
o Wes mins e o mali y. Ye as Helmke and
Le i sky (2004) a gue, in o mal ins i u ions
equen ly o e ide o e-sc ip hese ules. Sie a
Leone’s Pa liamen exempli ies his dual logic:
inhe i ed i uals o p ocedu e coexis ed wi h
in o mal ules ancho ed in pa y loyal y,
symbolic ges u es, and execu i e sc ip ing.
These in o mal logics did no simply unde mine
o mal ules; hey anima ed hei e y ope a ion,
p oducing a hyb id a ena whe e colonial esidues
o o mali y and pos colonial in en ions o
in o mali y in e locked o shape pa liamen a y
p ac ice.
By u ning inwa d o examine how in a-
pa liamen a y ela ionships we e pe o med,
sc ip ed, and en o ced, his a icle b ings in o
ocus he symbolic, pe o ma i e, and
p ocedu al dynamics ha s uc u ed Sie a
Leone’s legisla u e. I mo es beyond exis ing
emphases on execu i e dominance o b oad
go e nance ailu es (Abdullah, 2004; Reno,
1995) o e eal pa liamen as an (in) o mally
dis inc a ena whose in e nal poli ics di ec ly
shaped wide go e nance ajec o ies. In doing
so, i ad ances a c i ical a gumen : o unde s and
how Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen eally wo ked, we
mus u n o i s social li e - he ways MPs buil
alliances, s aged loyal y, esis ed exclusion, and
enac ed au ho i y. Legisla i e e ec i eness, in
his aming, is no simply a ma e o ou pu s o
cons i u ional design, bu o meaning-making
wi hin a con es ed ins i u ional cul u e.
In his sense, Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen could be
unde s ood as a space o execu i e sc ip ing,
whe e legisla i e ac ion is less abou delibe a ion
in any subs an i e sense and mo e abou
ehea sed lines pe o med unde he execu i e
gaze. Wha passed o deba e o en esembled
shadow boxing - ges u es o con es a ion
wi hou he possibili y o eal impac . Ci il
socie y obse e s, in u n, equen ly ead hese
pe o mances as uncon incing, a hollow hea e
o delibe a ion ha ne e pe suaded i s
audience. F om a Symbolic In e ac ionis
pe spec i e, such ac s can be seen as in alid
pe o mances: MPs wen h ough he mo ions
o pa liamen a y p ac ice, bu he i uals ca ied
li le c edibili y as au hen ic exe cises in
lawmaking o ep esen a ion.
Ye , wi hin his hollowed-ou space, MPs we e
no passi e. They uned hemsel es o he
disposi ions o wha hey o en saw as a alis ic
ou comes - ou comes al eady o eclosed by
execu i e p e e ence o pa y dec ee. Thei oom
o maneu e ing was na ow, bu no
meaningless. Many pa icipa ed in wha migh be
called he make-belie o pa liamen : a con es ed
ye alid p ocess in which hey could a leas
inse ges u es, delays, walkou s, o applause ha
signaled hei p esence in he game. They
g umbled unde he weigh o inau hen ici y,
ecognizing he limi s o hei ole, bu saw
su i al in playing along. To endu e, MPs ea ed
pa liamen a y li e as a pe o mance ha had o
be shown - an enac ed i ual o belonging,
de e ence, and esis ance, all a once.
Theo e ical F amewo k
To unpack how Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen
ope a ed benea h he su ace o o mal ules, his
a icle d aws on h ee o e lapping heo e ical
adi ions: Symbolic In e ac ionism, In o mal
Ins i u ions Theo y, and he concep o
Ins i u ional Cul u e. These amewo ks
oge he o e a g ea lens o unde s anding
how legisla i e ou comes a e shaped by
meanings, pe o mances, and unw i en codes o
conduc , as hey a e by s uc u e and p ocedu e.
Symbolic In e ac ionism
Roo ed in he wo k o Geo ge He be Mead
and de eloped u he by He be Blume (1969)
and E ing Go man (1959), Symbolic
In e ac ionism cen e s he idea ha social li e is
cons uc ed h ough ace- o- ace in e ac ion and
sha ed meanings. Applied o pa liamen a y
se ings, i asks: how do MPs de ine and pe o m
hei oles? Wha ges u es - speeches, walkou s,
silences - signal loyal y, dissen , o c edibili y? In
Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen , whe e ins i u ional
unce ain y and poli ical con es a ion we e
equen , symbolic ac ions ca ied ou sized
impo ance. Fo example, boyco s, commi ee
wi hd awals, and o mal displays o uni y o en
s ood in o eal legisla i e engagemen .
Pa liamen , h ough his lens, becomes mo e
han jus a place o delibe a ion. I is also a
symbolic s age whe e ac o s pe o m au ho i y,
hie a chy, and opposi ion - bo h o hei pee s
and he wa ching public.
In o mal Ins i u ions Theo y
Whe e Symbolic In e ac ionism ocuses on
mic o-le el in e ac ion, In o mal Ins i u ions
Theo y (Helmke & Le i sky, 2004) explains how
powe is s uc u ed h ough unw i en no ms
and pa allel ule sys ems. E dmann and Engel
(2007) desc ibe hese sys ems as neopa imonial,
whe e pe sonal loyal y, a he han bu eauc a ic
a ionali y, unde pins ins i u ional unc ion.
Such sys ems os e cogni i e sc ip ing, whe e
legisla i e ac o s p e-emp i ely align
con ibu ions o he p esiden ’s pe cei ed
desi es, and in he p ocess ans o m Pa liamen
om a checking ins i u ion in o a si e o he
legisla i e sc ip ing o execu i e will. This
endency is ein o ced by cons i u ional
p o isions such as Sec ion 77(k), which
empowe s pa y leade s - o en he p esiden
himsel - o igge he expulsion o MPs who
de ia e om he pa y line. This amewo k
helps us see ha legisla i e deadlock o en has
less o do wi h p ocedu al ambigui y and mo e
o do wi h compe ing in o mal allegiances and
eli e ba gaining ailu es. In many A ican
democ acies - including Sie a Leone - hese
in o mal ules o en o e ide o mal law. MPs
may o e acco ding o execu i e sc ip ing
en o ced h ough in o mal sanc ions, a he han
easoned deba e.
Du ing he 4 h Pa liamen , in o mal no ms
ein o ced pa y dominance and discou aged
open dissen . In he 5 h Pa liamen , lacking a
clea majo i y, in o mal ins i u ions - a he han
enabling lexible coali ion-building - became
si es o b eakdown, as no sha ed no ms could
sus ain us ac oss pa y lines. Pa onage
ne wo ks, in e nal ac ions, and pe sonalis ic
ba gaining o en eplaced anspa en
delibe a ion.
Ins i u ional Cul u e
A hi d necessa y lens is ins i u ional cul u e - he
se o embedded, o en unspoken, no ms ha
go e n how people beha e in each ins i u ional
se ing. Ma ch and Olsen’s (1984) concep o he
“logic o app op ia eness” explains how ac o s
beha e no based pu ely on a ional calcula ion,
bu on wha hey pe cei e as p ope o i ing in
hei ins i u ional en i onmen .
Pie e Bou dieu’s (1991) concep o habi us
complemen s his, showing how indi iduals
in e nalize ins i u ional expec a ions and
embody hem in speech, mo emen , and
pos u e. In Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen , his
cul u e mani es ed in coded de e ence o
senio i y, he o ical cho eog aphy, and he
ma ginaliza ion o “non-con o ming” ac o s.
The cul u e o plena y sessions o en ewa ded
asse i e pe o mance and loyal epe i ion o
pa y lines, and a deepe de e ence o execu i e
sc ip ing, in which pa liamen a y habi us is
shaped by wha he p esiden wan s a icula ed,
no wha cons i uen s ha e manda ed.
Bob-Millia ’s (2012) analysis o Ghana’s
Pa liamen shows ha commi ee powe ,
isibili y in deba e, and leade ship access a e no
simply ea ned h ough o mal mechanisms, bu
a e deeply media ed by cul u al cues, symbolic
capi al, and ac ional alignmen . The same
pa e ns we e e iden in Sie a Leone, especially
in how pe o mance and pa y p oximi y
de e mined c edibili y and legisla i e in luence.
Conside ed join ly, hese h ee amewo ks
illumina e he co e a gumen o his a icle: ha
Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen was go e ned as much
by cul u e, pe o mance, and in o mal alignmen
as by law o p ocedu e. They guide ou eading
o indings no as de ia ions om ule, bu as he
eal social in as uc u e o legisla i e li e.
Me hodology
A quali a i e case s udy design was adop ed,
app op ia e o explo ing how con ex -speci ic,
socially cons uc ed meanings eme ge wi hin
bounded ins i u ional se ings (Yin, 2018). The
case s udy ocused on he na ional Pa liamen o
Sie a Leone as a single ins i u ion ac oss wo
con as ing legisla i e pe iods - one ma ked by
dominan pa y con ol (APC), he o he by
nea -equal pa y balance (APC s SLPP).
The esea ch employs an in e p e i is ,
sociological app oach o unde s anding how
in e pe sonal ela ionships, in o mal ins i u ions,
and symbolic pe o mances shaped legisla i e
beha iou , collabo a ion, and b eakdown. The
ocus is on meaning-making and powe as
enac ed h ough in e ac ion, a he han as ixed
by ules. The in e p e i is o ien a ion aligns
wi h Symbolic In e ac ionism (Blume , 1969)
and Ins i u ional Cul u e heo y (Ma ch &
Olsen, 1984), which emphasize he subjec i e
in e p e a ions and ou inized p ac ices h ough
which social ac o s make sense o hei
ins i u ional en i onmen .
The s udy used h ee p ima y da a sou ces:
1. Semi-S uc u ed In e iews
Twen y- i e (25) in e iews we e conduc ed
wi h Membe s o Pa liamen , pa liamen a y
s a , ci il socie y ep esen a i es, and media
obse e s. In e iews explo ed pa icipan s’
expe iences o collabo a ion, us , exclusion,
leade ship con es s, commi ee unc ioning, and
public engagemen . Responden s we e
pu posi ely selec ed o e lec di e se pa ies,
gende , senio i y, and egional a ilia ion.
2. Documen Analysis
Hansa d epo s, pa liamen a y commi ee
eco ds, and public s a emen s we e analyzed o
iden i y pa e ns o pa icipa ion, symbolic
pe o mances (e.g., walkou s, p ocedu al
p o es s), and e e ences o in o mal no ms.
These ex s o e ed insigh in o bo h o mal
speech and i s unde lying ins i u ional meanings.
3. Obse a ional and Expe ien ial Da a
While o mal e hnog aphic obse a ion was
limi ed, some ield-le el insigh s we e d awn
om he esea che s’ p io p oximi y o
pa liamen a y p ocesses, p o iding con ex ual
and e lexi e dep h o he analysis.
Obse a ional no es ocused on symbolic
in e ac ions du ing key e en s - budge deba es,
leade ship elec ions, and momen s o
ins i u ional ension.
Thema ic analysis was employed, and analy ical
a en ion was paid o how MPs de ined oles and
esponded o ins i u ional ensions - pa icula ly
h ough pe o mance, allegiance, exclusion, and
s a egic ambigui y. The symbolic dimension o
beha iou was ea ed as cons i u i e o
pa liamen a y eali y.
All in e iewees p o ided in o med consen , and
pseudonyms a e used whe e app op ia e o
p o ec anonymi y. Gi en he poli ical sensi i i y
o pa liamen a y dynamics, da a in e p e a ion
was e lexi ely managed o balance c i ical
analysis wi h con ex ual empa hy.
Findings and Analysis: The
Pe o med and he Unw i en in
Pa liamen a y P ac ice
The indings om his s udy show ha
legisla i e li e in Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen is
shaped less by o mal laws and p ocedu es and
mo e by wha happens be ween he lines - by
ges u es, silences, alliances, and unw i en codes.
Pa liamen a y beha iou , especially du ing
momen s o poli ical ension, was no me ely
ule-bound. I was also symbolically pe o med
and socially na iga ed. The 4 h Pa liamen
unc ioned unde he symbolic weigh o
dominance and de e ence, while he 5 h was
de ined by agmen a ion, mis us , and
i ualized con on a ion. This sec ion p esen s
ou key hema ic insigh s ha eme ged om
in e iews, documen analysis, and obse a ions.
Each heme illus a es how MPs enac ed
au ho i y, nego ia ed legi imacy, and esponded
o ins i u ional b eakdown h ough
pe o mance, cul u e, and in o mal no ms. The
analysis links hese hemes di ec ly o he
heo e ical amewo ks al eady ou lined:
Symbolic In e ac ionism, In o mal Ins i u ions
Theo y, and Ins i u ional Cul u e.
Theme One: (Mis)T us and C oss-Pa y
In e ac ion
4 h Pa liamen : S uc u ed Dis ance and
Con olled Engagemen
In he 4 h Pa liamen (2012–2017), he All-
People’s Cong ess (APC) held a com o able
majo i y, which allowed i o domina e
pa liamen a y p oceedings and en o ce a
p edic able, e ically managed ins i u ional
hy hm. C oss-pa y in e ac ion in his pe iod
was ma ked by powe less coope a ion – a
si ua ion whe e opposi ion SLPP membe s o en
coope a ed because hey had no powe in non-
coope a ion. The opposi ion was gi en space o
speak bu a ely o shape ou comes.
T us , in his si ua ion, ope a ed in e nally,
wi hin he APC’s in e nal anks and i s
leade ship hie a chy. In e iews wi h APC MPs
emphasized wo ds like “discipline,” “line,” and
“coo dina ion.” One senio MP ema ked: “We
knew ou oles. We had he numbe s. You don’ need
much alking ac oss [ o he opposi ion] i you side is
aligned.” This e lec s wha Ma ch and Olsen
(1984) desc ibe as a “logic o app op ia eness” -
whe e beha iou is guided less by a ional deba e
and mo e by alignmen wi h ins i u ional
expec a ions and ole pe o mance.
Opposi ion MPs, meanwhile, cha ac e ized he
pe iod as one o “being seen, bu no included.” One
SLPP MP explained ha “deba es el
ehea sed,” and ha c oss-pa y dialogue, when
i occu ed, was “in o mal and behind he
scenes, no o public consump ion.” These
ehea sals ollowed an execu i e sc ip - MPs
we e conscious o pe o ming alignmen wi h
he p esiden ’s s ance, a he han pe suading he
chambe o he elec o a e. These accoun s
highligh he symbolic pe o mance o inclusion:
opposi ion MPs could speak, bu hei
con ibu ions we e la gely p ocedu al, no
delibe a e.
Symbolic ges u es subs i u e o ac ual
engagemen . Fo example, when opposi ion
MPs aised coun e poin s du ing plena y, he
ypical esponse was poli e acknowledgmen
ollowed by a e u n o he dominan pa y line.
The pe o mance o he 4 h Pa liamen was also
e lec ed in i s in e ac ional one. In e iews
sugges a high le el o wha we may call
‘ou come de achmen ’ – a belie ha ou comes
ha e been de e mined, and delibe a ions a e only
pe o med so ha pa liamen could be seen as
delibe a ing. As one ci il socie y obse e pu i :
“You could wa ch a whole deba e wi hou knowing how
commi ed hese people a e.” This pe cei ed
de achmen illus a es Go man’s (1959)
concep o an in alid on -s age pe o mance –
a si ua ion whe e a emp s o pe o m
delibe a ion ail o con ince he audience, in his
case, ci il socie y.
In e es ingly, he us ha did exis ac oss
pa ies in he 4 h Pa liamen was o en g ounded
in non-pa liamen a y iden i ies - sha ed school
o uni e si y, senio i y, o mu ual his o y. One
opposi ion MP ecoun ed ha “i was easie o
ind middle g ound wi h someone you knew
om uni e si y - e en i hey we e APC.” This
aligns wi h Blume ’s (1969) emphasis on
meaning being si ua ional and cons uc ed
h ough in e ac ion - no necessa ily by
ins i u ional design.
In sho , he 4 h Pa liamen unc ioned as a
space o con olled engagemen . C oss-pa y
us was minimal, shaped la gely by
pe o ma i e di e ences, ins i u ional
con ainmen , and he secu e hegemony o a
majo i y pa y. In o mal coope a ion exis ed, bu
only a he ma gins. Wha appea ed in he
p ocess o legisla ing was, in many ways, a
de ached pe o mance backed by p ocedu al
dominance and in e ac ional mimic y.
C oss-Pa y T us and Symbolic F agili y in
5 h Pa liamen
The 5 h Pa liamen (2018–2023) p esen ed an
en i ely di e en in e ac ional e ain. Wi h he
APC and SLPP holding nea -equal sea s, and
smalle pa ies like he Na ional G and Coali ion
(NGC) and Coali ion o Change (C4C) holding
swing posi ions, he chambe ’s composi ion
o e ed wha seemed like a s uc u al
oppo uni y o plu alism. In heo y, his
agmen a ion should ha e encou aged
nego ia ion, consensus-building, and c oss-pa y
dialogue. In p ac ice, howe e , i e ealed he
agili y o ins i u ional us and he limi s o
symbolic coope a ion.
Unlike he 4 h Pa liamen - whe e he majo i y
insula ed he uling pa y - he e, powe was up
o cons an con es a ion, and MPs ac oss pa y
lines we e h us in o si ua ions ha equi ed
in e ac ion bu o e ed li le assu ance o
eliabili y. As one SLPP MP pu i , “You needed
each o he , bu you didn’ us each o he . Tha ’s a
dange ous place.” Ano he om he APC side said,
“E e y handshake el like a es . You wa ch you wo ds,
you one - because any hing could lip. MPs unde s ood
ha unde Sec ion 77(k), a pa y leade ’s displeasu e
could cos hem hei sea , making loyal y o he execu i e
gaze mo e consequen ial han dialogue ac oss he aisle.”
This a mosphe e o hype -sensi i i y ansla ed
in o wha Go man (1959) would desc ibe as a
pe o mance unde su eillance. E e y speech,
absence, o ges u e was in e p e ed as a signal o
loyal y o be ayal - no jus o one’s pa y, bu o
ac ions wi hin i . MPs engaged in wha one ci il
socie y in o man called “su ace diplomacy” -
co diali y in he chambe masking deep
suspicion and s a egic posi ioning behind he
scenes. MPs calib a ed in e en ions o he
execu i e sc ip o hei own pa y leade ship -
o uling pa y MPs, ha mean pe o ming o
p esiden ial a en ion, o opposi ion MPs,
sc ip ing dissen in line wi h powe ul ac ion
leade s
Walkou s became a ecu en i ual in he 5 h
Pa liamen . Unlike in he 4 h, whe e absence was
a ely used as p o es , he e i was a symbolic ool:
a e usal o legi imize leade ship decisions,
commi ee appoin men s, o p ocedu al
p ocesses pe cei ed as un ai . These collec i e
exi s we e o en p eceded by in lamma o y
speeches, ca e ully cho eog aphed delays, o
coo dina ed silence. F om a Symbolic
In e ac ionis lens (Blume , 1969), hese
dis up ions could be iewed as s a egic
pe o mances mean o communica e
wi hd awal o ecogni ion and ins i u ional
de iance.
The Speake ship elec ion c isis ea ly in he 5 h
Pa liamen exempli ies his. SLPP’s mo e o
ins all i s candida e as Speake , amid a con es ed
coun , led o APC membe s walking ou en
masse. The ac was pe o ma i e, d ama ic, and
deeply symbolic: an asse ion ha “ his Pa liamen
is no neu al and is aking i .”
In o mal alliances - ac oss egion, senio i y, o
mu ual poli ical his o y - emained possible, bu
we e hinly s e ched. An NGC MP no ed,
“Some imes, being om he same egion helped. Bu ha
us seemed o ced and o show.” This poin s o wha
could be called condi ional us - us based no
on ins i u ional s abili y bu on shi ing
in e pe sonal calcula ions, emo ional memo y,
and poli ical agili y.
Ul ima ely, he 5 h Pa liamen was a case o
o ced p oximi y and a shadowy ela ional
in as uc u e. MPs we e p ocedu ally close bu
socially dis an . Coope a ion was necessa y bu
a e; ci ili y was expec ed bu cons an ly
h ea ened. The ins i u ion unc ioned as a s age
o mu ual suspicion.
In sum, his sec ion poin s up he a icle’s
b oade hesis: ha ins i u ional unc ionali y in
Sie a Leone’s Pa liamen is anima ed by he
symbolic economy o mis us , which, in he
absence o s able no ms, collapses in o agile
pe o mances and i ualized con lic . In he 5 h
Pa liamen , c oss-pa y in e ac ion was no
longe absen - i was omnip esen , bu haun ed
by dis us and unce ain y, pe o med a he
han li ed.
Theme Two: Ins i u ional In o mali y
Commi ee Spaces and In o mal Con ol in
he 4 h Pa liamen : O de Wi hou
Openness
In he 4 h Pa liamen (2012–2017), he APC’s
clea majo i y ansla ed in o a igh ly managed
ins i u ional en i onmen , whe e commi ees
unc ioned wi h ela i e p ocedu al o de - bu
unde he i m g ip o pa y con ol and in o mal
hie a chy. While hese commi ees we e mo e
echnically ocused han plena y sessions, hey
we e no au onomous. Ins ead, hey we e
s uc u ed by pa onage, senio i y, and eli e
de e ence, o en eplica ing he o mal
dominance o he uling pa y in in o mal ways.
In e iew da a show ha commi ee leade ship
was a ely con es ed, wi h MPs awa e ha
dissen no only isked ma ginaliza ion bu ,
unde Sec ion 77(k), could be in e p e ed as
‘c ossing he line,’ in i ing emo al om
Pa liamen al oge he . This legal shadow ga e
in o mal en o cemen ex ao dina y bi e. Chai s
we e ypically handpicked by he uling pa y
execu i es o Speake allies, no elec ed o
o a ed based on skill o me i . As one APC MP
explained, “e en when you lobby o commi ee posi ions;
he leade ship o he pa y con ols, on he whim you whe e
o go, and ha was i .” This pa e n aligns wi h
Helmke and Le i sky’s (2004) amewo k o
in o mal ins i u ions: ules ha a e no w i en
bu a e widely known, consis en ly en o ced, and
poli ically consequen ial.
Mo eo e , pa y “s ong men” o ‘bo bo ;
(clien s) o pa y and pa liamen a y leade s we e
s a egically placed on key commi ees - Finance,
Legisla i e, and Appoin men s. E en hough
commi ee ules allowed open pa icipa ion,
‘bo bo ’ MPs and opposi ion membe s we e
s uc u ally silenced by in e ac ional dynamics.
As Bou dieu (1991) would a gue, he habi us o
di e ence we e embedded in e e yday speech,
u n- aking, and ges u e. One SLPP MP ecalled:
“E en in commi ee, we knew who called he sho . You
could alk, bu alking agains an appoin men akes you
no whe e. So you play along, and ha b ings i s own
ewa ds’.
The cul u e o commi ees in he 4 h Pa liamen
was he e o e one o con olled collabo a ion.
While hey o e ed space o some subs an i e
engagemen - especially on echnical issues - he
ange o accep able deba e was popped h ough
so powe mechanisms: leade ship sc ip ing and
mo e u ns gi en o leade s o ‘bo bo o leade s’
o alk.
C oss-pa y in e ac ion in hese spaces was
domina ed by hese sc ip s and o en gea ed
owa ds ad ancing he execu i e’s sc ip h ough
commi ee ou pu s. The opposi ion pa y migh
be gi en he chance o play along, bu should i
seek o s all he p ocess, i is cu o . This
dis inc ion e eals how commi ee wo k
unc ioned as a backs age zone (Go man, 1959),
whe e he illusion o deba e could be p oduced
like some p ac iced g ound o he same display
in plena y.
In summa y, commi ee wo k in he 4 h
Pa liamen was a si e o managed unc ionali y.
I p o ided he appea ance o p ocedu al
diligence and some echnical collabo a ion, bu
wi hin he con ines o in o mal dominance.
Powe ci cula ed h ough pa onage and
senio i y, no open delibe a ion. The
pe o ma i e calm o commi ee sessions
masked a deepe poli ical cho eog aphy, whe e
access, oice, and in luence we e in o mally
dis ibu ed.
In o mal Nego ia ion and Commi ee
B eakdown in he 5 h Pa liamen
The 5 h Pa liamen (2018 - 2023) opened wi h
high expec a ions o dialogue and c oss-pa y
coope a ion bu quickly dissol ed in o bi e
ac imony ha s emmed om he con o e sial
elec ion o a speake and iolence agains APC
MPs in he Well o Pa liamen on he e y day
o he elec ion o he speake . This ac imony
pe cola ed o commi ees
In e iews sugges ha commi ee appoin men s
by passed p ocedu al no ms. As one MP
ecalled, “Commi ee o ma ion was a wa . E e y sea
was a p ize, no a esponsibili y.” While s anding
o de s manda ed equi able dis ibu ion, ac ual
appoin men s we e d i en by in o mal deals,
pa y e alia ion, and pe cep ions o loyal y - a
classic case o in o mal ins i u ions o e iding
o mal amewo ks (Helmke & Le i sky, 2004).
The Speake ’s con o e sial ole in selec ing
commi ee chai s ollowing he dispu ed
Speake ship elec ion only deepened mis us .
APC membe s iewed many appoin men s as
illegi ima e and e used o ake up ce ain
commi ee oles. SLPP MPs, in u n, accused
hei i als o obs uc ion. This b eakdown
ans o med commi ees om spaces o
“p ac ical wo k” in o con es ed si es o
legi imacy.
Inside commi ee ooms, he mood was ense
and agmen ed, and he commi ees we e o en
desc ibed as “ es less,” “unp edic able,” and
“ ull o unde cu en s.” Se e al MPs no ed ha
e en echnical discussions - on budge s, bills, o
o e sigh - could b eak down due o un esol ed
plena y-le el con lic s. As one cle k explained,
“The ension om he chambe didn’ s op a he doo . I
walked in o e e y session.”
Tha said, commi ees also p o ided momen s o
agile, issue-speci ic coope a ion - especially
among MPs who sha ed some egional ies o
pe sonal his o y. One MP explained, “Some imes
we wo k ac oss pa y because we wen o school oge he
o come om he same place. Bu i ’s quie coope a ion -
you don’ ad e ise i .”
In sum, he 5 h Pa liamen ’s commi ee sys em
became a mic ocosm o he b oade ins i u ional
malaise: o mally in ac bu unc ionally
comp omised. Commi ees o e ed spaces o
po en ial comp omise, bu wi hou sha ed ules
o engagemen o a ounda ion o us , hey
became ba leg ounds o symbolic con ol. As
one senio MP e lec ed, “Commi ees we e ou bes
chance o ix hings, bu we b ough he wa wi h us.”
Ou discussion o commi ee dynamics in he 5 h
Pa liamen ein o ces a cen al a gumen o he
a icle: ha in o mal ne wo ks and ins i u ional
cul u e do no me ely complemen o unde mine
o mal p ocedu e - hey de ine he p ac ical
limi s o pa liamen a y coope a ion. In he 5 h
Pa liamen , commi ee wo k exposed bo h he
possibili y o ela ional go e nance and he
pe sis ence o symbolic di ision.
Theme Th ee: Leade ship Ba les,
Walkou s, and he Cho eog aphy o
Resis ance
In Sie a Leone’s 4 h and 5 h Pa liamen s,
leade ship dispu es and symbolic p o es s
became cen al o how powe was nego ia ed
and challenged. These we e s aged
con on a ions, designed o signal ei he he
wi hd awal o legi imacy o he asse ion o
dominance.
The 4 h Pa liamen : Con olled Leade ship
and he Con ainmen o Dissen
In he 4 h Pa liamen , leade ship was se led
ea ly and emained unchallenged h oughou he
e m. The APC, wi h a pa liamen a y majo i y
and execu i e backing, ins alled and sus ained i s
p e e ed Speake and commi ee chai s wi hou
inciden . The e we e no eco ded walkou s o
o mal p o es s o e leade ship. Howe e , his
silence was con ainmen a he han
con ainmen .
Dissen was managed in e nally h ough pa y
discipline, no h ough open con es a ion. APC
MPs la gely echoed pa y posi ions in public, and
when disag eemen s a ose, hey we e “handled
inside,” as one MP pu i . SLPP MPs oiced
us a ion wi h being “symbolically p esen bu
p ocedu ally powe less.” A emp s o ques ion
leade ship decisions we e ei he igno ed o deal
wi h h ough p ocedu al de lec ion - mo ions
uled ou o o de , in e en ions cu sho , o
speaking ime edis ibu ed wi hou no ice.
F om a Symbolic In e ac ionis pe spec i e
(Blume , 1969), his pe iod e lec s a poli ics o
di e ence o e dis up ion. The dominan pa y
pe o med cohe ence; he opposi ion pe o med
us a ion - wi hin he limi s o pe mi ed
speech. The absence o walkou s o open p o es
was i sel symbolic: he ules o he pe o mance
we e igh ly managed, and de ia ion was
discou aged by in o mal pa y sanc ions.
The 4 h Pa liamen ’s leade ship s uc u e hus
ope a ed like a closed i ual, whe e legi imacy
lowed om numbe s and was bu essed by a
cul u e o owing he pa y line. The e y
p edic abili y o leade ship p ocedu es - and
hei immuni y o dis up ion - became a way o
ein o ce dominance. Leade ship in his pe iod
was hea ical: cho eog aphed, silen , and
symbolically unassailable.
The 5 h Pa liamen : Dispu ed Au ho i y and
he Pe o mance o De iance
In con as , he 5 h Pa liamen was bo n in c isis.
The dispu ed Speake ship elec ion - conduc ed
amid a ense balance o sea s be ween he APC
and SLPP - se he s age o a Pa liamen de ined
by pe o ma i e con lic . The SLPP mo ed
swi ly o elec i s nominee as Speake while APC
membe s boyco ed he o e. This ounda ional
i c ea ed a symbolic di ide ha haun ed e e y
subsequen in e ac ion.
The APC’s walkou om he Speake ship o e
was mo e han a p ocedu al objec ion - i was a
i ual ac o delegi ima ion, an a emp o ma k
he chambe as con es ed g ound. Acco ding o
Go man (1959), such pe o ma i e e usals o
pa icipa e a e powe ul ins i u ional messages.
They decla e, wi hou needing p ocedu al
language, ha he “scene” i sel is in alid.
Subsequen leade ship appoin men s -
commi ee heads especially - - we e all con es ed
h ough simila ac s o symbolic p o es . APC
MPs e used o ake pa in ce ain o es,
abs ained om commi ee nomina ions, and
s aged u he walkou s. SLPP membe s
coun e ed wi h hei own pe o mance o
p ocedu al legi imacy - insis ing on o ing
eco ds, cons i u ional e e ences, and public
decla a ions o compliance.
These leade ship s uggles we e pe o med
h ough epea ed cycles o challenge and
coun e challenge. P esiden ial speeches a he
annual s a e opening o pa liamen and budge
eadings by Minis e s o Finance became s ages
o symbolic esis ance, and e e y e usal o
comply became pa o he cho eog aphy. One
MP ema ked: “We we e pe o ming o ou pa ies, o
he public, o his o y.” Bu gi en MPs equen
e e ence o he leade o he go e ning pa y
( he P esiden o he Republic) hea y hand in
selec ing who ge s nomina ed o con es
