The case of the inspector general of police versus Harvey Steven Perez & Others, known as the cocaine case, represents the biggest drug bust in Sierra Leone's history and the biggest challenge to President Ernest Bai Koroma's APC government.

But in the haste to bring to justice those responsible for trafficking an estimated 700 kilograms of cocaine into the country, a scandal that has seen a minister sacked and 19 people charged with crimes, is the government about to entertain injustice?

According to Vandie Nabie, director of complaints, investigation and legal services at the human rights commission in Sierra Leone, if the new dangerous drugs law were to be used to charge the accused in this case with drug offences it may contravene the Sierra Leone constitution of 1991 and the universal declaration of human rights.

"To contemplate legislation (of a new law) while holding the accused, could be considered retroactive - that is the grey area. The charges must be prospective, not retroactive," said Nabie.

The case commenced on August 1, 2008 before principal magistrate Deen Tarawallie.

The accused were charge with a range of offenses including unlawful possession of small arms, unlawful entry, malicious damage to the perimeter fence valued at Le20 million, unlawful landing, conspiracy to unlawful landing, conspiracy to pervert the cause of justice and conspiracy to aid the escape of fugitive offenders with the aim of perverting justice.

The defendants were in court on what Nabie called "holding charges", or the lesser charges meant to hold the accused in police custody until further charges can be brought against them. The indictments are based on the existing law on the books when the crime was committed.

At the time of the commission of the crime, there was no law in Sierra Leone that covered the specific crime of possession or trafficking of cocaine. To retroactively charge the accused with the new law might violate their rights guaranteed under national and international laws.

Article 23, subsection 7 of the constitution states "no person shall be held to be guilty of a criminal offense on account of any act or omission which did not, at the time it took place, constitute such an offense".

Article 11 of the UDHR states that "no one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed".

"There are limits to human rights which are outlined in the constitution. In cases where public safety or public morality is in danger, the government can intervene. But is this exception outdated?" Nabie asked.

According to him, if the government retroactively charges these defendants it would be "inconsistent with good governance".

The new dangerous drugs law drafted in 2006 to strengthen existing law was tabled in parliament after the plane containing the cocaine was intercepted and the accused arrested under a certificate of emergency by the President.

For a law to be brought in under a certificate of emergency it must lead to public emergency or imminent danger, only then can a certificate of emergency be issued.

According to Nabie filing charges retroactively under the new law is "not conducive to rights protection. At the moment charges are laid, (the defense will) file an indictment to the Supreme Court." If the defendants claim that their human rights were being violated, their only recourse would be to appeal to the highest court in the country.

Defense lawyer and president of the Sierra Leone Bar Association, Crispin-Fio Edwards said that if charges were laid under the new dangerous drugs law, "we intend taking it up to the Supreme Court. They may (file charges), according to the wording of the law, but according to good sense and international conventions, you don't." According to principal magistrate Deen Tarawallie "it is up to the prosecutors to file charges, but it is my understanding that you cannot charge someone retroactively. I was made to understand that a bill must be passed into law that would make provision to be able to charge retroactively." It would be up to the attorney general to approve the use of the law in this case, and the inspector general of police to levy the charges.

According to a high ranking official involved in reforming Sierra Leone's legal system, who requested anonymity for this story, the new law was drafted in 2006 during the reign of the SLPP.

The previous government, heeding international warnings about the increasing use of West Africa by international drug cartels, held consultative meetings nation-wide to better understand what cocaine could do to the country.

The dangerous drugs Act was then drafted to change the image of the country as a transit point in the international drug trade and to act to save Sierra Leone's youth from the dangers involved in using and trafficking narcotics.

The act was presented to the SLPP government, but no action was taken. The act was also presented to the current APC government, but again it was not tabled in parliament until after the largest narcotics bust in the country's history.