1 Comment
In the wake of recent high-profile suspensions of Auditor General Mrs. Lara Taylor-Pearce and Deputy Auditor General Mr. Tamba Momoh, Opposition Chief Whip Hon. Abdul Karim Kamara has emerged as a prominent critic of the government’s actions.
The suspensions, which coincided with the imminent release of critical audit reports on state resource management, have triggered widespread apprehension among Sierra Leoneans.
Hon. Kamara has raised serious concerns about the timing of these suspensions, suggesting that they may be politically motivated and indicative of an attempt to stifle transparency.
He argued that the move undermines the fundamental principles of accountability that are essential for good governance. Highlighting past revelations of embezzlement within the Presidential office, as noted in the 2020 audit report, Hon. Kamara has accused the government of betraying its anti-corruption promises.
In a passionate address to Parliament, Hon. Kamara urged his fellow lawmakers to stand united against the tribunal report validating the suspensions.
He emphasized the critical role of the Audit Services Sierra Leone in ensuring transparency and accountability, calling on Parliamentarians to prioritize national interests over political considerations.
“This moment is pivotal for our country,” Hon. Kamara stated. “We must not allow political maneuvers to compromise our commitment to good governance and the integrity of our institutions. Upholding transparency and accountability is non-negotiable.”
As Parliament deliberates on the matter, Hon. Kamara’s strong stance reflects a broader call for maintaining the independence of key oversight institutions and ensuring that public funds are managed with the utmost integrity.
The outcome of this debate will be crucial in determining the future trajectory of Sierra Leone’s governance and its dedication to combating corruption.
Too little too late; the Tribunal should have been stopped even before it started because its setting up was illegal. Constitutional procedures were evidently not followed. Serious opposition parties would have asked the tough questions where there is clear evidence of wrongful doing or abuse of power. In this case it was gross abuse of power by the Executive