SLFA Governance Questions Emerge Over Executive Travel and Spending
Former SLFA General Secretary Chris Kamara has described internal concerns over executive travel and spending, saying he repeatedly urged officials to follow approved budgets and financial procedures.
Kamara made the comments while discussing how the Sierra Leone Football Association handled expenses involving its executive committee and other officials.
According to Kamara, executive committee members were not ordinarily entitled to unrestricted payments simply because they held elected positions. He said expenses, including travel, should be supported by an approved budget or authorisation from the appropriate body.
Kamara said he raised these concerns directly with SLFA President Thomas Daddy Brima and documented his advice in a written memo. He said he referred the president to the association’s financial policy and FIFA’s financial rules. He also argued that the executive committee has a formal role in approving matters not specifically covered by the association’s statutes.
The account places particular emphasis on executive travel. Kamara said some trips could arise from football activities without being included in the original budget, creating pressure on the president to find funds or seek approval after the expense had arisen.
He described this as a governance problem because the association could end up dealing with expenditure after the decision to travel had already been made.
Kamara also discussed payments connected to executive committee meetings. He said the association’s rules provided for sitting fees, while other payments depended on the circumstances and applicable policies.
However, the specific figures and allowances cited by Kamara in the interview could not be independently verified from the public records reviewed for this report. They therefore should not be treated as established SLFA rates without the relevant statute, staff manual, financial policy or payment records.
The broader issue has attracted scrutiny of SLFA’s financial controls. In April 2024, the Anti-Corruption Commission said its investigation had identified several payments to Brima that SLFA’s Finance Officer described as refunds for expenses the president had allegedly pre-financed. The ACC said some of those payments lacked adequate supporting documentation and relevant approvals.
Kamara’s role at the time is also established by contemporaneous reporting. A December 2021 report identified him as SLFA general secretary and said he had presented the association’s AFCON preparation plans and financial requirements.
The association’s governance framework gives the Executive Committee an important role in decision-making. A 2022 report on an internal dispute involving Kamara said decisions and approvals rested with the Executive Committee while the general secretary implemented its decisions. That account, however, was based on reporting and sources cited by the publication rather than an independently reviewed copy of the relevant statute.
Kamara’s account therefore raises a narrower question than whether SLFA spent money on football activities: were executive-related expenses authorised before they were incurred, properly budgeted and supported by the association’s financial rules?
Answering that question would require examining the applicable SLFA statutes and financial policies alongside executive travel requests, approved budgets, payment vouchers, bank records and minutes showing the relevant authorisations.