By: Mohamed Muctarr Sow Esq., Prosecutor-ACC

Sierra Leone has had laws aimed at fighting corruption dating back to 1907. During the colonial period, the Prevention of Corruption Ordinance of 1907 was enacted to address corrupt practices in the public service. This law was later replaced by the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1960, shortly before the country gained independence in 1961.

Although these early laws had a limited scope, largely because Sierra Leone was still under British colonial rule at the time, they show that efforts were already being made to confront corruption. While these laws may not have addressed corruption as broadly as it is understood today, they reflected a clear and early recognition that corrupt practices could undermine good governance and hinder national development.

This long history of anti-corruption legislation demonstrates that Sierra Leone has consistently acknowledged corruption as a serious national challenge. Over time, the country has continued to strengthen its legal framework to promote transparency, build public trust, and support sustainable development.

Following the end of the civil war in 2002, Sierra Leone has made steady and commendable progress in rebuilding its democratic institutions and strengthening good governance, despite facing challenges in developing effective anti-corruption laws and establishing a strong institutional framework. 

A central pillar of this national recovery has been the fight against corruption. For many years, corruption weakened state institutions, eroded public trust, and denied citizens access to essential services.  One of the most important responses to these challenges was the creation of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) in 2000 under President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah. 

The Commission was established to lead the fight against corruption and restore public confidence in government institutions. The ACC was later strengthened by the Anti-Corruption Act of 2008, which broadened its mandate and gave it the power not only to investigate corruption cases but also to prosecute them independently. This marked a major step forward in improving accountability. 

Further amendments were introduced in 2019 to make the law more effective. These changes increased minimum penalties for corruption offences, empowered the Commission to intervene in government contract negotiations to prevent corrupt practices, allowed trials in absentia in certain cases, and enhanced protection for witnesses and informants. 

Over the past twenty-five years, the ACC has grown into one of the country’s most visible and active accountability institutions. Its primary mandate is to investigate and prosecute corruption cases, recover stolen public funds, review systems within Ministries, Departments, and Agencies, and educate the public, especially public sector workers on integrity and ethical conduct in the discharge of their duties.

Despite its important role in governance, the ACC is not established or expressly provided for in the national Constitution, which is the supreme law (Grundnorm) of the land. Unlike some other key accountability institutions, the ACC remains a statutory body created by an Act of Parliament rather than being firmly protected under the Constitution.

Even so, successive governments, regardless of political affiliation, have recognized the Commission’s strategic importance. They have continued to support its work in strengthening good governance, promoting accountability, and improving public service delivery across the country.

Over time, each administration has taken steps to reinforce the ACC’s mandate by strengthening its legal framework, expanding its prosecutorial powers, broadening the jurisdiction of the courts to handle corruption cases, enhancing its asset recovery mechanisms, and increasing its operational capacity. As a result, the ACC has evolved into one of the most significant accountability institutions in Sierra Leone’s democratic development.

At a time when constitutional reform is being considered through the Constitution of Sierra Leone (Amendment) Bill 2025, it is both timely and necessary to grant the ACC constitutional status, placing it alongside other key accountability institutions.

This is the right opportunity to firmly entrench the ACC in the national Constitution, given the critical role it has played since its establishment in 2000. Recognizing the ACC in the Constitution would strengthen its independence, protect its mandate, and reaffirm the country’s commitment to fighting corruption and promoting good governance.

The 1991 Constitution already recognizes and protects certain oversight institutions. This shows that the framers of the Constitution, as well as successive governments, value accountability within the system of governance.

Section 119(1) of the Constitution provides that:“There shall be an Auditor-General for Sierra Leone whose office shall be a public office.”

Section 119(2) further states:“The public accounts of Sierra Leone and of all offices and courts of the Government of Sierra Leone, including the public accounts of all statutory corporations and institutions, shall be audited and reported on by or under the direction of the Auditor-General.”

These provisions firmly establish Audit Service Sierra Leone as an independent constitutional body. It is responsible for auditing public institutions each year and ensuring that public funds are properly managed and accounted for.

Similarly, Section 146(1) of the Constitution provides that: “There shall be an Ombudsman who shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority.”

Section 146(2) grants the Ombudsman the power to investigate certain administrative actions taken or omitted by government departments and statutory bodies. Through these provisions, the Office of the Ombudsman in Sierra Leone is constitutionally protected as a safeguard against maladministration and injustice within the public service.

Yet, while the Audit Service audits public accounts and the Ombudsman investigates administrative injustice, the ACC carries the heavy responsibility of investigating, preventing and prosecuting corruption, which remains one of the most serious threats to Sierra Leone’s development. 

Corruption directly undermines economic growth, weakens service delivery in health and education, discourages investment, and erodes public confidence in the state. It is therefore inconsistent and illogical that an institution tasked with confronting such a pervasive and dangerous problem is not given the same constitutional protection as other accountability bodies. Entrenching the Commission in the Constitution would correct this imbalance and align its status with the weight of its mandate.

The importance of establishing and progressively strengthening anti-corruption institutions was clearly articulated by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which examined the root causes of the civil war. In its Report, the TRC identified endemic corruption, abuse of power, and institutional weakness as major factors that contributed to state collapse and the suffering of citizens. 

The TRC observed that widespread corruption deprived the population of basic services, fostered inequality, and destroyed public trust in governance. It recommended comprehensive institutional reform, the promotion of transparency and accountability, and the strengthening of anti-corruption mechanisms to ensure that such failures would never again destabilize the country. 

Entrenching the ACC in the Constitution would give meaningful effect to these recommendations by the TRC. It would demonstrate that Sierra Leone has not only acknowledged its past governance failures but has taken concrete steps to prevent their recurrence through strong, independent, and permanent oversight institutions.

As a further demonstration of the Government’s continued commitment to supporting the fight against corruption, an ultra-modern building known as “Integrity House” was commissioned in 2023. This structure stands as a strong symbol of the country’s sustained efforts to combat corruption nationwide. It reflects the Government’s investment in and prioritization of the anti-corruption agenda.

At a time when several key government institutions and many other public agencies continue to operate from rented or temporary premises, providing a permanent home for the ACC in Freetown highlights the importance placed on fighting corruption. It underscores the recognition that combating corruption is central to national development and effective governance.

Nevertheless, statutory existence and physical structure alone is not sufficient to guarantee the long-term independence and stability of such a vital institution as the Anti-Corruption Commission. Laws enacted by the Parliament of Sierra Leone can be amended or repealed, often by a simple majority, leaving the Commission exposed to political shifts and changing priorities. 

Over the years, the ACC has faced practical and institutional pressures in the discharge of its mandate. A recurring area of tension has been concerning the handling of audit findings contained in the yearly reports issued by the Audit Service Sierra Leone. 

The leadership of Parliament through its Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has frequently maintained that it has primary oversight responsibility over audit reports and has mostly argued that the ACC should await its review and directive before commencing investigations based on those findings. 

On the other hand, the ACC especially under it past and present leadership has consistently maintained that while parliamentary oversight must be respected, corruption investigations arising from audit queries require timely and prompt action. 

The Commission through its leadership has therefore advocated for closer cooperation, constructive engagement, and institutional synergy between itself and Parliament to ensure that audit issues are addressed without unnecessary delay, duplication, or jurisdictional rivalry.

These experiences show why constitutional entrenchment for the ACC is necessary. When mandates overlap or institutional boundaries are contested, as sometimes happens between the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament and the ACC. A clear constitutional framework can define roles, promote coordination, and reduce friction. 

Including the ACC in the Constitution would provide stronger safeguards for its independence, ensure a firmer security of tenure for its leadership, and enhance its financial autonomy. It could also explicitly grant the ACC concurrent jurisdiction or an immediate right of action to investigate any issues arising from Audit Reports published by the Audit Service Sierra Leone, removing delays or disputes over authority. Constitutional recognition would clarify further the ACC’s investigative and prosecutorial powers, protect it from undue interference, and guarantee continuity beyond electoral cycles. 

Most importantly, it would affirm that the fight against corruption is not subject to institutional competition or political convenience, but is a permanent and unwavering national commitment. 

As Sierra Leone is currently considering action on constitutional amendments recommendations, the exclusion of the ACC would represent a missed historic opportunity to consolidate its more than twenty-five years of reform and progress. 

The fight against corruption is not merely a legal or administrative matter; it is fundamental to justice, equality, and sustainable development. Entrenching the ACC in the Constitution of Sierra Leone would significantly strengthen the fight against corruption and improve governance.

At present, the ACC exists by an Act of Parliament, which means its powers, structure, and independence can be changed by ordinary legislation. If the ACC is provided for directly into the Constitution, it would become part of the supreme law of the land. This would protect it from political interference, make it more stable, and increase public confidence in its work. Many African countries have already taken this step by placing anti-corruption institutions in their constitutions.

In Nigeria, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 clearly establishes a national commitment to fight corruption. Section 15(5) provides that: “The State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power”. In addition, the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution sets out a Code of Conduct for Public Officers. It states: “A public officer shall not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts with his duties and responsibilities” and “No person shall offer a public officer any property, gift or benefit of any kind as an inducement or bribe for doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of his official duties.” 

These provisions provide constitutional backing for institutions like the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). These institutions operate within a constitutional environment that clearly condemns corruption and abuse of office.

In Ghana, the Constitution of Ghana 1992 also directly addresses corruption. Article 35(8) states: “The State shall take steps to eradicate corrupt practices and abuse of power.” This constitutional command makes the fight against corruption a national obligation.

The Constitution further requires public officers to declare their assets, which supports accountability. Ghana has since established the Office of the Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute corruption-related offences.

A stronger model can be seen in Kenya. The Constitution of Kenya 2010 expressly requires the creation of an anti-corruption commission. Article 79 provides: “Parliament shall enact legislation to establish an independent ethics and anti-corruption commission, which shall be and have the status and powers of a commission under Chapter Fifteen, for purposes of ensuring compliance with, and enforcement of, the provisions of this Chapter.” 

This article led to the establishment of the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission. Its independence is constitutionally protected, and its authority comes directly from the supreme law. This is a clear example of constitutional entrenchment of an anti-corruption body.

In Uganda, the Constitution of Uganda 1995 goes even further by clearly defining the functions and powers of the anti-corruption body. Article 225(1) provides that the Inspectorate of Government shall have the function “to eliminate and foster the elimination of corruption, abuse of authority and of public office.” Article 230(1) adds that: “The Inspectorate of Government shall have power to investigate, cause investigation, arrest, cause arrest, prosecute or cause prosecution in respect of cases involving corruption, abuse of authority or of public office.”

These instances show a clear pattern across Africa: serious commitment to fighting corruption is often supported by constitutional entrenchment. Where anti-corruption bodies are protected by the Constitution, they are more independent, more stable, and more trusted. They are harder to abolish, defund, or politically manipulate. They operate with greater authority because their mandate comes directly from the highest law.

If Sierra Leone entrenches its ACC in the Constitution, it would send a strong message that corruption is not just a social issue but a constitutional violation as well. Such a constitutional status would  equally protect the Commission from a sudden political takeover.

This piece is a clear and deliberate call for the entrenchment of the Anti-Corruption Commission in the Constitution of Sierra Leone. It specifically urges all stakeholders directly involved in the ongoing constitutional review process -particularly the Executive through the Honorable Attorney General and Minister of Justice, the constitutional review drafting team, and the Parliament of Sierra Leone - give serious and favorable consideration to incorporating the ACC into the current review of the Constitution of Sierra Leone (Amendment) Act, 2025.

Such action would honor the spirit and intent of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, strengthen democratic governance, and secure the institutional future of the nation.

The people of Sierra Leone deserve accountability institutions that are stable, independent, and fully empowered to defend the public interest. Entrenching the ACC in the revised Constitution is not merely desirable; it is essential for the continued advancement of justice, transparency, and sustainable development in Sierra Leone.