Sorie’s Column
As Corruption Increases in Severity…………..
The Anti-Corruption Commission Laws Function as a means of support.
BY IBRAHIM SORIE DUMBUYA
Section 171 Subsection 15 of the Constitution of Sierra Leone, explicitly states that the Constitution itself is the highest law of the land, and any other law that conflicts with it is considered void and has no legal effect. This means that all laws and regulations must align with the Constitution to be considered valid and enforceable. Further, when we look at the Amendment Anti-Corruption Act of 2019, specifically in section 7 subsection 1, it outlines the powers of the Anti-Corruption Commission to institute legal proceedings against individuals suspected of corruption. However, this provision appears to conflict with section 120 subsection 2 of the Constitution, which states that the judiciary has the sole authority to handle all criminal and civil matters, including those related to the Constitution and any other laws.
This inconsistency raises questions about the separation of powers between the Anti-Corruption Commission and the judiciary in prosecuting criminal activities, particularly those related to corruption. It is important to ensure that all laws and regulations are in harmony with the Constitution to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of individuals under the legal system.
Additionally, the 2008 Anti-Corruption Act, as amended in 2019, further complicates the issue with its own set of provisions that may conflict with the Constitution and other existing laws. It is crucial for lawmakers and legal experts to thoroughly review and reconcile these discrepancies to ensure that the legal system operates smoothly and effectively in addressing corruption and holding perpetrators accountable. The provision in the Amendment Act 2019 that allows for the negotiation of refunds and preclusion from holding public office for a certain period is not an effective way to address corruption. Giving suspects the opportunity to simply refund the amount involved and agree to a temporary ban from holding public office, undermines the entire concept of justice. In Sierra Leone’s constitution, it is clear that those found guilty of criminal activities should be banned from holding government positions or doing business with the government. Allowing for negotiations and refunds with interest penalties gives those in positions of power more leverage to engage in corrupt practices, knowing they can simply repay the money if caught. This provision does more harm than good, as recovering funds from a criminal may only scratch the surface of the profits they have made from their illegal activities. A more effective approach would be to impose harsher penalties, such as permanent bans from public office, imprisonment, and asset seizure, to truly deter corrupt behaviour and hold individuals accountable for their actions.
Settling with a corrupt person to repay the funds and be barred from holding public office for at least three years seems ineffective in combating corruption. Allowing a criminal to negotiate a refund with an interest penalty only empowers individuals in positions of power to misuse public funds with the expectation of simply repaying the amount upon being caught. This law allows and protects criminals to profit from their illegal activities before eventually facing consequences. The fight against corruption will always have a political aspect, given that the Anti-Corruption Commission head is appointed by the president with the parliament’s approval. However, for a more effective approach to combat corruption, the Commission’s Head should be selected through a rigorous application process overseen by representatives from parliament, ensuring the Commission’s independence in its fight against corruption. The appointment of the Commission’s head by the president can result in political influence, especially when appointments are based on party affiliations, and tribal, or regional connections. Offenders must be prosecuted and convicted instead of simply negotiating refunds. Furthermore, the selection of the Commission’s head should be based on a depoliticized recruitment process rather than a political appointment. By implementing these measures, corruption can be eradicated to the highest degree.
