Once hailed as a revitalised force against corruption, Sierra Leone’s Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) is now facing growing public criticism over claims of selective justice, political bias, and a reluctance to hold powerful figures in the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) to account.
The ACC, led since 2018 by Francis Ben Kaifala, was credited with strengthening its prosecutorial powers and recovering stolen public funds. However, opposition leaders, civil society groups, and sections of the public now allege that the institution has reverted to being a “toothless bulldog” — only this time with sharper teeth for opponents and critics of the Bio-led government, while sparing allies, ministers, and party loyalists.
Critics argue that the Commission has developed a pattern of targeting lower-level officials, opposition figures, and politically unconnected individuals, while overlooking serious allegations involving senior SLPP ministers and high-ranking government officials. Several corruption reports, whistleblower accounts, and audit findings naming politically connected individuals have allegedly gone uninvestigated or have stalled without explanation.
In recent years, high-profile allegations involving procurement scandals, misuse of donor funds, and questionable state contracts reportedly linked to politically influential figures have failed to result in prosecutions. “The ACC is quick to pounce when it’s an opposition MP or a mid-level civil servant, but it goes silent when the accused sits in Cabinet,” one governance watchdog representative told this newspaper.
Perceptions of Political Protection
Observers say this perceived double standard has damaged public confidence in the institution. Rumours of backroom negotiations, selective leaks to the press, and informal “settlements” with politically connected suspects have fuelled the belief that the ACC is more of a political tool than an independent watchdog.
The Commission’s close alignment with the government’s public messaging, and the visible camaraderie between its leadership and senior SLPP figures, have further deepened suspicion. Critics say this erodes the appearance of impartiality and undermines the legal principle that no one is above the law.
Civil society activists point to the lack of action against friends, business associates, and political allies of the ACC Commissioner himself. “When the corruption allegations involve someone close to the SLPP inner circle, the file disappears or the investigation takes years with no outcome,” an anti-graft campaigner alleged.
These concerns have led some to conclude that the Commission’s earlier achievements in improving Sierra Leone’s international corruption rankings were more about optics than sustained systemic change. Critics warn that unless the ACC addresses these credibility issues, its global reputation as a strengthened anti-graft body could quickly unravel.
As the country heads towards another election cycle, the ACC’s perceived politicisation threatens to not only diminish its authority but also to further entrench a culture of impunity at the highest levels of government.
The ACC leadership has repeatedly denied any political bias, insisting that all cases are handled according to the law and available evidence. However, for many Sierra Leoneans, the once-celebrated “fierce watchdog” now looks alarmingly like the same “toothless bulldog” the institution was accused of being two decades ago — only now, they say, it chooses carefully when and where to bite.
By Joe Turay
