By Joe Turay
The Sierra Leone government’s decision to suspend the controversial US$25 Airport Security Fee at Freetown International Airport should not simply be welcomed as administrative housekeeping.
It should serve as a wake-up call for every Sierra Leonean concerned about transparency, accountability and the management of our country’s strategic national assets.
According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the fee has been suspended to allow the Audit Service Sierra Leone (ASSL) to conduct a special audit and review a more integrated collection system.
While the audit is a positive development, it raises an even bigger question: Why has it taken years for the government to audit a fee that has been collected from passengers without comprehensive public disclosure of its financial returns?
For years, every passenger departing Freetown International Airport has been required to pay an additional US$25 security charge.
Thousands of Sierra Leoneans, business travellers, tourists and members of the diaspora have contributed to this revenue stream.
Yet the public has never been told how much money has been collected annually, how much has gone to the government, how much has remained with the private operator, or how the proceeds have been spent.
In any democracy committed to good governance, such information should not be secret.
The government should immediately publish the concession agreement governing the collection of this fee. Sierra Leoneans deserve to know who negotiated the contract, under what terms it was awarded, how long it runs, the revenue-sharing formula, and the obligations imposed on the operator.
Equally important is the question of oversight. Which institution has been responsible for monitoring the company’s financial records?
Were annual audits conducted? Were reports submitted to Parliament?
Was the National Revenue Authority fully involved? These are not political questions; they are questions of public accountability.
The airport is not an ordinary commercial enterprise.
It is Sierra Leone’s principal international gateway and one of the country’s most strategic national assets.
Such facilities should operate with the highest standards of transparency because they directly affect national security, economic development and international confidence.
Many African countries have adopted models that retain strong public oversight of their airports.
In countries such as Ethiopia, Rwanda, Morocco and South Africa, airports are generally managed by state-owned airport authorities or publicly accountable airport companies, even where specialised private contractors provide certain services.
These arrangements help ensure that strategic infrastructure remains subject to national oversight while benefiting from private-sector expertise where appropriate.
This naturally raises an important policy question: Is Sierra Leone receiving fair value from its own airport arrangements?
The timing of the suspension also deserves scrutiny.
If the Audit Service now believes a special audit is necessary, why was such scrutiny not undertaken years earlier? Why has the government only now decided to pause the collection of the fee after passengers have paid it for so long?
These are legitimate questions that deserve clear answers.
The issue extends beyond airport charges. Sierra Leoneans are enduring one of the most difficult economic periods in recent memory.
Families continue to struggle with soaring food prices, high transport costs, expensive utilities and declining purchasing power.
Every additional fee imposed on citizens matters.
If millions of dollars have been collected through this airport security charge over the years, the public deserves to know precisely how those funds have benefited the country.
Have they improved airport security? Enhanced passenger services? Upgraded infrastructure?
Or simply increased the cost of travel without delivering visible improvements?
Airport security itself cannot be separated from the broader quality of airport infrastructure. International standards encompass runway maintenance, navigation systems, emergency response capacity, terminal facilities, passenger experience and regulatory compliance.
These are the benchmarks by which modern airports are judged.
The government should therefore publish the findings of the Audit Service in full.
It should also disclose the complete concession agreement, annual revenues collected since the fee was introduced, the distribution of those revenues between the operator and the state, and the specific investments financed through the proceeds.
Transparency should never depend on public pressure or media scrutiny. It should be the default position whenever public assets and public money are involved.
The suspension of the US$25 Airport Security Fee provides an opportunity not merely to review one charge but to reassess how Sierra Leone manages its strategic infrastructure.
The people deserve openness, accountability and assurance that national assets are being administered in the national interest.
Only through full disclosure can public confidence be restored and trust rebuilt.
