By: Joel Tejan Deen-Tarawally Esq., Prosecutor, ACC (LL.M, BL, LL.B, B.A)
One of the realities to contend with in the fight against corruption is the ability of corruption to fight back when faced with an existential threat. This does not mean that the phenomenon of corruption itself possesses the ability to repel those who seek to combat it; rather, it means that the social architecture, cultural orientation, and beneficiaries of corruption will certainly resist any serious attempt to sanitize a corrupt society. Hence, the beneficiaries of corruption will fight back in order to protect themselves and maintain the status quo.
It is often the case that those who engage in corruption possess the influence, economic means, and wherewithal to navigate their way toward escaping conviction, punishment, or the full force of the law, with the presumption of innocence often serving as their greatest ally. What is, however, completely unacceptable is the intimidation of whistleblowers and interference with investigation and prosecution witnesses, which frequently impede the effectiveness of the fight against corruption. This is a perennial problem not only in Sierra Leone but also in many developing countries where corruption is both systemic and cultural.
Whistleblowers are individuals who report wrongdoing within institutions, often at great personal risk. They are crucial in unveiling corrupt practices that would otherwise remain hidden, especially within government ministries, departments, and agencies. A witness, on the other hand, is an individual called upon to testify in court. In the battle against corruption, effective enforcement relies not only on strong laws but also on the courage of individuals willing to speak out by blowing the whistle on corruption.
Historically, the fear of retaliation and the lack of adequate protection have discouraged whistleblowers and witnesses from coming forward in the fight against corruption in Sierra Leone.
As a Prosecutor, I once handled an anti-corruption case in which a defendant and his defence counsel attempted to use intimidation tactics to prevent a key prosecution witness from testifying in court. In order to protect the said witness, I had to invoke Section 82(1) of the Anti-Corruption Act 2008, which provides that a person who discloses to the Commission an act of corruption by a public officer or public body shall incur no criminal or civil liability. I proceeded with the case to its conclusion, and the defendant was eventually found guilty.
Apart from Section 82 of the Anti-Corruption Act 2008, Section 81 protects the identity of an informer, while Section 83 empowers a Judge to order appropriate measures for the protection and safety of a witness, including ordering that proceedings be held in camera rather than in open court.
However, commendable as these provisions are, they remain intrinsically inadequate for the purpose of providing a well-structured and efficient whistleblower and witness protection legal framework. For instance, the provisions do not adequately address several issues, including the types of protection measures available, the criteria for determining which protection measures should be adopted in a given case, the manner of concealing identity and issuing new personal documents, consent for entering into legal obligations, interrogation and investigation of a protected person, restoration of original identity, and the establishment of a proper reward system, among others.
Consequently, pursuant to Section 140 of the Anti-Corruption Act 2008 (as amended in 2019), the Commission has promulgated, by Statutory Instrument, the Whistleblower and Witness Protection Regulations, marking a significant shift toward empowering citizens in the fight against corruption, ending corruption impunity, curbing intimidation, and strengthening accountability.
The Whistleblower and Witness Protection Regulations introduce a new, pragmatic, and contextual legal framework that addresses many of the historical and cultural challenges associated with conventional protection mechanisms in the fight against corruption. One such challenge arises from a form of “conventional protectionism,” whereby members of a particular group or class protect individuals accused of stealing state resources simply because they belong to the same group or social network. In such circumstances, the perpetrators are often perceived as “their own thieves,” and efforts are made to shield them from accountability.
This reality places whistleblowers in an important yet risky position, as the likelihood of intimidation, discrimination, or harm against them is significantly high.
Recognizing that this poses not only a threat to whistleblowers but also a serious obstacle to the fight against corruption, the Anti-Corruption Commission, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 140 of the Anti-Corruption Act 2008 (as amended in 2019), promulgated the Whistleblower and Witness Protection Regulations through Statutory Instrument No. 83 of 2025 as a game-changing mechanism for safeguarding these individuals and strengthening the fight against corruption.
How the 2025 Regulations Recalibrate the Fight Against Corruption
The Regulations establish a robust and enforceable protection regime.
The interpretation section recognizes that whistleblowers may be subjected to disadvantage, harm, or detriment and therefore provides them with the opportunity to seek protection from the Commission. The term “detriment” is defined as anything done or omitted to be done that causes disadvantage, loss, or harm to a whistleblower, his relative, or his interests.
Regulation 3(1) provides that where a whistleblower or witness reasonably believes that, due to the disclosure of information regarding the commission of a corruption offence, he is likely to suffer harm or danger, he may apply to the Commission for protection. Upon receiving such a request, the Commission must assess the situation within fourteen days and determine whether the circumstances warrant protection. Where protection is deemed necessary, the Commission shall, within seven days, enter into a protection agreement with the whistleblower or witness.
Under the protection agreement, the Commission assumes several responsibilities, including upholding the rights and freedoms of the protected person to the extent necessary for his protection; notifying the protected person in advance to refrain from activities that may compromise the protection measures; informing the protected person of the basic needs that will be provided; ensuring that the protected person receives necessary counselling services; covering relocation costs where relocation is required; and taking all necessary steps to ensure the effectiveness of the protection measures.
In protecting a whistleblower or witness, the Commission may:
(A)Physically protect the whistleblower or witness, including his residence and property
(B)Conceal his identity or the identity of his property
(C)Relocate him to a new area or environment
(D)Provide immunity from prosecution for a corruption offence where appropriate
(E)Prohibit a defendant from approaching the protected person’s residence, workplace, or school before or after final judgment
(F)Ensure that evidence is heard in camera, behind a screen, or with identity concealed
(G)Allow evidence to be tendered through electronic devices or other appropriate methods
(H)Utilize voice or facial distortion techniques to conceal identity
(I)Adopt any other protection measures deemed appropriate in the circumstances of the case
Regulation 13(1) and (2) further empower the Anti-Corruption Commission to provide a whistleblower or witness with a new identity where necessary for his protection.
The Commission may later restore the original identity. In implementing such measures, the Commission may issue a certificate of concealment and request relevant institutions authorized to issue identification documents to provide new identification documents to the protected person.
Such progressive measures are designed to provide clear and robust guarantees for the protection of whistleblowers and witnesses and to further strengthen the fight against corruption. Regulation 26 provides that any person who intentionally interferes with or impedes the protection measures of a protected person commits an offence and, upon conviction, shall be liable to a fine of not less than Le20,000 (Twenty Thousand Leones) or to a term of imprisonment of not less than one year, or to both such fine and imprisonment.
Reward and Compensation Mechanism
The Regulations also establish a clear reward and compensation framework. Regulation 20 empowers the Commission to reward a whistleblower or witness, monetarily, materially, or otherwise, where their disclosure leads to the successful discovery of corruption.
In addition to such rewards, the Commission may compensate the whistleblower or witness with a reasonable amount or institute an action for damages on their behalf where they have suffered detrimental actions such as unlawful termination, demotion, or discrimination.
Furthermore, Regulation 21(3) provides that any person occupying a public office who subjects a whistleblower or witness to detrimental action shall resign from his position within twenty-one days if found culpable by a court of law.
A critical component of the protection accorded to whistleblowers and witnesses is confidentiality. As provided in Regulation 28(1), all records and information relating to a protected person are treated and maintained with the utmost confidentiality. This ensures that the identities of whistleblowers remain protected throughout the investigative and prosecutorial process.
The Commission has also established secure reporting platforms, such as the 077985985/077986986/8515 hotlines and digital reporting portals, which further encourage anonymous disclosures without fear of exposure.
In conclusion, these Regulations not only protect whistleblowers but also strengthen the investigative and prosecutorial capacity of the Anti-Corruption Commission. Reliable witness cooperation, facilitated through protection agreements, accelerates investigations, leads to more robust cases in court, and reduces reliance on circumstantial evidence, which sometimes poses serious challenges to the successful prosecution of corruption cases.
The key message is simple: the State values truth-telling and will not abandon those who step forward to expose corruption. This is why the Whistleblower and Witness Protection Regulations represent a new dawn in Sierra Leone’s anti-corruption efforts. The Regulations align with international best practices and fulfill key recommendations and undertakings under the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, particularly Article 33 of the Convention. They also empower citizens with both the authority and protection needed to actively participate in the national fight against corruption, thereby giving true ownership of the anti-corruption struggle to the people of Sierra Leone.
As implementation progresses, I remain highly optimistic that this framework will lead to increased disclosures, stronger prosecutions, and a more transparent and accountable Sierra Leone. Ultimately, it will help dismantle and demystify the conundrum of endemic corruption and serve as a model for other African countries.
There should be no more fear of intimidation or reprisal when you blow the whistle or report corruption, you now have the full protection of the law.
Thank you for your attention!
©️ Public Relations Unit, ACC
