By Ragan M. Conteh

At least 54 lawmakers in Sierra Leone Parliament are believed to have refused the suspension of the Auditor General Lara Taylor-Pearce from office.

The suspension of Madam Pearce happened on 11th November, 2021.

The leadership of the APC MPs in Parliament, Hon. Abdul Kargbo stated that “we followed with keen interest the proceedings of the Tribunal that was set up to investigate her and the Deputy Auditor General Mr. Tamba Momoh for alleged professional misconduct and lack of professional performance.”

According to the MPs the Parliament of Sierra Leone, through the Office of the Clerk was accorded the report of the Tribunal, which was tabled in the Well of Parliament on Thursday 29th August, 2024.

They said since the Tribunal’s report was made public, and that they had read it, noting of the provisions of the constitution of Sierra Leone and other related legislations.

They said they had also received and noted submissions made by international professional bodies, members of the public, and the two auditors that were investigated by a special tribunal.

They stated that having done much deliberations on same, coupled with wider consultations with both local and international stakeholders, they wish however to state that the Auditor General and her deputy were strictly guided by the International Standards on Auditing [ISA] and by  the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAI).

On this a section 2240,  states that an auditor is usually not trained or expected to be an expert in the authentication of documents, however, when an auditor identifies conditions that cause the auditor to believe that a document may not be authentic or that terms in a document have been modified but not disclosed to the auditor, possible procedures to investigate a matter further includes by confirming directly with a third party.

The APC MPs said that was  obviously so the cause for Madam  Lara and deputy.

Because the MPs believe requesting for authorization before a third party inquiry may lead to the destruction of the evidence in the first place.

They maintained that the allegation for which the Auditor General was investigated for relates to third party confirmation of the authenticity of documents, which is clearly separate and distinct from third party confirmation of account balances such as bank, creditor, debtors account balances.

Furthermore, they disclosed the intent and purpose of this provision  to detect fraud and dishonesty, adding that requiring consent. As a requirement for such confirmation, they argue further, no doubt defeats the very intent for which it was created.

Lawmakers revealed that in paragraph 212 of the tribunal report, the Director General at the INTOSAI Development Initiative [IDI], made it abundantly clear that, he has never come across a requirement that an auditor should seek the consent of an auditee before confirmation could be made from a third party to authentic a document submitted as audit evidence, and that there are no standards for an auditor to get consent for third party confirmation.

However, they went on, to give instances as  contrary to such instructive and expert opinion from highly reputable auditing institution which sets standards for global auditing as provided for in Section 11 [2] [a] of the Audit Service Act 2014 as amended.

The tribunal in paragraph 229 of its report chose to base its conclusion primarily on testimonies of non-expert witnesses and totally discarded the testimonies of the expert witness based on international best practice, they argued.

“We view this not only as a bias, but a mockery of the principle of fairness and justice, ” they said.

APC lawmakers said that as an opposition, they said if this unprecedented removal of the Auditor General attracts two-third majority in Parliament, it will significantly affect the conduct of credible and independent audit and other accountability processes in Sierra Leone.

MPs said owing to the fact that the Audit Service Sierra Leone is perceived by a substantial number of citizens as the only remaining independent and  accountable agency and has stood the test of time for successive governments, and so an attempt by [ any] government to remove the Auditor General will, without a doubt, serve as a barrier for other auditors or other oversight institutions to conduct their work objectively and independently for fear of being subjected to what is perceived as a politically invested interests in an attempt to limit transparency in future.

They stressed that on the alleged failure of the Audit Service to audit the Freetown City Council (FCC) referenced in paragraphs 248-257 of the Tribunal report, and that they are shocked that the Tribunal could make conclusion that the Auditor General and her Deputy had failed to conduct proper audit exercise on the FCC for the Financial year 2020, even to the extent that successive Financial Statements of the FCC and that of the year in question were audited and expressed an impressive “UNQUALIFIED OPINION” in full compliance with Section 11(1) of the Audit Service Act 2014 [see table 4.3 – Councils Opinion 2020 on page 485 and 493 of the Auditor Generals Annual Report 2020].

They said it is worthy of note that all audits conducted by the Audit Service are scope- based and are limited to the Public Accounts of Sierra Leone and all Public offices, other bodies and organizations established by an Act of Parliament or Statutory instrument and that audits of Non-Governmental Organizations do not fall under the functions of the ASSL neither under any other legal mandate.

They underscored the fact that allowing the removal of the Auditor General on this particular issue will certainly defeat the intent and purpose for which His Excellency Julius Maada Bio rejected the 2020 Finance Bill under section 106 [1] of the Constitution of Sierra Leone [Act No. 6 of 1991].

Lawmakers furthered that this bill provided for unaccountable impress for President, Vice President and Speaker of Parliament for all overseas travels.

They continued that the said bill after perusal by State House and in a memorandum addressed to the Clerk of Parliament, the Secretary to the President had this to say “His Excellency the President has perused the document and has expressed grave concern over the open endedness of the non-accountable imprest as provided for in the said act and he is of the view that, this is prone to improper use of public funds” MPs, therefore, strongly believe that they as the opposition in parliament will not be a party to any attempt made by whosoever to erode such level of Transparency and Accountability.

Opposition lawmakers informed that on Tuesday 29th October 2024, the Institution of Chartered Accountants of Sierra Leone (ICASL), establish by the Institution of Chartered Accountants of Sierra Leone Act of 12th May 1988, to regulate accountancy and professional accountants in Sierra Leone, which both the Auditor General and her deputy are members off, issued a press statement to its members confirming that it has conducted its own investigation into this matter, and that there was no evidence of professional miscount.

Instead, MPs states that it confirmed that the auditors acted in the best interest of the public, upheld professional standards and adherence to international auditing standards and guidelines.

They said the same vain as ICASL, but on an international scale, on the 23rd July 2024, the global umbrella body for all Auditors General in the world, the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) who are responsible for regulating their members, and developing the ISSAIs, confirmed that the Auditor General indeed complied with their standard in a press statement titled: INTOSAI General Secretariat and INTOSAI

Development Initiative Joint Position on the Removal Process of the Auditor General of Sierra Leone.

In conclusion, they pointed out that, owing to the composition of this 6th Parliament, it is evident that two-thirds majority of all members of parliament that is needed to vote in favour of the removal of the Auditor General as provided for in section of the Constitution of Sierra Leone, cannot be achieved without the support of the opposition.

Therefore, in the best interest of accountability and transparency, which the Audit Service has stood for over the years, they advise that His Excellency the President reconsiders the recommendations in the tribunal report relating to the removal of the Auditor General and her deputy.

They said it is hoped that His Excellency will heed their advice in the interest of strengthening the tenets of transparency and accountability in the country.