By Ibrahim Karim Bangura (Tanko)

One of the outstanding and trustworthy civil society organizations in the country, Budget Advocacy Network (BAN) and other credible CSOs have raised serious worries over the bias in the Tribunal Report against Mrs. Lara Taylor-Pearce, and former Deputy Auditor-General, Mr. Tamba Momoh.

They are alleged for  misapplication of legal standards, and exclusive reliance on witness while neglecting expert testimonies from recognized authorities, and a selective presentation of evidences all of which were compromised by the Tribunal’s credibility and integrity of its findings.

Speaking to journalists, Abu Kamara, Coordinator of Budget Advocacy Network, said the Tribunal’s perceived partiality undermines its recommendations for the removal of both individuals from the Audit Service Sierra Leone and a subsequent investigation by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), which they describe as unfortunate precedent and miserable for good governance and the rule of law in the country. Noting the Tribunal’s failed to adequately demonstrate the application of other rule of law, principles thus including fair and impartial legal processes; due process; assess to justices and equality before the GBV law.

In addition, misstep casts a shadow on the credibility of both the Tribunal and its report, they said.

“The undersigned organizations published today 29th October 2024 an in-depth analysis of the Tribunal report regarding the Auditor-General, Mrs. Lara Tayior-Pearce and former Deputy Auditor-General, Mr. Tamba Momoh.”

“The analysis uncovers procedural deficiencies such as non-adherence to natural justice and the rule of law, unclear evidences standards, unsupported conclusions, and perceived partiality by the Tribunal.”

BAN says the TR demonstrates a failure to articulate specific allegations against Mrs. Lara Taylor-Pearce, and former Deputy Auditor-General, Mr. Tamba Momoh, misapplication.

It said the Transformed Freetown money project was a donor funs, control by donor budget, not FCC. Basically, it went on, the Audit Service was verifying receipts that hasve to do with the office of the President, using different hotels in South Africa, Zambia etc,” BAN official said.

Barrister Hassan Conteh Esq of Institute for Legal Research and Advocacy for Justice (ILRAJ), said the Act provides clear provision that were neither inconsistent with nor overridden by the constitution, and therefore the Tribunal’s approach misdirected the framework governing

Mr. Momoh’s position, thereby undermining the procedural integrity of the investigation. Despite the expert’s testimony and a state witness’s acknowledgment that the Auditor-General and deputy are entitled to exercise professional scepitism, the Tribunal sided with the state without identifying breaches of internationally recognized standards. In addition, Esq Conteh highlighted that the Tribunal findings were conflicting, coupled with huge unfairness interest without accounting for these discrepancies or the respondents’ successful rebuttal, thus pointing to a deeper issue of partiality and selective judgment in favour of the state.

He however, said the Tribunal has compromised the independence of the Audit Service Sierra Leone and the professional integrity of Mrs. Taylor-Pearce and Mr. Momoh regarding the above matter.

Mohamed Konneh, representative from the Sierra Leone Association Journalists (SLAJ), said the decision of the Tribunal Report is appalling base on their judgment, adding that parliament should critically look into the report.

“SLAJ is concerned about the methodology and transparency, going forward lawmakers should reject the Tribunal’s report for the interest of good government and accountability in the country,” he suggested.

Meanwhile, Managing Lead, Citizens Barray, Eleanor Thompson said the breach od section 11(1) and (2) of the Audit Service Act 2014 shows evidences of the Auditor-General’s or former Deputy Auditor-General’s inability or failure to carry out the function of their offices.

Issues of conflict of interests and allegations against Mrs. Taylor-Pearce were not even brought up during the Tribunal hearing and thus not proven.

She says the allegation against Mr. Momoh was based on a discredited witness who was unable to accurately identify Mr. Momoh.

“We noted improper third-party confirmation, and the Tribunal identified the wrong type of third-party confirmation and ignored expert evidences that confirmed that the relevant international auditing standards,” said Mrs. Thompson.