Electoral reform in Sierra Leone is not a threat: Why parliamentary oversight strengthens democracy

Abdul Kandeh Turay, Chairman Karene District Council

The outcome of the eight-day engagement between the APC, the Government and the Moral Guarantors has generated mixed reactions across the country. While both the Government and the APC have claimed victory, what stands out clearly is the visible uneasiness on the part of the Government. Their frequent appearances across media platforms, often delivering inconsistent and shifting narratives, only deepen public suspicion rather than inspire confidence.

At the heart of the engagement are eight key resolutions aimed at restoring credibility and trust in Sierra Leone’s democratic process. Among these, two are particularly critical: the establishment of a Standing Committee in Parliament on Electoral Matters, and the restructuring of the Electoral Commission for Sierra Leone (ECSL) before 31st December 2026.

It is therefore both surprising and revealing that the SLPP appears most agitated by the proposal to establish a parliamentary committee on electoral matters. Their argument, that such a committee would undermine the independence of the ECSL, does not withstand serious scrutiny. In fact, global democratic practice proves the exact opposite.

Across well-established democracies, parliamentary oversight of electoral bodies is not seen as interference but as a cornerstone of transparency, accountability, and public trust.

In the United Kingdom, for example, Parliament operates the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission, a statutory body responsible for overseeing the Electoral Commission’s performance, finances, and accountability. Far from weakening the Commission, this structure reinforces its credibility and independence.

Similarly, in Australia, the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters plays a central role in reviewing elections, assessing electoral laws, and scrutinizing the work of the Australian Electoral Commission. It is widely regarded as a global model of best practice.

In Canada, electoral oversight is handled by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, which supervises Elections Canada, electoral boundaries, and campaign financing. The existence of such a committee has strengthened institutional accountability without compromising independence.

Even in the United States, electoral matters are not left unchecked. Standing committees such as the House Committee on House Administration and the Senate Rules and Administration Committee exercise oversight over federal elections and campaign finance. This layered system of accountability is central to maintaining electoral integrity.

The same democratic principles apply across Africa. In Nigeria, the National Assembly maintains dedicated committees on electoral matters that oversee the Independent National Electoral Commission and guide electoral reforms.

In Kenya, the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee supervises electoral laws and the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, ensuring continuous legislative scrutiny.

Likewise, in South Africa, the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs provides oversight on electoral legislation and the work of the Independent Electoral Commission.

These examples make one fact undeniable: parliamentary oversight of electoral processes is not a danger, it is a democratic necessity.

Against this backdrop, the resistance by the SLPP raises legitimate concerns. A political party confident in its popularity should welcome reforms that enhance transparency and credibility.

Resistance to oversight often signals discomfort with scrutiny, and that alone should prompt serious reflection among citizens.

Equally troubling is the attempt by some government officials to misinform the public by alleging that the APC requested the inclusion of foreigners in the ECSL or ONS during the engagement. Such claims are not only unfounded but also intellectually dishonest.

A party with the APC’s depth of governance experience understands the principles of sovereignty and would not advocate proposals that undermine national control over critical institutions.

If the agreed reforms are implemented and the necessary restructuring is carried out, ensuring transparency, accountability, and institutional checks, then the credibility of the ECSL will no longer depend on one person.

Under such a strengthened framework, it would be acceptable to have Edmond Alpha or any other qualified Sierra Leonean serve as Chief Electoral Commissioner, because the system itself would guarantee fairness and integrity.

This is the essence of democratic governance: strong institutions, not strong individuals.

Ultimately, the path forward is simple. If the SLPP truly believes it enjoys widespread support, then it should have no fear of reforms that guarantee free, fair, and transparent elections. Democracy thrives on openness, not resistance.

Let the electoral reforms be fully implemented. Let credible systems be put in place. Let institutions be strengthened above personalities. And above all, let the will of the people prevail.

About the author

Abdul Kandeh Turay is the elected Chairman of Karene District Council in Sierra Leone