By Albert David
In a nation still struggling to strengthen its democratic foundations, the recent declarations attributed to Paran Tarawally, the current National Secretary General Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP), should trouble every citizen who believes in constitutional order and institutional integrity. When a political operative confidently proclaims that “the 2028 election belongs to us” and mocks opponents as unprepared, the issue is no longer partisan rivalry, it is a direct challenge to the very principles that safeguard national stability.
Such statements are not harmless political bravado. They reveal a mindset that treats elections not as a contest of ideas but as a foregone conclusion, a prize already secured through strategy rather than earned through public trust. This is the language of entitlement, not democracy. Yet the controversy does not begin with these recent remarks. Sierra Leoneans have not forgotten the unresolved ethical shadows surrounding Tarawally’s tenure as Clerk of Parliament, allegations that strike at the heart of public accountability.
During his time as the administrative head of Parliament, he was accused of deceptively facilitating the employment of his spouse under questionable circumstances, she received substantial monthly salaries without performing parliamentary duties. Ordinary workers were laid off under the pretext of reducing expenditure, while no transparent, independent investigation was ever conducted into the alleged nepotism and misuse of public funds. The quiet refund of salaries, without public disclosure, accountability, or consequences, only deepened public suspicion. These are not administrative oversights. They represent a profound breach of public trust and a violation of the ethical standards expected of those who manage the nation’s legislative machinery.
Even more disturbing are Tarawally’s own claims that he “played the political game” to engineer the expulsion of elected APC Members of Parliament, a move that, if accurately described, would constitute one of the most consequential manipulations of parliamentary representation in recent memory. The suggestion that such actions were coordinated with the executive, the judiciary, and the electoral commission raises serious questions about institutional neutrality and the separation of powers. These actions would not merely be political manoeuvres, they would be a direct assault on democratic legitimacy. They would represent a deliberate distortion of the people’s will, a calculated weakening of parliamentary independence, and a dangerous precedent for future electoral interference.
This is not about SLPP versus APC. This is about Sierra Leone versus the erosion of democratic norms. A democracy cannot survive when elections are spoken of as predetermined. It cannot thrive when public institutions are weaponised for partisan advantage. It cannot progress when accountability is replaced with silence, and when those entrusted with public office treat national governance as a private chessboard.
The international community observes these developments with growing unease, not because of party politics, but because democratic backsliding anywhere is a warning everywhere. Sierra Leone’s credibility, stability, and development depend on institutions that are stronger than individuals and processes that cannot be bent to political convenience.
The nation stands at a critical crossroads. One path leads to deeper division, institutional fragility, and public disillusionment. The other leads to transparency, accountability, and a renewed commitment to democratic principles. The future of Sierra Leone must not be dictated by political arrogance or institutional manipulation. It must be shaped by the will of the people, freely expressed, transparently counted, and constitutionally protected. Anything less is not democracy. It is a national and international embarrassment waiting to unfold.
