By Lawrence Williams
In what appears to be a war of words between Francis Ben Kaifala (photo) and Hon. Ibrahim Tawa Conteh over who takes primacy of the 2023 Auditor-General’s report, the ACC boss has retaliated to the deputy speaker’s stance, describing it as a form of “parliamentary gangsterism”.
Both the ACC and Parliament now seem to be at loggerheads regarding who should exercise jurisdictional competence over the audit report.
Hon. Tawa Conteh, being the deputy speaker and chairman of the Parliamentary Account Committee (PAC), argues that parliament has primacy over the report, citing Section 119 of the 1991 Constitution. And until the PAC is finished examining the report no person or authority is allowed to create a parallel inquiry.
But Ben Kaifala, who is rumored to have eyes on the presidency, has challenged this position, stating that the report serves as a relevant source of information the ACC could use to investigate instances of corruption that may have occurred in the audited MDAs. Ben relies on the statutory powers in the ACC (amendment) Act of 2019, which allow him to exercise jurisdiction over any and all corruption-related matters.
For Hon. Tawa, the argument is very clear: the PAC is established under Section 93(1)(e) of the Constitution as the sole arbiter of the audit report. This position resonates well with Section 119 (4), which states that the Auditor-General shall ”submit his report to Parliament and shall in that report draw attention to any irregularities in the accounts audited and to any other matter which in his opinion ought to be brought to the notice of Parliament”.
Subsection 4 reiterates further that: ”Parliament shall debate the report of the Auditor-General and appoint where necessary in the public interest a committee to deal with any matters arising therefrom.”
Parliament is an arm of government with wide constitutional and legislative powers, while the ACC is its creature embodied with statutory responsibilities. Therefore, this political one-upmanship between the creator and its creature makes the battle more interesting and mind-blogging all together.
With the country’s “most dangerously educated lawyer” now standing toe-to-toe (or rather mount-to-mouth) with one of the most revered, hardworking, and dedicated parliamentarians in recent times, one can only wish that the wits and witless banter of this political showdown be taken to the stages in Las Vegas.
