Decentralization in Sierra Leone - Research for Development

Decentralization in Sierra LeoneIt is rare, in post-conflict African states, for peacebuilding to be openly recognized as anofficial rationale for decentralization (Crawford and Hartmann, 2008:244-5). However, theKabbah government’s submission to the meeting indicated that it was in full agreement withits development partners’ analysis (GoSL, 2002). Sierra Leone’s first full PRSP reiterated thispeacebuilding rationale:The Government has already adopted decentralisation and empowerment as a keystrategy for promoting good governance, consolidating peace and reducing poverty. Thisstrategic decision is based on the recognition that a major contributing factor to the tenyearcivil war was the antagonism between a large section of the population, who weremarginalised from the political process and deprived of social services and economicdevelopment opportunities on the one hand and those who controlled resources throughabsolute power and corruption on the other. Additionally, the immense developmentchallenges facing the nation cannot be addressed unless the entire population ismobilised to identify and own their local priorities and address these priorities throughcollective action (GoSL, 2005:81).The GoSL’s willingness to embrace this peacebuilding agenda clinched donor support for theprogramme. The World Bank focussed support on decentralization, as opposed to the broaderpackage of public sector reforms advocated by other donors, for precisely this reason (Zhou,2007). The Bank was in favour of a fast-track programme, similar to the “big bang”decentralization initiated in 1999 in post-Suharto Indonesia, in order to cement institutionalreforms while the political climate remained favourable (World Bank, 2003). An early UNDPpolicy briefing also notes, enthusiastically, that “decentralization of government services andre-establishment of elected local government councils may be the most important politicalreform in Sierra Leone since independence” (UNDP, 2004:1).A striking difference emerges here between Sierra Leone’s decentralization programme andprogrammes undertaken in other post-conflict states. In Sierra Leone, there was no perceivedneed to construct a decentralized political framework specifically to facilitate the peaceful coexistenceof former warring factions. None of the leading factions in the Sierra Leoneanconflict became major players in peacetime politics: the old army and CDF disbanded soonafter peace was formally declared and the RUF failed to make headway as a political party.Consequently, there were none of the protracted debates and tense negotiations overdecentralization in Sierra Leone as there were, for example, between RENAMO andFRELIMO factions in Mozambique (Sitoe and Hunguana, 2005) and between Albanians andSerbs in Kosovo (KIPRED, 2009). Nor did decentralization in Sierra Leone take placeagainst a background of extreme inter-ethnic violence as in the case of Rwanda (van Tilburg,2008). With GoSL support for the programme assured, donors were free to focus on thetechnical modalities of decentralization. It was not until later that the complex politicsinvolved in local government in Sierra Leone began to make their presence felt.Fast-Track ImplementationProgress in implementing the new programme was rapid. A government task force, supportedby UNDP and DFID, coordinated expert seminars and public consultations ondecentralization reforms in 2003. This work culminated in the drafting of a new LocalGovernment Act (LGA), which was ratified by the Sierra Leone Parliament in February2004. Local council elections were held three months later. The World Bank joined thepartnership at this time and went on to serve as the main conduit for international technicaland financial support to the programme.Fanthorpe Consultancy Ltd Page 52