Decentralisation has become a widely adopted governance strategy worldwide, particularly in post-colonial African states.
Historically, these nations have suffered from centralised power structures
that have resulted in governance inefficiencies, corruption, and a lack of
political participation at the local level (Olowu & Wunsch, 2004). InIn 
Sierra Leone, decentralisation is a crucial aspect of post-war governance reconstruction, aimed at enhancing service delivery and empowering local
authorities (Fanthorpe, 2006).

Despite the enactment of the Local
Government Act (2004) and efforts to restore the chiefdom and district
councils, decentralisation in Sierra Leone continues to face structural challenges, including conflicts between local and national authorities, financial mismanagement and a lack of transparency in land governance (Fanthorpe, 2005). The persistence of these challenges has hindered the intended benefits of decentralisation, raising critical concerns about governance and development at the local level.

This study seeks to analyse the historical
evolution of decentralisation in Sierra Leone, and examine the roles ofthe chiefdom administrations, district assemblies, and provincial assemblies in governance.
It also assesses significant governance challenges in local administration and resource management, and provides policy recommendations based on successful decentralisation models in Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana.

Addressing decentralisation requires an
Understanding of the historical factors that have shaped governance in Sierra
Leone, the role of traditional and district-level authorities in governance,
and the key challenges that decentralisation efforts continue to face. This research also explores how Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana have successfully implemented decentralisation and offers policy reforms to strengthen local governance in Sierra Leone.

The study adopts a qualitative research
approach through historical document analysis, focusing on colonial and
post-independence governance structures. Comparative case studies of Ghana,
Rwanda and Botswana provide insights into best practices in decentralisation.
Interviews with policy experts, traditional leaders, and governance specialists
complement the research, along with secondary data analysis from government
reports, academic articles, and legal frameworks.

The Historical Evolution of Decentralisation in Sierra Leone

Decentralisation in Sierra Leone has undergone multiple transformations, marked by four key periods: pre-colonial traditional governance, colonial indirect rule (1896–1961), post-independence
centralisation (1961–2004), and the Local Government Act (2004–present).

Before colonial rule, governance in Sierra
Leone was structured around chieftaincy institutions, where chiefs functioned
as custodians of land and natural resources, arbitrators of justice, and
political and administrative leaders (Kilson, 1966). Governance structures included paramount chiefs who were the supreme rulers overseeing regional territories, village chiefs and elders responsible for dispute resolution, and secret societies such as Poro and Sande, which regulated customary laws and cultural practices (Mamdani, 1996).

With the introduction of indirect rule by the British colonial administration (1896–1961), chiefs were granted administrative
power but remained accountable to colonial authorities. This governance model
strengthened hierarchical power structures, allowing chiefs to serve as intermediaries between the colonial government and local populations (Fanthorpe, 2006). However, indirect rule institutionalised elite capture,
weakened local governance, and reinforced inequalities, leaving a legacy of governance inefficiencies that persist today.

After gaining independence in 1961, Sierra
Leone’s governance system became highly centralised, resulting in the dismantling of local governance institutions. The national government gained greater control over traditional authorities, resulting in governance inefficiencies and escalating land disputes due to the lack of decentralised decision-making (Ladner, 2016). These governance challenges were exacerbated by the concentration of power within the executive branch, limiting the autonomy of local governance structures.

Following the devastating civil war
(1991–2002), Governance reforms were introduced to rebuild state institutions.
The Local Government Act (2004) sought to reintroduce district and municipal
councils, improve service delivery, and enhance participatory democracy by
re-establishing the authority of local governments and traditional leaders
(Government of Sierra Leone, 2004). However, despite these reforms,
decentralisation continues to face challenges, particularly in terms of
financial management, land governance, and political interference.

Chiefdom Administrations and Local Governance

Chiefdom administrations remain central to governance in Sierra Leone, particularly in rural areas where customary land tenure systems dominate. These administrations play an essential role in managing land, mediating conflicts, enforcing traditional laws, and negotiating with investors in sectors such as mining and agriculture (Acemoglu, Reed, & Robinson, 2014).

Despite their importance, chiefdom
administrations face significant challenges. Corruption and the misallocation of resources have weakened their effectiveness in governance (Logan, 2013).
Chiefs are often accused of lacking transparency in land deals, leading to
disputes and conflicts among local communities. Political interference in the
selection and appointment of chiefs further complicates governance, as chiefs
frequently become aligned with political elites, compromising their neutrality
and governance roles.

District and Provincial Assemblies: Roles and Challenges

District and provincial assemblies are
responsible for coordinating governance efforts between chiefdom administrations and the central government. These assemblies are intended to enhance decentralised governance by allowing greater local participation in decision-making. However, they face significant challenges that undermine their
effectiveness.

One of the primary challenges is the conflict between chiefs and elected officials, as power struggles often emerge over
control of land and resources. Budgetary dependence on central government
allocations limits the financial autonomy of district and provincial assemblies, reducing their ability to implement policies effectively (Mokonzi, 2016). Furthermore, bureaucratic inefficiencies and weak policy enforcement mechanisms impede local governments’ ability to operate independently and deliver essential services (Ladner, 2016).

Comparative Case Studies: Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana

A comparative analysis of decentralisation in Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana offers valuable insights into best practices that
Sierra Leone could adopt measures to strengthen its local governance system.

In Ghana, the establishment of the National House of Chiefs has facilitated the integration of traditional leadership into governance. Chiefs serve as advisors in policymaking and contribute to land governance within legal frameworks (Ray, 2003; Ubink, 2007).

Rwanda has implemented a structured,
community-led decentralisation model that emphasises participatory governance.
Through initiatives such as Umuganda, a community service program that
fosters civic engagement, Rwanda has strengthened local governance by promoting community participation in decision-making (Chemouni, 2014). The decentralised resource allocation system has also improved service delivery at the local level.

Botswana’s Bogosi Act (2008) has
provided a legal framework that defines the role of chiefs in governance. This law has facilitated transparent revenue-sharing models, particularly in the mining sector, ensuring that local communities benefit from natural resources.
By clearly delineating the responsibilities of traditional leaders, Botswana has minimised corruption and governance inefficiencies in land and resource
management (Good, 2008).

Policy Recommendations

To improve decentralisation in Sierra Leone, lessons from Ghana, Rwanda, and Botswana should be applied. One key 
recommendation is the enforcement of anti-corruption measures in the chiefdom
administrations to enhance accountability and transparency. Establishing a National
The House of Chiefs, as in Ghana’s model, could provide a structured framework for traditional leadership and land governance.

Sierra Leone could also adopt participatory
governance practices, such as Rwanda’s Umuganda, to encourage community
engagement in decision-making. Implementing a transparent land registration system would help resolve longstanding land disputes and ensure equitable access to land. Additionally, following Botswana’s example, Sierra Leone should develop precise revenue-sharing mechanisms that guarantee local governments and communities benefit from natural resource revenues.

Citation & References

A. Books & Academic Papers

Acemoglu, D., Reed, T., & Robinson, J. A.
(2014). Chiefs: Economic Development and Political Authority in Sierra Leone.
American Economic Review, 104(6), 1797–1825.
https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.6.1797

Chemouni, B. (2014). Explaining the Success of Rwanda’s Governance: Centralisation, Development, and Political Control.
Journal of Eastern African Studies, 8(2), 196-209.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2014.883770

Fanthorpe, R. (2005). On the Limits of
Liberal Peace: Chiefs and Democratic Decentralisation in Post-War Sierra Leone.
African Affairs, 105(418), 27-49. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adi074

Fanthorpe, R. (2006). Neither Citizen nor
Subject? ‘Lumpen’ Agency and the Legacy of Native Administration in Sierra
Leone. African Affairs, 105(421), 27-49.
https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adi074

Good, K. (2008). Diamonds, Dispossession, and Democracy in Botswana. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 46(4),
637–660. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X08003496

Kilson, M. (1966). Political Change in a
West African State: A Study of the Modernisation Process in Sierra Leone.
Harvard University Press.

Ladner, A. (2016). Local Government and
Decentralisation: Strengthening Democratic Governance. Journal of
Political Reform, 12(3), 341-365.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14649388.2016.1187401

Logan, C. (2013). The Roots of Resilience:
Exploring Popular Support for African Traditional Authorities. African
Affairs, 112(448), 353-376. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adt020

Mamdani, M. (1996). Citizen and Subject:
Contemporary Africa and the Legacy of Late Colonialism. Princeton
University Press.

Mokonzi, C. (2016). Customary Land Tenure and Decentralisation in Sierra Leone. International Journal of African
Governance, 19(3), 251-268. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adw002

Olowu, D., & Wunsch, J. S. (2004). Local
Governance in Africa: The Challenges of Democratic Decentralisation. Lynne
Rienner Publishers.

Ray, D. I. (2003). Ghana: Traditional
Leadership and Rural Local Governance. Canadian Journal of African
Studies, 37(2-3), 283-312. https://doi.org/10.1080/00083968.2003.10756405

Richards, P. (1996). Fighting for the
Rainforest: War, Youth & Resources in Sierra Leone. Heinemann.

Ubink, J. (2007). Traditional Authorities in Ghana: Surrogate Government Agents or Real Authorities? Leiden Law
Journal, 21(4), 77-102. https://doi.org/10.1093/ghd/21.4.77

B. Government Reports & Legal Documents

Botswana Government. (2008). The Bogosi
Act: Governance and Chieftaincy Reform. Government of Botswana.

Government of Ghana. (1992). Constitution
of the Republic of Ghana. Government Press.

Government of Sierra Leone. (2004). The
Local Government Act. Government of Sierra Leone.

Government of Sierra Leone. (2009). The
Chieftaincy Act. Government of Sierra Leone.

Government of Sierra Leone. (2020). National
Development Plan 2020–2025. Freetown: Ministry of Planning and Economic
Development.

Rwanda Governance Board. (2016). Decentralization
Policy Review. Government of Rwanda.

C. Case Studies & Reports from International Organizations

Afrobarometer. (2016). Traditional Leaders
in Modern Africa: Can Democracy and Chieftaincy Coexist? Afrobarometer
Briefing Paper No. 145. https://doi.org/10.1093/afrobarometer.bp145

Commonwealth Local Government Forum. (2018). Decentralisation in Africa: Trends and Policy Recommendations. London: CLGF.

International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). (2019). Land Governance and Customary Tenure in West
Africa. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649388.2019.1597401

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP,2018). The Role of Traditional Authorities in Post-Conflict Governance.
UNDP Policy Brief.

World Bank. (2017). Decentralization and
Local Governance in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

D. Additional Online References

Sierra Leone Ministry of Local Government and
Rural Development. (2021). Annual Report on Decentralisation.  https://mlgrd.gov.sl/reports

Transparency International. (2022). Corruption and Local Governance in Sierra Leone. 
https://transparency.org/reports/2022/sierra-leone-local-governance

World Economic Forum. (2021). Decentralisation and Economic Development in Africa. 
https://weforum.org/reports/africa-decentralization

E. In-Text Citations

1. Historical
   Context:
   • Decentralization
     Post-independence Africa has mainly been influenced by colonial governance structures, where chiefs served as intermediaries between local communities and colonial administrators (Mamdani, 1996;
     Olowu & Wunsch, 2004).
   • In Sierra Leone, chieftaincy institutions were formalised under indirect rule, which centralised power while maintaining customary law
     (Fanthorpe, 2006).
2. Governance
   Challenges:
   • Logan
     (2013) argues that chiefdom administrations in Sierra Leone suffer from corruption and political interference, limiting their effectiveness in local governance.
   • Studies show that district and municipal councils remain financially dependent
     on central government allocations, making them susceptible to elite
     capture (Ladner, 2016; Fanthorpe, 2005).
3. Case
   Study Comparisons:
   • Ghana has successfully integrated traditional leadership into governance through the establishment of the National House of Chiefs (Ray,
     2003; Ubink, 2007).
   • Rwanda’s community-led decentralisation strategy, known as Umuganda, has improved citizen participation and service delivery (Chemouni, 2014).
   • Botswana’s  Bogosi Act (2008) has legally defined the role of chiefs in land and natural resource management, reducing corruption in land governance (Good, 2008).
4. Policy
   Recommendations:
   • To strengthen decentralisation in Sierra Leone, scholars recommend creating a
     National House of Chiefs, like Ghana’s model (Government of
     Ghana, 1992).
   • Adopting Botswana’s revenue-sharing model in mining and land governance could reduce economic disparities and increase local autonomy
     (Botswana Government, 2008; World Bank, 2017).