MINISTER WURIE, ACC IN HOT SOUP!
…Over USL Extension Scandal
As public attention continues to focus on the University of Sierra Leone (USL) impasse, one of the first documents submitted to the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) concerns what has been described as a “No-Cost Extension Request” under the U-19 Youth Forward Project.
The documents show that on 1 February 2022, COMAHS authorities informed the Vice-Chancellor and Principal of USL that a no-cost extension contract had been agreed upon for the Youth Forward (U-19) Project. The extension was for an additional six months, from 1 January 2022 to 30 June 2022, and required the University’s signature.
The supporting amendment document indicates that the project was funded through a partnership involving Boston College and COMAHS-USL, with Dr. Haja Ramatulai Wurie listed as Principal Investigator. The amendment specifically extended the project period by six months and allocated US$15,000 for the extension period.
According to the budget attached to the extension, the allocation was distributed as follows:
- Dr. Haja Ramatulai Wurie – US$7,500
- Mrs. Elizabeth Kojo-Lansana – US$4,500
- Mrs. Yatta Jennifer Kamara – US$3,000 for the six-month extension period.
The documentation further outlines activities to be undertaken during the extension period, including preparation of publications, development of additional funding opportunities, facilitation of seminars, and completion of administrative and financial reporting requirements.
Questions the Public May Ask
The publication of these documents raises several questions that many observers believe deserve clarification:
- Was the no-cost extension properly approved by all required university authorities?
- Were the payments and allowances made strictly in accordance with the terms of the grant agreement?
- Were all project outputs and deliverables completed during the extension period?
- Did the ACC review this documentation as part of its investigation?
- If so, what conclusions did the Commission reach regarding the extension and related payments?
The Bigger Issue
The significance of Evidence 1 is not necessarily whether a no-cost extension existed—such extensions are common in research projects worldwide. Rather, the question is whether all procedures, approvals, and financial arrangements were handled in accordance with university regulations and grant requirements.
With these documents now in the public domain, attention is increasingly turning to the ACC.
The public deserves to know: Has the ACC fully addressed Evidence 1 in its findings, and if not, when will the Commission release a second report dealing with the outstanding evidence submitted in relation to the USL impasse?