The 2021 Mid-Term Census was aborted since it lacked the consent and cooperation of key stakeholders and the vast majority of the people of Sierra Leone.
The Mid-Term Census was bashed at by the people especially those in the North-West regions owing to suspicion of gerrymandering.
The people held the view that that there had never been something like a mid-term census as such exercise is held every 10 years.
The last census was held in 2015 and it therefore followed that another census should be held in 2025, but it is the inverse hence the refusal to participate. In a related development, Development partners, EU, World Bank and others toed the line of the masses by withdrawing support from a process widely seen as illegal and untimely.
This time, will it be a census with consensus amid an ongoing impasse between the ruling Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) and the opposition, All People’s Congress (APC).
Census requires unity and cooperation as data derived from the process is crucial to the country’s all-round socio-economic development.
The current census was supposed to have been held last year, 2025 as the last headcount was conducted in 2015, but financial challenges could be the cause for the postponement compounded by the lingering political dispute.
It is however set to be held this year, 2026 with plans already set in motion.
Although the two political parties, SLPP and APC have reached a headway to end the post-election stalemate, undercurrents of disagreements between the political parties still echoes through the corners of Sierra Leone.
The ANU gave birth to the Tripartite Committee which proffered 80 recommendations whose implementation is supposed to end in seven months according to the December 31, 2026 deadline proposed by the international community.
The recommendations are meant to reform electoral laws, policies and practices so that future elections would be free, fair and credible.
Government stance shows that the they are willing to implement the recommendations since it is for Sierra Leone’s peace and stability.
The recommendations are now tabled before parliament for endorsement ahead of implementation.
Once adopted, the recommendations become law with a binding effect on government.
SLPP, on the other hand, does not countenance the ANU and the 80 recommendations which many of its senior members refer to as a “gentleman’s agreement.” By calling a gentleman’s agreement implies that the ruling elites are at liberty to either accept or reject its terms without any consequence.
SLPP firebrand political hardliner, Paran Tarawally, quite lately appeared on an online tv and made the party’s position clear on the ANU.
“SLPP is not part of the Agreement for National Unity although it is signed by government,” he voiced out his party’s position towards the ANU to the shock and awe of many Sierra Leoneans.
It still remains unclear whether SLPP and the government has come to terms regarding the ANU as the people of Sierra Leone are taken aback by the scribe’s latest comments over the controversial issue.
Regarding the ANU imbroglio between the two political entities, SLPP will have a say but government will have a way since it is highest institution within the state.
As the implementation rolled out, it is therefore safe to say that the people would take part in the country’s governance processes only when the it is completed.
The APC grassroot members who are in the majority, by observation, appears in no mood to support any government programme or activity especially census which has implication on the delimitation of electoral boundaries.
Although doubts are being poured into actualisation of the 2028 election, it is generally believed that the election will hold on the slated date.
By mere inspection, it is an election that the ruling party will not risk losing to make history in post-one-party democracy.
If SLPP won the 2028 election, it sets a history of becoming the first political party to go for in a third term and same time realise the party’s stance of not handing over power to its political rival, the APC.
Such an achievement for a third-term rule is no easy pushover for the ruling party which has explored all avenues and leave no stone unturned to make things work.
One of the avenues is to ensure that the census holds and wins the consent and cooperation of all and sundry.
But, there is a third party in the drama-the Development Partners who are key to the financing of the process.
Currently, the international community is not ready to fund any development project in Sierra Leone until the recommendations are fully implemented.
After the June 24, 2023 election, the international community have cut off funding for several areas of development working in line with the reports of credible local and election observation missions.
Those who have been following recent economic trends are privy to the role of donor communities in national development.
Sierra Leone, despite its recent growth in GDP through the Iron Ore boom, is still struggling to provide social services to the people especially energy, one of the much-needed social services.
Sierra Leone’s struggles could not be divorced from the refusal of donor partners to prop or back up the economy as usual.
It is true that they have held back their resources from government as they wait for the outcome of the implementation of the recommendations. They wanted to see whether government will take the implementation serious or toe the party line.
After the 2023 election which attracted several criticisms over the announcement of the incumbent party winner, the international community cut off ties with government by depriving the country of the usual aid.
The United States which was about to pour in $480m into Sierra Leone’s economy held back their money owing to reports that emanated from the election observation mission.
The money is a grant under the MCC (Millenium Challenge Corporation), a body that sets good governance benchmarks which countries should meet if they are to qualify for it.
The report of US’s main observation body, the Carter Center was highly critical of the entire election process and even recommended accountability for those alleged to have played significant role in election rigging.
Consequently, the US was the first to take strong action on Sierra Leone by withholding MMC fund and same time slam travel ban on Sierra Leoneans including government officials.
EU too reverted to similar action by withholding funds for budget support to Sierra Leone.
The claim that post-war Sierra Leone has always faced a deficit budget financed mainly by development partners with EU taking the lead is incontestable.
EU apart form its support to the country’s infrastructural development, for successive years, funds the country’s budget.
The inter-state body also provide funds for the conduct of Sierra Leone’s general election, but it however stops such assistance owing to the outcome of the 2023 election.
It is clear that the report of the EU Election Observation Mission might have, to a large extent, influenced such decision.
Treading on the same path is the UNDP which, credible sources say, has stopped supporting the courts under the Justice Support Project. As a UN agency, their decision to withhold their support to Sierra Leone also has been linked to electoral reports and Tripartite Committee recommendations submitted to the Security Council, the UN’s highest organ.
Almost Invariably, Britain’s development wing, Department For International Development has also cut off funding for institutions of accountability including the country’s anti-graft agency.
Such funding cut is directly connected to the outcome of the election as the Commonwealth election observers were also on the ground during June, 2023 election.
Sierra Leone is also last in the queue in terms of loans offered by the World Bank, IMF and other international financial institutions owing to the post-election stalemate.
The question that filters through the public, at the moment, boils to one thing-If these development partners keep their funds away from the country’s development projects, will they fund the 2026 census?