By: Musa Paul Feika
The a fundamental question confronting Sierra Leone; why does the country’s main seaport continue to feature in international cocaine investigations despite repeated official assurances that security systems are robust? Each new seizure linked to cargo that passed through Freetown reignites concerns about the integrity of the country’s export chain, placing the Sierra Leone Ports and Harbours Authority (SLPHA), under intense public and international scrutiny. While port authorities insist Sierra Leone is being unfairly blamed for crimes committed elsewhere, many believe the recurring incidents demand greater transparency, stronger accountability, and convincing evidence that the nation’s principal gateway to international trade is not being exploited by transnational drug trafficking networks.
The Director General of the Sierra Leone Ports and Harbours Authority (SLPHA), Yankuba Askia Bio, has mounted a vigorous defense of the country’s main seaport against growing allegations that it has become a transit point for international drug trafficking. However, his explanations are unlikely to silence mounting public concerns over Sierra Leone’s repeated association with major cocaine seizures abroad.
During a recent radio interview, the SLPHA boss, Yankuba A. Bio admitted that the recurring reports have tarnished not only the image of the Ports Authority but also the reputation of Sierra Leone.
“I am really, really concerned because it affects me personally, it affects the government, and it affects the image of our country,” he said.
While acknowledging the reputational damage, the Director General Mr. Bio insisted that organized criminal networks operate worldwide and argued that Sierra Leone should not automatically be blamed each time drugs are discovered in containers overseas.
He maintained that international shipping involves multiple ports and several institutions before cargo reaches its final destination, making it difficult to conclude that narcotics originated in Sierra Leone.
Yet, for many Sierra Leoneans, the explanation raises as many questions as it answers.
If containers linked to Sierra Leone continue appearing in high profile international drug investigations, critics argue that deeper scrutiny of export controls and security systems is inevitable.
The Director General emphasized that SLPHA does not directly control customs clearance or cargo declarations, describing the Authority primarily as the landlord and regulator of port infrastructure while private concessionaires and other government agencies oversee operational procedures.
“Our responsibility is different from the customs clearance process,” he said.
His remarks appear to shift much of the operational responsibility to customs authorities, shipping agents, freight forwarders, terminal operators, and other institutions involved in the export chain.
Responding to allegations surrounding a cocaine shipment intercepted overseas, the Director General Mr Yankuba A. Bio cited an investigation which, according to him, established that the container departed Sierra Leone empty and sealed before spending several days at another West African port, where it was allegedly tampered with.
He said investigations involving international shipping companies and foreign port authorities concluded that the cocaine was inserted outside Sierra Leone.
However, the Director General Yankuba A.Bio did not publicly identify the investigation, nor did he indicate whether its findings have been released for independent scrutiny.
The repeated emergence of Sierra Leone’s name in international drug trafficking reports continues to fuel public concern and raises broader questions about whether existing safeguards have been sufficient.
Perhaps the strongest admission during the interview came when the SLPHA chief announced sweeping new security measures designed to prevent future incidents.
Under the new arrangements, all export containers must arrive at least 72 hours before shipment, while export operations have been transferred to Inland Container Depots to allow more extensive inspections by security agencies. Terminal operators have also been directed to tighten security procedures.
While presented as reforms, the measures inevitably raise another question, if existing security systems were already adequate, why were such significant changes considered necessary?
For many observers, the introduction of stricter controls suggests that authorities themselves recognize vulnerabilities within the export process that required urgent attention.
Having spent more than fifteen years at the Ports Authority, the Director General said safeguarding Sierra Leone’s maritime reputation remains one of his highest priorities and pledged continued cooperation with international partners.
But restoring confidence may require more than assurances.
As international attention increasingly focuses on transnational drug trafficking routes across West Africa, Sierra Leone faces growing pressure to demonstrate that its ports are not becoming vulnerable links in global criminal networks.
Whether the latest reforms will restore confidence remains to be seen. For now, the country’s principal gateway to international trade continues to operate under an uncomfortable cloud of suspicion, with every new drug seizure abroad placing Sierra Leone’s port security under renewed scrutiny, leaving one question unanswered; why does Sierra Leone’s SLPHA keep finding itself at the center of the cocaine conversation?