Absence of Mayor & Deputy Doesn’t Empower Councillors to Act — Former SLPP Mayor Avers

Former SLPP Mayor of Bonthe District and former Public Relations Officer of LOCASL, Layemin Joe Sandi, has weighed in on the ongoing controversy surrounding the nomination of an “Acting Mayor” in Freetown, describing the move as a troubling precedent.

Sandi argued that where both the Mayor and Deputy Mayor are absent from governance, the law does not transfer executive authority to councillors to assume the office of Mayor. He emphasized that Section 16(3) of the Local Government Act only permits councillors, during a properly constituted meeting, to elect one among themselves to preside over proceedings.

According to him, this role is strictly procedural and does not confer the powers, authority, or status of a Mayor. “To interpret it otherwise,” he noted, “would be to stretch the law beyond its intent.”

He further highlighted the importance of quorum, stressing that a council meeting can only proceed lawfully when at least half of all councillors are present. Without this minimum requirement, he said, no valid decisions can be taken. Consequently, any attempt to elect or declare an “Acting Mayor” without meeting quorum requirements would carry questionable legal standing.

On the role of central government oversight, Sandi clarified that the authority of the Ministry of Local Government and Community Affairs is limited. Citing Section 105 of the Act, he stated that the Minister does not have the power to appoint or approve an Acting Mayor.

Addressing potential escalation, Sandi pointed to Section 108 of the Act, which provides a higher-level intervention mechanism. In situations where a council becomes unable to function effectively, the President may step in—but only with the approval of two-thirds of Parliament. He stressed that this is a constitutional safeguard reserved for extreme circumstances and must be exercised with caution, transparency, and accountability.

While acknowledging the broader issues contributing to the current impasse—including governance concerns, implementation of national recommendations, the drugs crisis, and the rising cost of living—Sandi cautioned against responses that undermine the legal framework of local governance.

“This moment calls for dialogue without ego,” he stated, urging political actors to engage in good faith. He emphasized that governance is a shared responsibility and warned institutions against creating solutions outside the law, regardless of intentions.

Sandi concluded by underscoring the importance of local councils as the closest point of service delivery to citizens. Weakening these institutions, he warned, ultimately harms ordinary people the most. He called for adherence to the law and restraint in order to avoid setting precedents that could be difficult to reverse.

Sandi argued that where both the Mayor and Deputy Mayor are absent from governance, the law does not transfer executive authority to councillors to assume the office of Mayor. He emphasized that Section 16(3) of the Local Government Act only permits councillors, during a properly constituted meeting, to elect one among themselves to preside over proceedings.

According to him, this role is strictly procedural and does not confer the powers, authority, or status of a Mayor. “To interpret it otherwise,” he noted, “would be to stretch the law beyond its intent.”

He further highlighted the importance of quorum, stressing that a council meeting can only proceed lawfully when at least half of all councillors are present. Without this minimum requirement, he said, no valid decisions can be taken. Consequently, any attempt to elect or declare an “Acting Mayor” without meeting quorum requirements would carry questionable legal standing.

On the role of central government oversight, Sandi clarified that the authority of the Ministry of Local Government and Community Affairs is limited. Citing Section 105 of the Act, he stated that the Minister does not have the power to appoint or approve an Acting Mayor.

Addressing potential escalation, Sandi pointed to Section 108 of the Act, which provides a higher-level intervention mechanism. In situations where a council becomes unable to function effectively, the President may step in—but only with the approval of two-thirds of Parliament. He stressed that this is a constitutional safeguard reserved for extreme circumstances and must be exercised with caution, transparency, and accountability.

While acknowledging the broader issues contributing to the current impasse—including governance concerns, implementation of national recommendations, the drugs crisis, and the rising cost of living—Sandi cautioned against responses that undermine the legal framework of local governance.

“This moment calls for dialogue without ego,” he stated, urging political actors to engage in good faith. He emphasized that governance is a shared responsibility and warned institutions against creating solutions outside the law, regardless of intentions.

Sandi concluded by underscoring the importance of local councils as the closest point of service delivery to citizens. Weakening these institutions, he warned, ultimately harms ordinary people the most. He called for adherence to the law and restraint in order to avoid setting precedents that could be difficult to reverse.