Freetown, Sierra Leone – 1st July 2026
A formal complaint addressing concerns of maladministration and abuse of administrative discretion has been submitted to the Office of the Ombudsman regarding the continued tenure of Professor Bashiru Koroma as Vice-Chancellor and Principal of Njala University. The complainant has called for urgent intervention to address alleged violations of the Universities Act, 2021, which govern the management and governance of public universities in Sierra Leone.
The complaint highlights that Professor Koroma reached the statutory retirement age set by the Universities Act at 65 years on 3rd March 2025. According to Section 15(7) of the Act, senior staff members are required to retire upon attaining this age, extensions beyond this must be granted only under exceptional circumstances and for clearly defined short-term periods. Despite this clear legal framework, Professor Koroma was granted a one-year extension beyond this mandatory retirement age, which has since expired. Reports now indicate that further efforts are underway to secure yet another extension, raising questions about compliance with the law and governance standards within the institution.
The Complaint’s letter stresses that the retirement age is not merely advisory or administrative, but constitutes a statutory mandate enacted by Parliament. While the Act permits limited extensions in exceptional cases, repeated renewals of such extensions risk nullifying the intended legislative purpose. “An exception that is renewed whenever it expires ceases to be exceptional,” she wrote, emphasizing the risk of administrative discretion overstepping the bounds set by statute.
Another critical element presented in the complaint pertains to the succession mechanism established under Section 8(5) of the Universities Act. The Act stipulates that when the office of Vice-Chancellor becomes vacant, the Pro-Vice-Chancellor should act in that capacity until a substantive appointment is made. This provision is designed to ensure institutional continuity and maintain integrity in leadership appointments without creating power vacuums. The failure to activate this mechanism while perpetuating successive extensions for Professor Koroma, contravenes this requirement and undermines good governance practices.
The complaint touches on broader constitutional and administrative concerns. Public authorities operate strictly within the scope of powers granted to them by law and are bound to exercise such powers reasonably, fairly, and for legitimate purposes. Administrative discretion is circumscribed by legal frameworks and principles of legality, transparency, and accountability. Any neglect of these safeguards or distortion of discretionary powers can constitute maladministration—an issue warranting thorough investigation by the Ombudsman’s Office.
The implications of prolonging Professor Koroma’s tenure extend beyond legal technicalities. Succession planning, staff morale, equitable opportunities for qualified academics, public confidence in university governance, and respect for statutory institutions all stand at risk. The perception that legal requirements might be selectively enforced, creates an unhealthy precedent that could erode trust in public institutions and their administration.
The Complainant explicitly clarifies that the complaint is not a personal attack on Professor Koroma, but focuses on ensuring lawful, transparent, and accountable governance within public universities. Upholding the Universities Act reflects adherence to parliamentary intent and promotes legitimacy in institutional operations. “No public officer, regardless of office or accomplishment, should be permitted to remain in office contrary to the requirements of statute, if doing so undermines public confidence in the administration of the law,” she asserts.
In the complainant’s concluding remarks, the complainant appeals to the Ombudsman to treat the complaint with utmost seriousness. She urges the Office to conduct a comprehensive investigation into whether maladministration has occurred and to recommend corrective measures. Such actions would reinforce respect for statutory provisions, safeguard good governance, and maintain public trust in Sierra Leone’s higher education system.
This complaint brings to light the critical need for transparency and rule of law in the administration of public offices. Given the importance of Njala University as a key institution in the country’s educational landscape, the matter attracts significant public interest. How the Office of the Ombudsman responds could have wide-reaching implications for governance standards across public institutions in Sierra Leone.
As calls for accountability grow louder, stakeholders await the Ombudsman’s findings and recommendations. For now, the spotlight remains firmly on Njala University and the processes governing its leadership, with hopes that lawful procedures and institutional integrity will prevail.
See letter below:
