Gambiaj.com – (BANJUL, THE GAMBIA) – The government has ordered a police investigation into former Kerewan Area Council (KAC) Chairman Malamin I. L. Bojang over alleged financial misconduct, negligence, and failures in oversight during his tenure but has stopped short of finding that he was involved in corruption.
The government has also directed the Auditor General to conduct a forensic audit that could lead to a surcharge against him while referring his case for a review of his fitness to hold public office.
The decisions are contained in Volume 5 of the Government White Paper on the Commission of Inquiry into the Conduct of All Local Government Councils. Bojang, who chaired the council between 2018 and 2023, is the first individual addressed in the Kerewan volume.
The government accepted all four principal recommendations concerning him, including a criminal investigation, possible recovery of public funds, a formal finding of improper conduct and negligence, and a review of his suitability for future public appointments.
Under the directive, the Inspector General of Police (IGP), working with other competent investigative bodies, must establish whether Bojang’s actions or omissions facilitated criminal misconduct, abuse of office, conspiracy, corruption, or the unlawful loss of public funds. Investigators must also determine whether he received any direct or indirect benefit from the transactions identified by the Commission.
However, the government drew a distinction between negligence and criminal corruption in its assessment of his conduct.
It said the available evidence “may not support corruption” but was sufficient to establish improper conduct in office and negligence. The findings will be formally recorded and taken into consideration should Bojang seek future public appointments.
On the financial aspect, the Auditor General has been instructed to conduct a forensic audit. Any attempt to recover money from the former chairman must, however, be supported by evidence establishing a direct causal link between his conduct and an identifiable financial loss.
Delegation Did Not Remove Oversight Responsibility
During his appearance before the Commission, Bojang described his responsibilities as largely supervisory and political. He told the inquiry that he presided over council meetings and provided general oversight of the administration while relying on the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Director of Finance for day-to-day financial management.
He said procurement compliance was handled by the Contracts Committee and Procurement Unit, while disciplinary matters fell within the responsibilities of the Establishment Committee and the Local Government Service Commission (LGSC).
Bojang denied personal involvement in the misappropriation of council funds, arguing that the CEO did not consult him or seek his clearance before making expenditure decisions.
But the Commission’s findings, subsequently accepted by the government, identified several shortcomings in his oversight responsibilities.
Bojang admitted endorsing council resolutions without first ensuring that the required ministerial approvals had been obtained. He also acknowledged that he had not adequately scrutinized financial reports and procurement processes.
More significantly, audit findings and procurement compliance reports were regularly presented and discussed at council meetings, yet the chairman failed to ensure that decisive corrective or disciplinary measures followed.
The inquiry also found that he did not adequately enforce audit recommendations, demand accountability from responsible officers, or make effective use of the council’s statutory powers.
Bojang further acknowledged receiving complaints from procurement officers alleging that procurement procedures were routinely bypassed and documents fabricated after payments had already been made.
Although he was copied on those complaints, he conceded that his interventions were “largely informal, verbal, and undocumented.”
The Commission also took account of a six-month period during which the council operated without a replacement internal auditor while the substantive post-holder was away on training. Payments continued during that period without the usual internal audit oversight.
In his testimony, Bojang acknowledged that some procurement abuses went beyond technical or administrative errors and reflected deliberate non-compliance and corruption.
The government’s position is that his reliance on other council officials did not absolve him of his own responsibility to supervise their work and ensure accountability.
Government Stops Short of Finding Corruption
Despite the findings against him, the government has not concluded that Bojang personally stole public money or benefited from the irregular transactions.
Instead, it has left those questions for the police to investigate, making his case different from that of former Kerewan CEO Seedy K. Touray and other officials facing separate measures under the White Paper.
The government has also referred Bojang’s fitness-for-office case to the relevant Council under Section 20 of the Local Government Act 2002, as amended. Unlike the council’s finance and executive officers, whose cases have been referred to the Local Government Service Commission, Bojang’s matter has not been sent to that body.
On legislative reforms, the government accepted the Commission’s recommendation for a review of the legal framework governing local councils. However, it argued that existing legislation on local government, public finance, auditing, and procurement already provides sufficient accountability mechanisms.
In the Government’s assessment, the principal problem is not the absence of laws but their failure to be properly enforced.
The White Paper also acknowledges weaknesses beyond the former chairman’s immediate administration. It accepts findings that the LGSC failed to consistently enforce disciplinary measures, while the ministry responsible for local government relied largely on administrative engagement rather than decisive enforcement.
Bojang’s case is the first among more than 30 individuals addressed in the Kerewan volume of the White Paper.
The government has also ordered the suspension of former CEO Touray and Director of Finance Abdoulie Khan, alongside wider reforms targeting revenue collection, procurement, records management, and financial accountability across local councils.
These include digitizing revenue collection, introducing a formal scheme of service for revenue collectors, improving records management, and strengthening institutional capacity.
The government says the problems uncovered by the inquiry were “not merely isolated” incidents but reflected entrenched institutional weaknesses.
The White Paper, however, remains a statement of government policy and not a judicial determination of criminal guilt. Bojang remains presumed innocent of any criminal offense, and whether he faces prosecution will depend on the outcome of the police investigation. Any financial recovery will similarly depend on the forensic audit establishing his direct responsibility for an identifiable loss of public funds.
Leave a Reply