The Supreme Court has declared the removal of former auditor general Modou Ceesay from office unlawful, stemming from events in September 2025. Police officers removed Ceesay from his office at the National Audit Office after President Adama Barrow appointed Ceesay as Minister of Trade. The court ruled Ceesay's removal was null, void, and of no legal effect, stating the police action violated Section 158 of the National Audit Act. The Supreme Court awarded D4 million to Modou Ceesay, ordering the Attorney General and the Inspector General of Police to pay the sum within 60 days.
Constitutional Protection Affirmed
Modou Ceesay challenged the government's position during the proceedings, asserting that the Auditor General is a constitutionally protected office holder. He contended that the Auditor General can only be removed through procedures specifically prescribed by the Constitution and the National Audit Act. Conversely, the government argued that Mr. Ceesay had effectively ceased to hold office following his appointment as Minister of Trade by President Adama Barrow. However, Mr. Ceesay maintained before the court that he never accepted the appointment as Minister of Trade. The Supreme Court ultimately rejected the suggestion that Modou Ceesay had resigned from his position as Auditor General, stating instead that he was forcefully removed from his office.
Financial Redress Ordered
The Supreme Court awarded D4 million to Modou Ceesay as vindicatory damages for the violation of his constitutional rights. The court further directed the Attorney General to pay Mr. Ceesay all outstanding salaries and allowances owed from September 2025 until the date of judgment, adding 10 percent interest. The Attorney General was also ordered to pay Mr. Ceesay his salary and allowances from the judgment date until either the expiry of his tenure or his retirement.
All parties involved in the case were mandated to file affidavits within seven days, providing detailed information regarding Mr. Ceesay’s age, salary, allowances, pension entitlements, and gratuity. Lawyer Lamin J Darbo, representing the plaintiff, acknowledged the D4 million award but stated it was "not enough on the facts of the case," despite being a substantial sum.
Lawyer Darbo emphasized the court's stance on Ceesay's removal, noting, "From this decision it is clear that it is all complete nonsense to suggest that Modou Ceesay had resigned. He was forcefully removed from his office, and the court has rejected that position." Mr. Darbo also addressed the issue of Ceesay's reinstatement, stating, "I know everybody wanted him to be reinstated, but the court said that is a difficult situation because the auditor general works very closely with government departments and the presidency and given the relationship that exists, practically it would be impossible for him to be reinstated. We accept that as a reality."
Legal Counsel's Perspective
Justice OMM Njie delivered the full decision on behalf of the five justices, a unanimous ruling by the apex court. The Supreme Court stopped short of ordering Modou Ceesay's reinstatement, finding that the strained relationship between Ceesay and the Executive made such a move impractical. Mr. Ceesay’s successor, Cherno Amadou Sowe, was ordered to remain Auditor General.
Lawyer Lamin J Darbo acknowledged the court's reasoning regarding reinstatement. "I know everybody wanted him to be reinstated, but the court said that is a difficult situation because the auditor general works very closely with government departments and the presidency and given the relationship that exists, practically it would be impossible for him to be reinstated. We accept that as a reality," Darbo stated. He also lamented that taxpayers will ultimately bear the cost of the unlawful actions of senior officials.