By Abdulai Jalloh & Martin Wusha Conteh

Since 2013, Sierra Leone football has passed through the administrations of Isha Johansen, Thomas Daddy Brima and, most recently, Babadi Kamara. Over the years, decisions taken under these administrations have generated controversy and raised questions among football stakeholders about governance, accountability, justice and the overall direction of the game.

For many stakeholders, some of these decisions have created what they regard as worrying precedents, particularly in the handling of disciplinary matters, alleged match-fixing cases, elections, and promotion and relegation.

The Isha Johansen Era

During Isha Johansen’s administration, several players and football administrators were suspended following allegations of match manipulation. The issue became one of the most controversial chapters in Sierra Leone football.

Rodney Michael, a prominent football stakeholder, was among those affected by the controversy. He was disqualified from contesting the Sierra Leone Football Association (SLFA) elective congress and subsequently challenged the decision at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

CAS eventually ruled in his favour. However, by the time the ruling was delivered, the SLFA electoral process had already produced Thomas Daddy Brima as the new president.

The controversy surrounding the match-fixing allegations also left several players and officials awaiting what they believed would be a fair resolution.

Johansen subsequently acknowledged that political considerations had influenced aspects of the match-fixing process, describing elements of the campaign as “witch-hunting.” That admission further intensified questions about the independence and credibility of the disciplinary process at the time.

The Thomas Daddy Brima Administration

When Thomas Daddy Brima took over the leadership of the SLFA, many stakeholders hoped that the outstanding match-fixing cases would receive renewed attention and that those affected would finally receive justice.

However, those expectations were not fully realised.

The Brima administration was itself confronted with another extraordinary match-fixing controversy involving two Eastern Region first-division promotion matches.

The results attracted widespread attention because of the extraordinary scorelines:

• Kahunla Rangers vs. Lumbebu United — 95-0, after a halftime score of 2-0.
• Gulf FC vs. Koquima Lebanon — 91-1, after a halftime score of 7-1.

The extraordinary results prompted calls for investigations and raised serious questions about the integrity of the competition. The episode remains one of the most remarkable scoreline controversies in Sierra Leone football.

For many observers, however, the bigger issue was not simply the extraordinary scores but whether the football authorities had established a sufficiently credible and transparent mechanism for investigating and resolving such cases.

The Babadi Kamara Administration

The election of Babadi Kamara once again raised expectations among football followers that some longstanding controversies would finally be addressed.

Among the issues that remained of concern were unresolved disciplinary matters and questions surrounding previous decisions.

The administration also inherited the complicated issue of promotion and relegation.

At one stage, the Premier League’s position on promotion and relegation became a major source of controversy. Teams that had expected to face relegation were allowed to remain in the competition after the authorities announced that there would be no relegation or promotion.

Some football stakeholders viewed the decision as a form of payback, against a club and individuals who had previously been affected by football disputes. One of the clubs associated with that controversy was Mighty Blackpool, headed by Rodney Michael.

Michael subsequently took the matter concerning Mighty Blackpool’s relegation to the FIFA Disciplinary Committee, arguing that the club should not have been relegated. The matter was ultimately decided in Mighty Blackpool’s favour, and the club was reinstated.

The current administration has now faced another major controversy involving promotion and relegation, this time between Mount Aureol SLIFA and Bullom Stars.

The SLFA Appeals Committee recommended a replay following its consideration of the disputed fixture. SLIFA, however, has continued to challenge the outcome, arguing that the decision was unfair, particularly in circumstances where the Appeals Committee acknowledged issues concerning the eligibility of a Bullom Stars player.

The matter has continued to generate debate among football stakeholders, with questions being raised about whether the applicable regulations have been applied consistently and whether clubs are receiving equal treatment.

The Relegation Controversy

The latest development has taken the dispute to another level.

The Sierra Leone Premier League Board has communicated with both clubs confirming the 16 teams expected to participate in the next Premier League season. Bullom Stars is included among those 16 teams, while Mount Aureol SLIFA has been left out.

That effectively confirms SLIFA’s relegation, despite the club’s continuing objections and its position regarding the Appeals Committee’s recommendation.

The situation therefore raises another difficult question for Sierra Leone football: when competing interpretations of the rules emerge, who ultimately provides the final and binding sporting justice?

A Pattern That Needs to Change

The issue goes beyond Isha Johansen, Thomas Daddy Brima or Babadi Kamara.

It is about the institutions that govern Sierra Leone football.

If disciplinary decisions remain unresolved for years, if clubs continue to question the application of promotion and relegation regulations, and if stakeholders repeatedly raise concerns about consistency and transparency, then the credibility of football administration will inevitably come under scrutiny.

Sierra Leone football cannot continue to operate around perceptions of winners and losers, friends and enemies, or supporters and opponents.

Football governance must be based on clearly established regulations, due process, transparency and equal treatment.

The country has talented players, passionate supporters, committed administrators and clubs investing heavily in the development of the game. What is needed now is an administrative system strong enough to protect the integrity of that investment.

The SLIFA-Bullom Stars saga should therefore not be viewed simply as another dispute between two clubs. It should be an opportunity for Sierra Leone football to examine how decisions are made, how appeals are handled, and how sporting justice is ultimately delivered.

The real legacy of successive administrations should not be defined by the controversies surrounding them.

It should be measured by whether Sierra Leone football became stronger, more transparent and more accountable under their leadership.

The time has come for the institutions of Sierra Leone football to put football first, above personalities, politics and perceived interests.