Freetown, Sierra Leone – The recent announcement by the Sierra Leonean government to divide Freetown into two distinct localities, mirroring London's City of London and Greater London, has sparked considerable debate and raised critical questions about the future of the nation's capital. While proponents may envision enhanced governance and service delivery, the plan faces significant hurdles, particularly concerning funding and the potential for increased administrative fragmentation. This new approach to decentralization, began through proclamation by the Hon. Cherinor Bah, Minister of Information and Civic Education during the ministry's Civic Day Series retreat in Moyamba, Southern Sierra Leone.

The proposed restructuring aims to create two separate administrative entities within Freetown, each with its own local council, in a bid to improve urban management and service delivery. This bold move draws inspiration from the distinct administrative and policing models of the City of London and the sprawling Greater London area. If we dare to leap this much, it is imperative we examine the models used in the United Kingdom's London City.

The London Model: A Dual Approach to Governance and Policing

London's unique setup features two primary police forces: the City of London Police (CoLP) and the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). Their distinct focuses offer a fascinating comparison:

• City of London Police (CoLP): Responsible for the "Square Mile," London's financial heart, the CoLP specializes in economic and financial crimes, including fraud, cybercrime, and money laundering. It acts as the National Lead Force for Fraud in the UK and plays a crucial role in protecting critical financial infrastructure. Its smaller jurisdiction allows for a highly specialized and targeted approach to policing.
• Metropolitan Police Service (MPS): Covering the vast majority of Greater London, the MPS is the UK's largest police force. Its responsibilities are broad, encompassing counter-terrorism, public order, general crime investigation across 32 boroughs, and the protection of high-profile locations and individuals. Its scale necessitates a comprehensive and diverse approach to policing. What benefits would Freetown or Sierra Leone stand to gain from this model?

Benefits of the London Model (Potentially for Freetown):

• Specialization: A two-tiered system could allow for specialized administrative and policing units tailored to the distinct needs of different areas within Freetown. For example, one locality could focus on commercial development and financial regulation, while the other prioritizes social services and community development.
• Targeted Resource Allocation: With separate administrations, resources could theoretically be allocated more efficiently based on the specific demands and priorities of each locality.
• Local Accountability: Decentralization can bring governance closer to the people, potentially leading to greater accountability and responsiveness to local needs.

Cons of the London Model (Potential Challenges for Freetown):

• Duplication and Inefficiency: Establishing two separate administrative structures could lead to duplicated efforts, increased overheads, and potential friction between the two entities.
• Coordination Challenges: Effective governance in a divided city would require seamless coordination between the two administrations on issues that transcend boundaries, such as infrastructure, public health, and transportation.
• Resource Disparity: Just as the City of London is economically distinct from other parts of Greater London, a similar divide in Freetown could lead to significant disparities in revenue generation and service quality between the two new localities.

Implications for Business, Administration, and Policing in Freetown

Business:

• Pros: The government might argue that clear administrative boundaries could streamline business registration, licensing, and specific development initiatives, potentially attracting more investment by offering tailored regulatory environments. Specialization could foster particular economic hubs.
• Cons: Businesses operating across the new divides might face increased bureaucratic hurdles. Disparities in local regulations or tax regimes could create an uneven playing field. Uncertainty during the transition period could deter new investments.

Administration:

• Pros: The stated aim of improved service delivery and more efficient urban management is a significant potential benefit. Smaller, more focused local councils could be more agile and responsive to citizen needs.
• Cons: This is arguably the most contentious area. Critics, including Freetown's Mayor Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr, highlight the existing challenges of fragmented mandates and limited resources. Creating more administrative units without addressing fundamental issues of funding, capacity, and coordination risks deepening fragmentation rather than improving efficiency. New offices, staff, and logistics will incur substantial recurrent costs.

Policing:

• Pros: A specialized police force for a designated commercial or financial hub within Freetown could enhance security for businesses and better combat economic crimes, mirroring the CoLP. This could also free up the broader force to focus on general crime and community policing.
• Cons: The main challenge will be ensuring seamless cooperation and intelligence sharing between the two police forces. Without clear protocols, criminal activity could exploit jurisdictional gaps. There's also the risk of one force being better resourced or trained than the other, leading to an inequitable distribution of security.

Funding: The Elephant in the Room

Perhaps the most pressing concern is funding. The Nation's national budget is partly aided by development partners. Even in the midst of natural resources, Sierra Leone is one of the world's poorest countries with existing local councils struggling with inadequate resources. Freetown's current Mayor, Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr, has pointed out that the Freetown City Council has not received its tied grants for the current year, and other councils face outstanding transfers from 2024. This similar outcry across the country begs several questions that could raise eyebrows on the new proposal the two Freetown localities and how that matches expectations considering the status quo of other councils across the country.

• Is the proposed new Freetown locality just an administrative exercise? Without a robust and transparent fiscal transfer framework, and without significantly increased central government support, the creation of new localities risks being merely an administrative exercise. It could lead to more offices, more bureaucracy, and increased recurrent costs without a tangible improvement in service delivery.
• Will it benefit the nation and the people? For the plan to truly benefit the nation and its people, it must be accompanied by:
  • Sustainable Funding Mechanisms: This includes not only consistent central government grants but also support for local councils to enhance their own-source revenue generation, especially in areas with limited current capacity.
  • Capacity Building: New administrative units will require skilled personnel and robust institutional frameworks. Investment in training and governance structures is crucial.
  • Clear Mandates and Coordination: Defining clear responsibilities for each new entity and establishing effective mechanisms for inter-council collaboration are paramount to avoid duplication and conflict.
  • Community Consultation: The current lack of consultation with Freetonians, whose lives will be directly affected, is a major criticism and risks undermining public trust and buy-in.

Conclusion

The Sierra Leonean government's plan to reconfigure Freetown's administrative landscape is ambitious. While the London model offers intriguing possibilities for specialization and targeted governance, its success in Freetown hinges entirely on the meticulous planning, robust financial backing, and genuine commitment to addressing existing systemic challenges. Without these fundamental pillars, the creation of new localities may well prove to be an administrative mirage, further straining already limited resources and failing to deliver the promised benefits to the people of Freetown and the nation as a whole. The true test of this initiative will lie not in its resemblance to London, but in its tangible impact on the lives of Sierra Leoneans.