A new national conversation on governance and public sector performance is taking shape as the Public Sector Reform Unit (PSRU) introduces an interactive television platform aimed at deepening dialogue between government institutions, lawmakers, and civil society actors.
Known as “Reform Hour,” the initiative is designed to create a public space where critical issues surrounding the effectiveness of the civil service and governance systems can be openly discussed. The program forms part of PSRU’s broader mandate to coordinate and guide reform programs across Ministries, Departments, and Agencies while also engaging civil society organizations in the reform process.
The inaugural discussion aired on African Young Voice Television and brought together key voices from parliament and civil society to explore the roles each plays in strengthening accountability, policy implementation, and democratic governance.
Moderating the conversation was Siaka Wusha-Conteh, Head of Communications and ICT at PSRU, who framed the discussion around the constitutional responsibilities of Parliament and the complementary oversight role played by civic groups. He reminded viewers that Parliament remains the supreme lawmaking body in the country, with legislation emerging primarily from government policy directions or through parliamentary procedures.
Among the panelists was Abdul S. Marray-Conteh, Chairman of the Parliamentary Legislative Committee, who provided an inside perspective on how laws are crafted and refined within the legislative system.
According to him, Members of Parliament operate under a threefold mandate that includes lawmaking, oversight, and representation of their constituents. These functions, he explained, are largely carried out through parliamentary debates and specialized committees that analyze policies and proposed legislation.
He described the Legislative Committee as a critical stage in the lawmaking process, particularly for complex or highly technical bills.
“When a bill reaches Parliament, it first goes through the first and second readings,” he explained. “At that point, if the bill is technical or requires deeper analysis, it is referred to the Legislative Committee for detailed examination.”
He said the committee then undertakes a line-by-line review of the bill, scrutinizing each clause to ensure that it meets legal standards and policy objectives. During this stage, committee members may recommend amendments, insert additional provisions, remove sections, or adjust language to improve clarity and effectiveness.
The committee also engages in consultations with relevant stakeholders to ensure that the proposed law reflects practical realities.
“Our responsibility is to refine the legislation thoroughly before it proceeds further,” he noted. “We make sure it is properly cleaned up so that when it returns to Parliament, it is stronger and more effective.”
After completing its review, the committee prepares a report which is presented before the entire Parliament. The report carries significant weight in the decision-making process.
According to Hon. Marray-Conteh, Parliament adopts the recommendations of the Legislative Committee in nearly ninety percent of cases, demonstrating the importance of the committee’s technical analysis.
Once the report is presented, the bill then proceeds to the Committee of the Whole House, where all Members of Parliament examine it again and make final adjustments before voting.
The lawmaker also highlighted the consultative nature of legislative development, noting that many legislative initiatives begin long before they reach Parliament.
Often, he said, discussions start within government ministries and agencies where policy proposals are formulated. Early engagement between these institutions and Parliament can help ensure that the resulting legislation is workable and aligned with national priorities.
He further noted that the majority of bills introduced in Parliament originate from the government, reflecting policies approved by the cabinet. Private members’ bills those introduced by individual MPs rarely succeed due to procedural complexities and the dominance of government-sponsored legislation.
Providing the civil society perspective was Victor Lansana Koroma, Executive Director of Health Alert, who described civil society organizations as a crucial bridge between citizens and the state.
Koroma said civil society groups function as watchdogs, advocates, and facilitators of public participation in governance processes.
“We serve as the moral compass and custodians of citizens’ interests,” he said. “Our role is to ensure that the relationship between the public and those in authority remains transparent, accountable, and fair.”
He emphasized that civic organizations help amplify the voices of ordinary citizens who might otherwise struggle to influence decision-making processes.
Through advocacy campaigns, research, and community engagement, these organizations raise awareness about governance challenges and push for reforms that improve service delivery and democratic accountability.
Koroma argued that meaningful development cannot occur without addressing fundamental governance structures.
“Sustainable development is not possible if governance issues remain unresolved,” he stated. “Civil society plays a critical role in highlighting inefficiencies and demanding reforms that benefit the broader population.”
He added that civic actors often bring together professionals from various backgrounds, including journalists, lawyers, and former public servants, who analyze public policies and highlight weaknesses within government systems.
By exposing gaps in performance or policy implementation, civil society groups encourage government institutions to improve transparency and efficiency.
Koroma also stressed the importance of inclusive consultation in policy design.
“You cannot sit in an office and design policies that affect millions of people without engaging them,” he said. “When you go into communities to consult citizens, you will inevitably meet civil society organizations that are already representing those voices.”
He pointed to the Open Government Initiative as an example of a successful platform that once brought together government officials, opposition parties, and civil society groups to discuss governance issues in an open and transparent environment.
Such platforms, he noted, helped foster trust between the state and citizens by encouraging open dialogue.
However, he observed that similar levels of engagement—particularly in terms of unrestricted access to information have not always been sustained in recent years.
Koroma also highlighted coordination challenges among institutions involved in governance reforms.
He suggested that the PSRU could play a stronger role as a central coordinating body that connects ideas and expertise from different sectors.
For that to happen, he said, the unit would require greater research capacity and the ability to analyze reforms across multiple sectors.
“Reform is often resisted because it disrupts existing systems,” he explained. “But in reality, reform is the engine of innovation, development, and progress.”
Hon. Marray-Conteh agreed with the need for stronger collaboration between lawmakers and civil society groups.
He cited the platform known as CSO-net, which was created to facilitate engagement between parliamentarians and civil society organizations on legislative matters.
Through such platforms, he said, civil society actors can share their expertise and concerns with lawmakers, contributing to better policy outcomes.
The lawmaker also identified a persistent gap between policy frameworks and legislation.
In some cases, institutions struggle to implement laws because the supporting policies or operational guidelines are unclear or incomplete.
To address this challenge, he introduced the concept of post-legislative scrutiny, a process that allows Parliament to evaluate whether enacted laws are functioning as intended.
Post-legislative scrutiny involves reviewing the implementation of laws after they have been enacted, gathering feedback from institutions, stakeholders, and the public.
Such reviews help lawmakers identify weaknesses, unintended consequences, or enforcement challenges that may require amendments.
Hon. Marray-Conteh cited public concerns about the Cyber Law of Sierra Leone as an example.
He acknowledged that many citizens have complained about the perceived rigidity of certain provisions within the law.
Despite these complaints, he said no institution has formally approached Parliament to request a review of specific sections.
“People often criticize the law publicly,” he said. “But for Parliament to act effectively, institutions must formally present evidence showing which provisions are problematic and why.”
He noted that Parliament has not yet conducted a comprehensive post-legislative review of the Cyber Law, partly due to limited technical capacity to assess its impact at the community level.
He emphasized that stronger collaboration between lawmakers, government institutions, and civil society organizations would make such reviews more effective.
Regular assessments, he said, would ensure that laws remain responsive to evolving social, technological, and economic realities.
As the Reform Hour platform continues, organizers hope it will serve as a national forum where policymakers, experts, and citizens can openly discuss governance challenges and explore practical solutions.
By bringing together diverse perspectives from Parliament, government institutions, and civil society, the initiative aims to strengthen accountability, improve public service delivery, and advance Sierra Leone’s ongoing public sector reform agenda.