A growing dispute over management rights at No. 2 River Beach has now escalated into a full-blown governance controversy, following a High Court injunction that effectively bars the Western Area Rural District Council (WARDC) from accessing or administering the iconic tourism site. An investigation by This Day Salone reveals significant contradictions between the injunction and the Local Government Act 2022, which appears to clearly vest beach management authority in the local council, and not in external or unrecognized groups.
At a recent press briefing held on November 28, 2025, at the Western Area Rural District Council, WARDC Chairman Kasho Joseph Holland-Cole sharply criticized the injunction issued by Justice Augustine K. Musa, arguing that it undermines the statutory powers of the Council and interrupts its mandate to protect public resources. Chairman Holland-Cole described the court’s action as untenable and unfair, noting that the Council was never heard before the judge granted the order.
“Under Section 21 of the Local Government Act 2022, the Council is recognized as the highest political authority in its locality, with full legislative and executive control over local resources,” he said. “To prevent the Council from managing No. 2 River Beach without even giving us the opportunity to present our case is a clear violation of legal principles and fairness.”
A detailed review of Section 21(1) confirms that local councils are empowered to exercise legislative and executive authority, promote development, and manage all resources within their jurisdiction. Section 21(1)(c) specifically authorizes councils to mobilize and manage revenue from licenses, rates, entertainment facilities, and other local assets – categories under which tourist beaches fall.
No. 2 River Beach has been a major recreational and tourism hub for two decades, yet residents argue that it has generated little tangible development or national revenue. From 2004 to 2024, the site was controlled by SANCOFAR, a self-styled community-based group that is not recognized under the Local Government Act or any statutory governance structure. Under the Act, only local councils and recognized community authorities such as elected ward committees or traditional bodies may be delegated responsibility for public resources. SANCOFAR does not fall into these categories. Despite this, the entity reportedly collected revenue for 20 years without providing audited accounts or transparent financial reports.
Council documents reviewed indicate that WARDC had initiated several reforms to restore accountability at the site before the injunction halted its work. These included allocating over NLe 400,000 to rehabilitate the main access road; opening a joint bank account with recognized community authorities at Sierra Leone Commercial Bank to meet transparency requirements under Section 88 of the Act; carrying out sanitation and environmental management activities; and providing basic community amenities. Council officials argue that these actions were fully consistent with their mandate under Section 21 and the financial management provisions outlined in Sections 49–61.
The conflict escalated when SANCOFAR filed legal action-reportedly without mandate from statutory community decision-making structures, resulting in the High Court injunction. Residents and local authorities have questioned the legitimacy of this challenge, noting that Sections 20 and 25 of the Local Government Act limit formal community engagement with councils to recognized statutory committees, not unregistered or parallel groups. Additionally, Section 19(c) establishes that decisions made by the Council in its ordinary sittings carry prima facie legal authority unless overturned through proper processes involving the Council itself – raising further doubts about the legal basis of the injunction.
Chairman Cole stressed that the court’s failure to hear the Council constitutes a serious breach of judicial fairness and due process.
Governance experts warned that allowing a court injunction to override explicit statutory mandates could destabilize Sierra Leone’s entire decentralization framework. The Local Government Act outlines clear lines of authority, they noted, and actions that contradict those lines risk setting a precedent that weakens local governance nationwide.
Chairman Holland-Cole expressed gratitude to the Sierra Leone Police, the Office of National Security, and the Deputy Speaker of Parliament for supporting efforts to maintain order around the beach during the dispute. He appealed directly to President Julius Maada Bio, the Speaker of Parliament, the Chief Justice, and the Ministers of Local Government and Finance, warning that failure to resolve the issue urgently could set a dangerous precedent for all 22 local councils.
“This injunction gravely limits the Council’s ability to perform its lawful duties,” he said, adding that the government’s current fiscal constraints make local revenue generation more critical than ever.
This investigation finds that the impasse at No. 2 River Beach now extends far beyond a local administrative disagreement. It has become a test of the Local Government Act 2022 itself, and a crucial measure of whether legally empowered local councils can exercise the authority granted to them under national law. As tourism becomes increasingly central to Sierra Leone’s development agenda, clarifying who controls key tourism assets is no longer just a legal question, but a national priority.
