Transparency SI warns over rejected SIICAC Director appointment, urging fair process to protect anti-corruption integrity.
A recent publication in the Weekend Solomon Star (Saturday, 24 January 2026), headlined “Appointment Rejected Twice – Attorney General Rejects Kalu to Head LCC and Now SIICAC”, raises serious concerns about the integrity of the recruitment mechanism of the government.
Transparency Solomon Islands is gravely concerned that the position of Director General of the Solomon Islands Independent Commission Against Corruption (SIICAC) remains vacant after the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) declined to approve the recommendation of an interview panel. The panel had recommended Mr Solomon Kalu, a former Chairman of the Leadership Code Commission and a lawyer, who currently serves as Team Leader for Governance at the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Country Office for the post. This position has remained vacant now going on for a year. This turn of events is not good enough as the people of Solomon Islands advocated for the establishment of SIICAC to address corruption that fuels conflict and social disorder, by diverting funds from public goods towards private interest, shapes opportunities for conflicts by providing incentives for the corrupt to influence and control executive government (extractive industries), and threatens democracy and durable peace by undermining public trust in State’s capacity and its willingness to enforce Anti-Corruption legislation.
Transparency Solomon Islands urges the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) to reconsider its decision and appoint Mr Solomon Kalu to the position of Director General of SIICAC. Mr Kalu in Transparency Solomon Islands view has the right experiences, qualification, and a very active and committed person to good governance in his work and conduct. The right person to support the SIICAC Commission implement the National Anti-Corruption Strategy of the GNUT Executive Government. It is important that the right person is appointed to this post to support the new Commissioners, something that was lacking in the previous commission as pointed out by the former Chairman quite often. Now that the GNUT government is committed, let us give the commission the opportunity to do their work combating corruption.
Fighting corruption is one of the flagship policies of the current government and one which featured in its 100 days programme. Whilst the Prime Minister has done its part in putting in place the National Anti-Corruption Strategy, appointed new Commissioners, the actions of the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC) and especially that of the Attorney General on the rejection of the panel’s recommendation is unacceptable, unless there is something more serious than what was reported in the print media (24th Jan 2026). To date the newly appointed SIICAC Commissioners have not met at all and the office is in disarray to say the least because it does not have a Director General. It is now going on to their second year (Commissioners) and the appointment of the Directors General has become most urgent.
With regard to Attorney General’s reasoning for rejecting the recommendation of the panel, the question is does he prefer another person of his choosing? His reasoning, allegedly based on Mr Kalu having not complied with the former government’s “No Jab, No Job” COVID-19 policy seems strange. Is this a requirement in government recruitment now? Many who were laid off because of this are now working (since the revocation of COVID 19 SOE). This does not make sense nor is it a valid reason for this rejection given that the State of Emergency Declaration and the Emergency Powers Regulations have now been revoked and the former government is no longer in power. If the Attorney General has other more damming reasons for the rejection of Mr Solomon Kalu to the position of Director General of SIICAC he should share it with the public and give Mr Kalu the opportunity to respond to those than this no-good rationale.
SIICAC is a cornerstone institution in the fight against corruption. Any perception that its leadership appointments are subject to questionable decision-making, inconsistency, or political influence undermines public confidence before the institution can even fully function.
A vacant Director General position delays operational effectiveness and weakens the national anti-corruption framework at a time when public trust in institutions is already fragile.
Transparency Solomon Islands calls for clear, transparent, and legally grounded explanations for decisions affecting key governance institutions. Upholding process is not a procedural luxury. These are essential for upholding integrity, accountability, and public trust.
If anti-corruption bodies are to command legitimacy, their leadership must be appointed through processes that are not only lawful, but are also seen to be fair, independent, and free from arbitrary interference.
The fight against corruption cannot succeed if the systems designed to protect integrity are themselves weakened by questionable decision-making.
Source: TSI Media Statement
