Modou Ceesay Seeks D15.8 Million in Compensation as State Challenges Pension, Allowance Claims

A week after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of former Auditor General Modou Ceesay, the parties have presented sharply differing interpretations of the financial compensation he is entitled to receive, setting the stage for another legal dispute over the implementation of the judgment.

In an affidavit filed on July 14, Mr. Ceesay claims he is entitled to D15,815,425.76 in salary, allowances, and retirement-related benefits, in addition to the D4 million in vindicatory damages awarded by the Supreme Court in its July 7 judgment.

The government, however, disputes key aspects of that calculation, arguing that several of the claimed benefits—including pension and gratuity—are not yet payable under the law. The state has also asked the court for additional time to comply with the judgment, saying it requires more than the 60 days ordered by the court to determine and process the sums due.

Mr. Ceesay’s affidavit outlines what he says are the financial benefits he would have earned had he completed his statutory nine-year term as Auditor General. The filing states that he was born on May 17, 1981, and calculates his entitlement from Sept. 15, 2025, the date he says he was unlawfully removed from office, through the expiration of his term.

His claim includes unpaid salary, allowances, gratuity, and pension benefits, all calculated on the assumption that he would have remained in office for the full duration of his appointment. The detailed computation is attached to his affidavit as Exhibit MC2.

The government, through an affidavit sworn by Abdoulie Badjie, a Senior State Counsel in the Attorney General’s Chambers, argues that Mr. Ceesay’s calculations go beyond what the law permits.

According to the state, Mr. Ceesay was appointed Auditor General on Nov. 14, 2022, and assumed office on Nov. 26, 2022. While acknowledging that the National Audit Office Act, 2015, provides for a maximum nine-year term, the government argues that the expiration of that term would not automatically entitle him to pension and gratuity payments before reaching retirement.

“According to the National Audit Office Act, gratuity and pension are payable on retirement, and such payments need to be approved by the Board after consultation with the President,” the State said in its affidavit. “Pension is not payable to the plaintiff before retirement.”

The affidavit further states that Mr. Ceesay “would not have reached the statutory retirement age by 2031,” when his nine-year term would have ended.

The government is also seeking an extension of the court-imposed payment deadline.

“I believe that more than 60 days is needed to ensure payment of all sums payable to the Plaintiff, and to ensure that such payments are made in accordance with applicable laws,” Mr. Badjie said in the affidavit.

The State said it has encountered difficulties obtaining the financial records needed to calculate the amounts payable.

“Our chambers have made enquiries in a bid to have available all the information needed to address the requirements of the order of this Honourable Court and have so far been able to obtain two pay slips of the Plaintiff/Respondent,” the affidavit states. The documents have been attached as Exhibit AB1.

One of the pay slips produced by the State shows that as of September 2025, Mr. Ceesay earned a gross monthly income of D174,342, with deductions totaling D62,306, resulting in a net monthly salary of D112,036.

The pay slip lists a basic salary of D58,125 and several allowances, including D40,000 in responsibility allowance, D15,000 in house rent allowance, D8,000 in telephone allowance, D4,000 in residential allowance and D3,000 in professional allowance.

The State contends that Mr. Ceesay should not continue receiving telephone, professional, responsibility and residential allowances because he is no longer serving as Auditor General.

Mr. Ceesay’s legal team rejects that position, maintaining that because the Supreme Court found his removal unlawful, he is entitled to the full salary and benefits attached to the office for the remainder of his statutory term.

The matter has been adjourned until next Tuesday, when the court is expected to consider the competing calculations and the government’s request for additional time to satisfy the judgment.