Transparency Solomon Islands

Transparency Solomon Islands Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Transparency Solomon Islands, Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), Transparency Solomon Islands, Hyundai Mall, Level 2, Room 226, Mendana Avenue, Honiara.

Transparency Solomon Islands (TSI), the national chapter of Transparency International, is a not-for-profit organisation committed to advocating for transparency, accountability, and good governance, and fighting corruption in Solomon Islands.

23/03/2026

Are Pacific leaders delivering on their anti-corruption promises or just making commitments on paper?

Six years after the Teieniwa Vision, the reality is becoming clearer:
Progress is uneven, institutions are under-resourced, and corruption risks still threaten development across the region.

In Solomon Islands, a CPI score of 44 and slow progress highlight a hard truth. This shows that laws alone don’t stop corruption. Action does.

From weak oversight systems to limited whistleblower protection, the gaps remain. Meanwhile, ordinary citizens continue to feel the impact through poor services, lost opportunities, and diverted public funds.

The message is simple:
👉 Integrity must move beyond declarations
👉 Accountability must be enforced
👉 Public resources must serve the people

📖 Read more: Pacific Integrity Commitments vs Reality: A Regional Reflection on the Teieniwa Vision⤵️⤵️

Six years after Pacific leaders committed to confronting corruption through the Teieniwa Vision, an important question remains: are those regional commitments translating into meaningful progress across Pacific Island countries?
Last month, regional leaders, diplomats, and governance experts gathered in Suva at the Secretariat of the Pacific Islands Forum. The meeting marked the sixth anniversary of the region’s anti-corruption initiative. The event, co-hosted by the Pacific Islands Forum and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, renewing attention on collective efforts to strengthen transparency, accountability, and integrity in public institutions.
Opening the commemoration, the Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum described the anniversary as an important milestone in the region’s journey toward stronger governance. At the centre of the Teieniwa Vision, he noted, is the symbol of the “sailing canoe,” reflecting Pacific identity and the region’s shared commitment of Pacific nations to steer a unified course against corruption.
First adopted in Tarawa in February 2020, the Teieniwa Vision recognised corruption not only as a governance challenge but also as a development threat capable of undermining economic growth, democratic stability, and public trust across the Pacific.
Six years on, however, the challenge for Pacific Island countries is no longer simply about making commitments. The real test lies in demonstrating whether those commitments are producing meaningful institutional reforms.
Across the Pacific region, governance outcomes vary significantly. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) published by Transparency International, countries such as New Zealand consistently rank among the least corrupt globally. However, several Pacific Island countries sit within the middle or lower ranges of the index.
Countries including Fiji, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, and Solomon Islands continue to face governance challenges. These include institutional capacity constraints, limited public sector oversight, and issues relating to political accountability.
While the CPI does not measure corruption directly, it provides a useful regional snapshot of perceived corruption risks within public institutions.
For Solomon Islands, the most recent CPI score of 44 suggests persistent governance concerns and limited progress in addressing corruption in the public sector. Over several years, the country’s score has remained largely stagnant. This reflects the broader challenges many Pacific Island countries face in strengthening their national integrity systems.
In recent years, Solomon Islands has taken steps to strengthen its legal and institutional framework for accountability. One of the most significant developments has been the establishment of the Solomon Islands Independent Commission Against Corruption (SIICAC).
Established under national law, SIICAC serves as the country’s independent anti-corruption body with the mandate to investigate and prevent corruption. Its establishment marked an important milestone for governance in Solomon Islands. It strengthened accountability, the rule of law, and the protection of democratic institutions. The Commission is intended to serve as a central pillar of the country’s national integrity system.
However, institutions alone cannot address corruption challenges without adequate resources, strong political commitment, and active public engagement.
Weak governance can undermine the delivery of essential services such as health care, education, infrastructure development, and economic opportunities. When public resources are inefficiently managed or diverted from their intended purposes, the impacts are felt most strongly by communities who rely on these services.
For Pacific Island countries, where public resources are often limited and development needs remain significant, strong integrity systems are not optional. They are essential for national resilience and sustainable development.
From a broader Pacific perspective, the anniversary of the Teieniwa Vision offers both a moment of reflection and an opportunity to strengthen the initiative moving forward.
Since its adoption, the Vision has helped elevate anti-corruption as a regional priority. It has also encouraged cooperation between governments, development partners, and civil society organisations. However, progress across the region remains uneven.
Several structural challenges continue to affect the implementation of anti-corruption commitments across Pacific Island countries.
First, many national oversight institutions operate with limited financial and technical resources. Anti-corruption bodies, audit offices, and accountability institutions often face capacity constraints that limit their ability to investigate and prevent corruption effectively.
Second, whistleblower protection and access to public information remain uneven across the region. In many Pacific countries, citizens still face barriers when attempting to report corruption or obtain government information.
Third, political financing systems and the management of public development funds continue to raise transparency concerns in some parts of the region. Strengthening oversight in these areas is important for maintaining public trust.
Civil society organisations across the Pacific also play an important role in strengthening accountability. Likewise, Transparency Solomon Islands contributes to public awareness, policy advocacy, and independent monitoring of governance practices. However, many civil society organisations operate with limited resources and rely heavily on project-based funding from development partners.
As the Pacific region reflects on the progress of the Teieniwa Vision since its adoption, governance experts and civil society actors have increasingly called for a review of the initiative. Such a review could help ensure the Vision remains relevant to the evolving political and economic landscape of the Pacific.
Since 2020, the region has experienced significant changes. These include growing geopolitical competition, increased infrastructure investment, and expanding climate finance flows. These developments make strong transparency and accountability systems even more important to safeguard public resources.
At the same time, many observers note that the Teieniwa Vision lacks a dedicated funding mechanism to support its long-term implementation.
Establishing a regional financing framework could strengthen national anti-corruption institutions, support capacity building, and enable civil society organisations to play a stronger role in promoting transparency.
Innovative financing mechanisms could also support implementation. These may include regional integrity funds and targeted support for oversight institutions.
The symbolic sailing canoe of the Teieniwa Vision continues its journey across the Blue Pacific. However, the success of the initiative will ultimately depend on whether regional commitments are matched by sustained action, stronger institutions, and meaningful public participation.
For Solomon Islands and its Pacific neighbours, strengthening transparency, accountability, and institutional integrity is not simply a governance reform agenda. It is a necessary foundation for protecting development resources, safeguarding democratic institutions, and ensuring that public resources truly serve the people.
The message for the region remains clear: integrity must move beyond regional declarations and become a lived reality within national governance systems across the Pacific.

////END////

12/03/2026

➡️Millions of dollars are allocated every year through the Constituency Development Fund, yet many communities continue to ask difficult questions.

➡️Do citizens know how much funding their constituency receives?
Where are the publicly available expenditure reports and beneficiary lists?
And if CDF is meant to drive development, why do many communities still struggle to see lasting results?

➡️These questions go to the heart of transparency, accountability, and public trust in the management of public resources in the Solomon Islands

READ TO KNOW MORE BELOW⤵️⤵️⤵️

Funds for the People, Not Politics: TSI Pushes for CDF Reform

With the passing of the much Bill Boarded CDF Act 2023 now going onto two years since the Joint National General Election of 17 April 2024, most constituencies continue to question why few visible development programs have been implemented in their areas. Transparency Solomon Islands (TSI) have carried out extensive community awareness sessions on the Constituency Development Funds (CDF) and is continued to be approached by citizens seeking information on CDF. One thing that stands out is the lack of information about CDF, citizens want to know how their tax money is used, how much of tax-payers funds allocated to their constituencies, beneficiary lists, constituency expenditure reports only to name a few. These are important information inaccessible to the tax payers, limiting citizens’ ability to monitor public spending and hold decision-makers accountable.
Constituency Development Funds (CDFs) is the largest stream of public funding allocated to the development of constituencies in the Solomon Islands. CDF is designed and it is argued to bring development directly to the people and to develop all 50 constituencies across the entire country. It is larger than the funds allocated to Provincial Governments who are responsible for the whole province. The CDF funds are intended to finance social and economic infrastructure, assist vulnerable families, strengthen local livelihoods.
In principle, CDF is argued as a practical solution to the country’s geographic challenges. In practice, however, it has become one of the most corrupt, wasteful funding used for political financing purposes and political gain (monetization of elections) maintaining sitting members of Parliament.
For years, citizens, researchers, and civil society organisations, including Transparency Solomon Islands (TSI), have raised concerns with regards the lack of transparency, inconsistent reporting, and questionable use and much secrecy surrounding CDF. Communities frequently question why allocations and beneficiary lists are not routinely published, why their constituency development plan is not made public, why some projects fail to produce lasting results. Some constituencies appear to benefit more from CDF funded development initiatives than others fueling public frustration and raising broader questions about integrity, transparency, accountability, fairness, and oversight of CDF.
Prior to having a CDF legislation (2013 and later 2023), this public fund operated without a comprehensive legislative framework clearly defining permissible spending, reporting standards, or enforceable penalties for misuse. Although funds were drawn from the national budget, its expenditure failed to comply with Government Financial Instruction, nor the Public Finance Management Regulations, Oversight mechanisms were either absent, unclear or inconsistently applied. This regulatory gap created conditions in which allegations of corruption, favoritism, politically influenced distribution, or misuse and abuse arise, whether substantiated or perceived, contributing to declining public trust in members of Parliament and those who handled this public funds.
Ongoing public reporting reflects the depth of concern. The 2019 national census indicated that approximately 35 percent of households reported negative experiences related to CDF allocations, citing unfair or politically biased distribution. Election observers raised concerns about the use of Constituency Development Fund in ways that garners political support. Media reports (2023) suggested that more than 30 percent of households were calling for stronger governance and clearer accountability mechanisms.
Amid sustained public debate, Parliament enacted the CDF Act 2023 however this Act failed to adequately address higher issues associated with CDF, nor improve the mechanisms to ensure the performance of the CDF is monitored, transparent, and accountable. It continues to perpetuate these issues and legalise corrupt practices. Whilst the Act introduced rules on allocation, management, and reporting, along with penalties for misappropriation or the personal conversion of project assets. There are still gaps that must be addressed to strengthen financial discipline, enhance oversight, and promote fairer distribution of public resources. Whilst a number of MPs are making an effort to comply with the provision of the CDF Act 2023, nothing much changed in the control and management of the CDF.
As raised by TSI when the CDF Act 2023 went through the Parliamentary Process, legislation alone does not guarantee accountability. The effectiveness of the CDF Act 2023 depends on consistent enforcement, transparent reporting, and meaningful community participation. Governance gaps have tangible consequences for development: Inadequate planning and weak oversight can undermine the sustainability of existing critical social infrastructure and community-based economic initiatives. When projects are short-term or poorly coordinated, they often fail to deliver lasting and meaningful benefits to communities.
TSI therefore calls for practical and enforceable reforms. Constituency allocations, expenditures, and beneficiary lists should be published annually and accessible to constituencies. Independent audits conducted by the Auditor-General should be regular and publicly available. Clear spending guidelines must be consistently applied, enforced with a firm separation between development funding and political campaigning. Structured community consultation mechanisms are essential to ensure projects reflect collective priorities rather than individual discretion.
CDFs represent a significant portion of the taxpayer’s money which should be invested in the development of Solomon Islands, both economic and human resources. When managed transparently and accountably, the fund can strengthen health services, education, infrastructure, and livelihoods across the country. Without robust safeguards, however, they risk undermining public trust, confidence in democratic institutions, and the integrity of political leadership.
Transparency Solomon Islands urges the National Parliament, government agencies, members of Parliament, to collectively provide enforcement mechanisms that will truly ensure CDF serve the public interest. Accountability strengthens democracy, and transparency protects public trust. Public funds must serve the public interest above all else. Bill Boards most certainly will not be able to enforce the CDF Act.

/////END/////

02/03/2026

The Director General position at SIICAC has now remained vacant for nearly a year after the Judicial and Legal Service Commission declined the interview panel’s recommendation.

SIICAC is a cornerstone institution in the fight against corruption. Delays, inconsistent decision-making, or unexplained rejections risk weakening public confidence before the Commission can fully function.

If anti-corruption leadership appointments are not transparent, lawful, and clearly justified, the credibility of the entire system is placed at risk.

Fighting corruption requires more than policy statements, it requires fair process, operational leadership, and accountability in action.

Solomon Islands deserves integrity institutions that function independently, transparently, and without unnecessary delay.

Read more below⤵️⤵️

When Process Is Undermined, Integrity Suffers: TSI

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.

///END///

02/03/2026

SIICAC cannot fight corruption if it is not fully operational.

Commissioners have been appointed, yet meetings are reportedly not convened. A Director-General remains absent. Cases remain pending.

An anti-corruption body that exists in law but not in practice weakens deterrence, erodes public trust, and creates serious governance risks.

While the Government’s decision to provide SIICAC with a separate 2026 budget allocation is a positive step, budget independence alone is not enough. Leadership, regular meetings, and full activation of its legal mandate are urgently required.

Integrity institutions must function in practice and not just on paper.

Solomon Islands deserves accountability that works.

The time for implementation is now. Read below for more⤵️⤵️

SIICAC Paralysis and Its Implications for National Integrity

Transparency Solomon Islands (TSI) expresses serious concern over the continued operational paralysis of the Solomon Islands Independent Commission Against Corruption (SIICAC), despite the formal appointment of its commissioners.
SIICAC is established under national law as the peak independent anti-corruption public body with perpetual succession. Its creation marked an important milestone in Solomon Islands’ commitment to strengthening governance, accountability protecting democracy, and the rule of law. The Commission is intended to serve as a central pillar of the country’s national integrity systems and framework.
Under the Act, the Commission consists of six (6) members appointed by the Governor-General by Legal Notice (Gazette). It comprises a Chairperson, a Deputy Chairperson and four (4) other Commissioners.
These appointments are intended to ensure oversight, direction, and independence of the Commission in its mandate of fighting corruption, promoting good governance, accountability and the integrity of the Machinery of Government.
However, although Commissioners have been appointed, Commission meetings have reportedly not been convened. This is attributed to the absence of a Director-General, a weak excuse as the previous Commission when appointed held the monthly meetings required under law and discussed matters of importance including the recruitment of the Director General.
In addition, cases that have been investigated and prepared for onward processing remain pending, awaiting facilitation by the Director General through to SIICAC for endorsement. In the prolonged absence of a Director General and a Commission that has not convened a meeting going on for a year since appointment, it is more than double jeopardy for the fight against corruption in Solomon Islands. Without this key leadership position, and a Commission that is dysfunctional, Solomon Islands Independent Commission Against Corruption is incapacitated and unable to fully discharge its statutory responsibilities.
The Act confers clear powers and functions on SIICAC. These are:
• Determining appropriate action upon the conclusion of corruption investigations;
• Prosecuting corruption offences with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions;
• Preventing corruption through statutory prevention functions;
• Directing the Director-General in the operation of the Commission; and
• Exercising any other powers and functions conferred by law.
These provisions establish SIICAC not merely as an advisory body, but as an enforcement and preventative institution with a direct mandate to address corruption (reactive & proactive roles).
At the recent launch of the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), TSI highlighted broader concerns relating to governance, electoral integrity, political finance transparency, accountability and public confidence in public office leadership. Global assessments, including the Country Policy and Institutional Assessment of World Bank and the Global Corruption Barometer Pacific 2021, continue to identify governance vulnerabilities that requires sustained institutional strengthening to tackle.
The CPI serves as an accountability tool. It reflects not only business sector perceptions but also the strength, effectiveness, weaknesses and credibility of institutions responsible for oversight and enforcement. When key integrity institutions are not fully operational, public confidence is weakened and corruption risks do increase.
The continued inoperativeness of SIICAC carries significant implications for Solomon Islands:
• Allegations of corruption that have remain unresolved.
• Deterrence against corrupt conduct is weakened.
• Public trust in accountability institutions declines.
• Governance risks will deepen – leading to democracy backsliding; and
• National and international confidence in institutional integrity is affected.
An anti-corruption commission that exists in law but is not fully operational in practice creates a gap within the country’s integrity system.
Electoral integrity, political leadership integrity, and anti-corruption enforcement are interconnected components of democratic governance. Preventive messaging alone is insufficient without effective enforcement mechanisms.
Transparency Solomon Islands maintains that strengthening democracy requires fully operational, independent, and adequately resourced integrity institutions. Institutional credibility depends on functionality, not merely legal existence.
TSI commends the Government for National Unity and Transformation’s (GNUT) public commitments to doing more in this space. Its decision to provide SIICAC with a separate, dedicated budget line allocation in the 2026 National Budget, removed from the Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, is a welcome reform and a positive step toward enhancing institutional independence and operational capacity. It aligns with the government’s stated 100 Days policy emphasis on transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.
However, while the establishment of a separate budget head is a welcome development, it must be complemented by timely appointments and the activation of full operational structures. Budgetary independence alone cannot enable SIICAC to fulfil its mandate if key leadership positions remain vacant. Public confidence and institutional effectiveness are strengthened when oversight bodies are fully functional and have effective leadership to lead and direct its operations.
Solomon Islands deserves integrity institutions that are functional not only on paper but in practice. Established institutions that investigate, deter, prosecute, and prevent corruption consistently and credibly, free from administrative bottlenecks and undue interference is what taxpayers of this country deserve. Not continued paralysis.
For SIICAC to fulfil its intended purpose under the Anti-Corruption Act 2018, it must have leadership in its office, convene its monthly meetings and be well resourced with clarity of mandate, and operational autonomy. SIICAC reflects and respond to citizens collective commitment and cry for democratic governance and accountability in the manner in which the affairs of our country are managed and administer.
Strengthening SIICAC, alongside other oversight institutions, is essential to maintaining citizens’ trust. Citizens of this country have the right to know and see that corruption is addressed, justice is upheld, and national development is protected.
The time for implementation is now. Solomon Islands deserves nothing less.

/////END/////

02/03/2026

👉Primary Focus
The central focus is the link between extractive industry activities (especially logging) and child vulnerability, particularly:
• Underage relationships
• Transactional arrangements (“log marriages”)
• Sexual exploitation
• Weak enforcement in rural areas
👉Secondary Focus
The article also focuses on:
• Governance gaps in enforcement of anti-trafficking and child protection laws
• Institutional weaknesses in monitoring extractive sites
• Accountability failures in oversight systems
• The need for coordinated national reform

Read more below⤵️⤵️

Extractive Wealth Must Not Come at the Cost of Our Children

Transparency Solomon Islands (TSI) is deeply concerned about mounting evidence linking extractive sector activities, particularly large-scale logging operations, with the exploitation of vulnerable women and children in rural communities across Solomon Islands.
Independent reports, media investigations, and international human rights assessments have identified logging areas as high-risk environments where underage relationships, transactional arrangements referred to as “log marriages in a number of reports,” and sexual exploitation have been reported. This is a serious matter involving very young and vulnerable women and girls.
In reported cases, girls as young as 13 have allegedly entered relationships with foreign workers under arrangements involving financial or material exchange. Whether framed as custom or informal agreements, such practices raise serious child protection and potential trafficking concerns.
Research by UNICEF, international labour monitoring bodies, and regional NGOs has consistently identified remote extractive sites as environments of heightened vulnerability to commercial sexual exploitation and child abuse. Studies have also highlighted how customary practices, including bride price, may in some instances be distorted or monetised in ways that mask intimidation or exploitation.
These are not abstract risks. They are patterns of vulnerability that have been repeatedly raised in national and international assessments.
While Solomon Islands has strengthened aspects of its legal framework, including amendments to sexual offences laws and measures under immigration and anti-trafficking legislation, implementation challenges exist and remain. Prosecution rates for trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation remain limited. Enforcement, monitoring are either non-existence, absent or influenced by foreigners. Data collection is inconsistent. Oversight, monitoring in remote areas and areas close to Honiara and accessible is either absent or non-existence or weak. Addition to that, on a serious note, communities affected by extractive operations lack information, they are ill-informed of the law compounded by difficulties in accessing reporting mechanisms and adequate survivor support services. All are centralised in the capital, Honiara.
Civil society organisations, including HOPE Trust, Hagar Solomon Islands, and the Family Support Centre, have made commendable efforts to address child protection risks. Community bylaws prohibiting child marriage in parts of Guadalcanal demonstrate that local leadership can act decisively. Community elders, leaders, and families also bear responsibility in safeguarding children. However, isolated efforts cannot substitute for systematic, systemic nationwide enforcement and institutional oversight.
The extractive sector generates significant economic value. However, no revenue stream justifies environments where vulnerable children face heightened risks of exploitation. The revenue generated is also mired with forest crimes such as money laundering and very little to no knowledge of the transnational dynamics and drivers of forestry crime. This is but a forest crime committed by Asian logging companies.
Asian logging companies in particular Malaysian Logging Companies mode of operation is entrenched in the relationships between Malaysian timber tycoons and the Malaysian government. This is also the formula they are using and re-producing in Solomon Islands both in logging and mining. It is therefore important for the government to acknowledge that collaborative and cross-national efforts are required to address these “log marriages” and many more crimes of forest that deny Solomon Islands the benefit that it should earned from the exploitation of its forest and protect our women and children.
TSI believes this issue is not solely a social protection concern. What is occurring within the forest sector also has serious financial and governance implications. Exploitation linked to extractive activities disrupts communities, weakens accountability systems, and undermines sustainable development.
TSI therefore urges the Government, key stakeholders, and development partners to pursue strategic approaches to tracing financial flows and dismantling networks that enable crimes associated with forest exploitation. Such efforts are essential not only to protect women and children from abuse, but also to safeguard what remains of our forests and to promote transparent and sustainable governance.
It is deeply concerning that only a small number of parliamentarians or one politician that consistently advocate for accountability and continue to speak out on these issues. Stronger and broader political leadership is needed to confront these challenges with urgency and resolve.
In the discussion of the exploitation of women and children in the logging sector it is important that we do not forget other crimes that overlap with forest crimes such as drugs, money-laundering, wildlife trafficking, and many more.
This is fundamentally a governance and accountability issue.
Where extractive licenses are granted, where camps are established, and where foreign labour operates, there must be:
• Clear monitoring of social impacts
• Mandatory child protection safeguards
• Enforced compliance mechanisms
• Transparent reporting of abuse allegations
• Accountability for perpetrators and systemic enablers
Free and fair economic development requires integrity. Development that undermines the safety and dignity of women and children cannot be considered sustainable or ethical.
TSI calls for immediate and coordinated national action. The Government must strengthen enforcement of child protection and anti-trafficking laws, including reviewing the legal marriage age to align with international standards. Relevant ministries responsible for forestry, policing, and women, youth, and children’s affairs must establish joint monitoring and compliance mechanisms for logging and other extractive sites.
Logging companies and license holders must be required, as a condition of their license, to adopt and implement a Code of Conduct, a Child Protection Policy, and other relevant safeguarding frameworks. These safeguards must be actively enforced and publicly disclosed as a condition of operation.
Development partners should prioritise strengthening rural child protection systems and expanding survivor support services in extractive-affected provinces. Parliament must ensure that economic governance reforms incorporate mandatory social impact accountability measures.
Silence normalises exploitation. Transparency exposes it.
Solomon Islands cannot afford a development model where rural poverty, weak oversight, and extractive wealth intersect to endanger children. Protecting vulnerable communities is not optional; it is both a constitutional and moral obligation.
Transparency Solomon Islands will continue to advocate for governance reforms that ensure economic activity upholds the rights, dignity, and protection of all Solomon Islanders, more especially our children.

/////Ends/////

Address

Transparency Solomon Islands, Hyundai Mall, Level 2, Room 226, Mendana Avenue
Honiara
POBOX1665

Opening Hours

Monday 09:00 - 17:00
Tuesday 09:00 - 17:00
Wednesday 09:00 - 17:00
Thursday 09:00 - 17:00
Friday 09:00 - 17:00

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Transparency Solomon Islands posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Organization

Send a message to Transparency Solomon Islands:

Shortcuts

Share

Category