In the interest of transparency and public trust, the group called for a full, independent and impartial review of the matter by appropriate oversight bodies, followed by clear guidance on whether prosecutors are permitted to engage in private legal services connected to matters within the criminal justice system. It also said temporary administrative measures might be necessary to safeguard institutional credibility while such a review is ongoing.
According to the organisation, the concern is not about personalities but about governance, ethics and the integrity of public institutions. GALA pointed to Mr Manga’s acknowledged involvement in facilitating access to investigators, advising parties in an active dispute, conducting site visits and later providing paid private legal services to an individual connected to the same matter. It also highlighted the receipt of private payment from a suspect or interested party in a case that originated within the criminal justice system, regardless of how such payment was described.
GALA further noted that the situation illustrates a blurring of professional boundaries between public prosecutorial duties and private legal practice, a development it says creates a clear conflict of interest and undermines public confidence in the impartiality of the justice system.
The organisation stressed that anti-corruption is not measured only by criminal culpability but also by adherence to ethical standards, the avoidance of conflicts of interest and the protection of institutional integrity. In its view, the central public question is not simply whether a crime was committed, but whether conduct expected of a prosecutor, and of a nominee to an Anti-Corruption Commission, was upheld.
GALA added that appeals to personal integrity, past service or the modest size of the amount involved do not address concerns rooted in principle. It argued that corruption and ethical breaches are defined by position and power, not by figures.
GALA concluded by reiterating that accountability strengthens institutions, while silence, defensiveness or politicisation weakens them. It maintains that no individual is above scrutiny, especially those entrusted with enforcing the law and leading the fight against corruption.
