By Alieu Jallow

Gambians in the Diaspora have reacted with frustration, though not surprise, at the National Assembly’s rejection of the Diaspora Voting Bill.

Many argue that President Adama Barrow and his government have never demonstrated genuine political will to extend voting rights to Gambians abroad, despite their significant contributions to the country’s GDP.

The Diaspora has been a key economic pillar for years, sending millions of dollars in remittances that sustain families and boost the national economy. However, many feel that Barrow’s administration has deliberately sidelined them from the democratic process, fearing the political consequences of their participation in elections.

Saikou Camara, a prominent diaspora activist, stated that Barrow sees the Diaspora vote as a direct threat to his presidency, knowing well that a significant number of Gambians abroad, along with their children who are eligible to vote, could sway the results against him.

“Barrow understands that his government is widely unpopular among Gambians abroad. If they were allowed to vote, they could register their adult children, many of whom have never even been to The Gambia, to participate in elections. Now, imagine the entire Gambian diaspora, along with their adult children and spouses, voting overwhelmingly against Barrow. Do you think he would willingly allow that, knowing it could cost him the presidency? It would be political suicide,” he states.

He also warned of potential economic repercussions, highlighting the contradiction in the government’s approach. While remittances from abroad will undoubtedly continue, he noted that the Central Bank’s recent initiative to attract diaspora investment in The Gambia could suffer if the government refuses to acknowledge their political rights.

“You cannot expect Gambians abroad to pump their hard-earned money into a system that refuses to recognize them as full citizens, if Gambians want real change, they must vote Barrow out in 2026. Simple,” Camara added.

Samba Bah is another young Gambian in the United States who stressed that he was not the least surprised, noting that he has not seen much political will for extending suffrage to the diaspora. However, he called on his fellow Gambians to leverage the opportunity to collaborate and work to advocate for their representation.

“I want this to serve as a motivating factor for Gambians in the diaspora to organize and work together transnationally to advocate for suffrage and representation. Our neighbors, Senegal and Cape Verde, have diaspora representation in their parliaments. We can have the same. But to have that, we will need to organize across political divides and geographical borders to advocate and lobby for it,” he said.

Sowe added that despite the government recognizing the Diaspora’s contribution, they are reluctant to grant them their political rights.

“I know the government recognized the diaspora’s contribution, but this decision suggests that while they are happy to benefit from the diaspora’s economic contributions, it is unwilling to grant them the political rights that should naturally accompany their role in national development. This vote suggests that the government does not see much value in the diaspora’s political participation,” he said.

Pa Samba Jaw, commonly known as Coach, is a prominent human rights activist based in Maryland. He expressed his frustration over what he described as the President and his cabinet denying bona fide Gambians their fundamental human and constitutional rights. Coach emphasized that he was surprised by the rejection of the bill, stating that since Barrow came to power in 2017, he has shown nothing but ingratitude despite the millions of dalasis raised by the Diaspora for his campaign.

“Adama Barrow’s government recognizes the contribution of the diaspora only in words. Every year, they would tout the diaspora’s contribution to the economy when they announce the massive remittances from the diaspora. Lest we forget, Adama has, since coming to power, been dismissive of the diaspora’s contribution to his presidency. It is an irrefutable fact that Adama Barrow’s accidental presidency was only possible because the diaspora poured millions of Dalasis into his campaign, but if you were to ask him today, he would claim that he alone “killed the lion”.

Coach Pa Samba believes that President Barrow and his cabinet cannot be trusted in terms of Diaspora affairs.

“Just like Barrow did with the 3-year agreement, the 2020 Draft Constitution, whenever you have any agreement with him, and that agreement comes in the way of his insatiable desire to self-perpetuate, he will renege on that promise. In Barrow’s mind, having the diaspora vote could cost him politically, hence this vote by his supporters at the National Assembly,” he argues.

The rejection of the Diaspora Voting Bill is being seen as a clear indication of the government’s unwillingness to uphold the fundamental rights of its citizens abroad. Whether this will impact future elections and investment decisions remains to be seen, but for many in the diaspora, the message from Barrow’s government is clear: their contributions are welcomed, but their votes are not.

By: Alieu Jallow

Mayor Rohey Malick Lowe has called on women to uplift and support one another rather than engage in rivalry and betrayal, particularly in politics and leadership.

Expressing her concerns, Mayor Lowe spoke about the challenges women face, especially those aspiring to political power, noting that internal divisions and a lack of solidarity often hinder progress. She urged women to unite, foster mutual empowerment, and break the barriers that have long kept them from leadership positions.

Her remarks came as she addressed the women of Banjul on the eve of International Women’s Day under the theme “For ALL Women and Girls: Rights. Equality. Empowerment.” This year’s theme focuses on unlocking equal rights, power, and opportunities for all and creating an inclusive future where no one is left behind. Central to this vision is empowering the next generation—particularly young women and adolescent girls—as catalysts for lasting change.

As the only female mayor in The Gambia and President of REFELA, Lowe reflected on both the progress made and the challenges that remain for women in politics. She pointed out that female leaders face opposition not only from male politicians but also from some women who have internalized gender biases.

Mairam Ceesay, a former staunch supporter of the former president and an executive member of the Network of Locally Elected Women of Africa (REFELA), a women’s commission within United Cities and Local Governments of Africa (UCLG Africa), urged women to practice political tolerance and avoid making statements driven by sentiment.

Tunko Jammeh, the ward councillor for Soldier Town, encouraged men to support women in leadership, saying they often bring effective leadership qualities.

With the leadership of REFELA based in The Gambia, the organization has supported women entrepreneurs and small businesses, helping them access financial aid, training, and networking opportunities. Several female beneficiaries shared how the initiative has transformed their lives.

While progress has been made, challenges such as gender inequality, political intimidation, and cultural barriers continue to hinder women’s full participation in decision-making. This year’s theme, “Accelerate Action,” serves as a reminder that true equality requires deliberate policies, collective advocacy, and unwavering commitment from individuals, governments, and organizations to create a more inclusive and equitable society for future generations.

By: Alieu Jallow

Hon. Yahya Menteng Sanyang, the National Assembly Member (NAM) for Latrikunda Sabiji, has resigned as Chairperson of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee, citing concerns about the committee’s effectiveness and mandate.

In a telephone interview with The Fatu Network, Hon. Sanyang stated: “I cannot lead a committee that is ineffective, useless, and has no mandate as per our proceedings.”

In his resignation letter addressed to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Hon. Sanyang expressed dissatisfaction with the committee’s ability to fulfill its core function of scrutinizing regulations formulated by the Executive. He noted that a recent parliamentary decision had effectively reduced the committee’s powers, leaving it without a meaningful role.

Hon. Sanyang explained that the Subsidiary Legislation Committee was initially tasked with reviewing and advising on subsidiary legislation laws and regulations that supplement primary legislation. However, following a recent report adopted by the National Assembly, Ministers and the Executive are now able to formulate regulations without parliamentary oversight, which, according to him, rendered the committee ineffective.

While emphasizing his commitment to serving the country, Hon. Sanyang clarified that his decision was driven by a desire for the committee to be able to carry out its duties effectively. He expressed his concern about the committee’s focus on meetings and allowances instead of substantive legislative work.

“This bill is no more, so the committee cannot work now, and all the committee can do is hold meetings and collect our sitting allowances. That’s not why we are in the National Assembly. We are here in the National Assembly to improve laws, to make good laws, and good regulations. If that’s not the case, we only go and meet and collect our committee allowances. I am not interested in that. What I want to do is make good laws for the country, for the interests of the people. But as it is right now, the committees cannot do anything, and I cannot be the head of a committee that cannot do anything,” he stressed.

Hon. Sanyang’s resignation brings to light concerns over the balance of power between the Executive and the National Assembly, particularly in terms of the oversight function of parliamentary committees. Since assuming leadership of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee, Hon. Sanyang mentioned that his committee was unable to hold any Executive member accountable. This prompted the committee to propose a bill aimed at empowering the committee to better execute its oversight responsibilities.

“We cannot do anything because the law is still there, and until that law is passed by the National Assembly, that will mandate the President, the ministers, and the executive arm of the government to bring all regulations before the National Assembly for further scrutiny. So, since I became the chairperson, we cannot work. That is why we brought the committee member bill, so that it can empower the committee to ensure the president, the ministers, and everybody bring their regulations before the National Assembly for us to scrutinize,” he outlined.

The resignation of Hon. Sanyang as chairperson of the Subsidiary Legislation Committee is likely to spark discussions regarding the authority of parliamentary committees and the role of the Executive in policy-making. It highlights ongoing concerns about accountability, transparency, and the checks on executive power in legislative affairs. As the National Assembly grapples with these issues, Hon. Sanyang’s resignation may prompt further examination of the committee’s role and the broader legislative process in the country.

The United Democratic Party acknowledges the press release issued by the Ministry of Transport, Works, and Infrastructure on March 5, 2025, concerning the concession agreement with Albayrak Group. While we appreciate the Ministry’s efforts to clarify its position, critical concerns remain unaddressed, particularly regarding transparency, equity, and the long-term implications of this arrangement.

1. Clarification of Stance

Our concerns are not rooted in accusations of “selling” the Port of Banjul but in the opaque terms of the concession itself. The Gambian public and key stakeholders, including the National Assembly, have been excluded from scrutinizing an agreement that binds national assets and revenue streams for 30 years.

2. Transparency and Democratic Oversight

The Ministry’s failure to involve the National Assembly or disclose the full agreement to the public undermines democratic governance. Concessions of this magnitude, which involve strategic national infrastructure, must undergo parliamentary debate and public consultation per constitutional principles. The claim that the process was “guided by patriotism” does not substitute for accountability.

3. Inequitable Profit-Sharing Model

The 80-20 profit split in favor of Albayrak raises serious questions:

• Why should a foreign entity retain 80% of profits from Gambian resources for three decades?
• Is this ratio consistent with global best practices for port concessions, particularly in comparable West African nations?
• What safeguards exist to ensure The Gambia’s 20% equity share yields meaningful returns, given inflation and evolving economic conditions?

4. Duration of the Concession

A 30-year term risks locking The Gambia into an arrangement that may not align with future economic priorities. Long-term concessions demand rigorous cost-benefit analysis, including:

• Exit clauses for non-performance by the investor.
• Mechanisms for periodic review to adjust terms in line with national interests.

5. Unanswered Questions on Public Benefits

While the Ministry highlights infrastructure upgrades (e.g., Sanyang Deep Seaport), critical details are absent:

• What guarantees exist that Albayrak will fulfill its USD 19 million investment pledge?
• How will the promised “4% of gross revenue” and “dividends” be calculated and audited?
• Why are Basse and Kaur Inland Ports mentioned only in passing, with no binding timelines?

6. Local Content and Employment Concerns

The concession’s “1% local content provision” is insufficient for a project of this scale. Furthermore, retaining existing staff under Albayrak does not address broader unemployment or skills development for Gambians.

7. Call to Action

We urge the Ministry to:

• Immediately publish the full concession agreement for independent review.
• Subject the agreement to parliamentary scrutiny and public hearings.
• Re-negotiate terms to ensure a fairer profit-sharing model and a shorter concession period.
• Establish a multi-stakeholder committee to monitor implementation.

Conclusion

The Gambia’s ports are strategic assets that belong to its people. Any concession must prioritize national interest, transparency, and equitable gains. We reject attempts to dismiss legitimate concerns as “misinformation” and demand accountability to safeguard our nation’s future.

UDP MEDIA TEAM