By: Alieu Jallow

During Wednesday’s parliamentary question-and-answer session, Foreign Minister Dr. Mamodou Tangara acknowledged the harsh realities faced by many Gambians in accounting for those who have perished during irregular migration attempts. This statement comes amid rising concerns over the safety and welfare of migrants, as thousands continue to risk their lives in search of better opportunities abroad.

The Foreign Minister emphasized that the Gambian government is facing significant hurdles in documenting and understanding the true scale of lives lost in these treacherous journeys, given the clandestine nature of such movements and the involvement of transit routes often managed by informal networks.

“The ministry, in collaboration with relevant international organizations such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and other partners, is committed to monitoring this migratory flow, documenting cases, and tracing missing persons where possible. However, due to the high risk and illegal nature of irregular migration, compiling an exact list of individuals who have embarked on this journey is challenging,” Tangara outlined.

Dr. Tangara noted that most of these irregular migrants do not register their departures and use routes that bypass immigration posts, thus making tracking difficult. He highlighted that despite these challenges, his ministry is working diligently to gather as much relevant data as possible to respond to parliament’s request for confirmed deaths, citing that the government is partnering with international organizations and foreign missions to identify Gambians who tragically lost their lives en route to Europe.

“We continue to coordinate efforts to trace missing persons and help families where possible. Considering the complexity of this request, we kindly ask for your understanding that the ministry requires additional time to consolidate the necessary data from our partners and foreign missions,” the Foreign Minister appealed.

Migration from The Gambia has escalated in recent years, driven by a myriad of factors including economic instability, high youth unemployment, and the quest for better living conditions. Many Gambians embark on perilous journeys, often relying on smugglers and facing significant risks, including exploitation and death at sea.

The Foreign Minister pointed out that while the government is committed to addressing the challenges posed by irregular migration, they are implementing security measures to deter people from embarking on these routes. He, however, noted that these migration issues often come to light when migrants face difficulties, resulting in their approach to the government, particularly in situations where they are stranded. He stressed that the government does not have the budget to support such cases.

“Unfortunately, we have been engaging our partners to work together in addressing this issue because we are the biggest victims, as it’s our young, valid, and ambitious people who are leaving. These are not criminals; they are just going because they think the pastures are greener on the other side, which sometimes is not the reality.”

As discussions around migration continue to evolve on both national and international platforms, the acknowledgment of these challenges by The Gambia’s Foreign Minister is a crucial step toward fostering dialogue on finding solutions, as well as a call for better data and reporting.

By: Alieu Jallow

President Adama Barrow has criticized opposition leader Ousainou Darboe, labeling him as “selfish.” This statement reflects the ongoing political tensions in The Gambia, where both leaders represent opposing views and ideologies. Barrow’s remarks suggest that he sees Darboe’s actions or motivations as prioritizing personal interests over the welfare of the country or its citizens. This exchange highlights the polarized political landscape in The Gambia, as each leader seeks to rally support and define their vision for the nation.

Lamin Cham, who is now the campaign manager for Barrow’s National People’s Party (NPP) after defecting from the Darboe-led UDP, is at the center of this exchange. Barrow recalled an incident involving Cham, where he claimed Darboe tried to persuade Cham to leave his position and follow him, which Cham rejected.

“He met Lamin Cham at the court and asked him to surrender himself so that his files in court could be struck out. Belie wahalie, Lamin told him, ‘Surrender myself and go where? I met you working in State House, and in my comfortable private vehicle with a driver and police escort. You want me to abandon all that and follow you? Should someone do that? I’m in my Pajero, and you want me to walk?’ So you see how he thinks. Is that genuine? You summon someone to court because of what the person did, and you ask him to surrender himself—’selfish,’ ‘selfish,’” he alleges.

Barrow claims that the UDP leader, while in office as both Foreign Minister and Vice President, never advised him on some of the appointments he made, which were not in line with the dictates of the Constitution, until he was relieved of his duties from the government.

“When we were all in office, all these appointments were made with these people. Lamin Cham, his UDP Youth President, is here seated; we were here together, and he didn’t say a word. Dembo By Force, National President, we were here together, and he never said a word. So he didn’t say anything all that while. He was seeing all this. He was Foreign Minister and Vice President. He never came to me once and told me that this or that was not in line with the laws, and he was a government employee. So now, is it when he realized that and is busy running around, up and down, going to court?” he claims.

Additionally, the President asserts that Darboe’s campaign on unconstitutional appointments should have commenced when he was in government, but he failed to act, thus indicating that he was politicking to divide the NPP and create panic among them, citing that Gambians are now aware of what’s happening.

These comments from the head of state didn’t sit well with others, who criticized the President for not focusing on addressing other pressing issues that affect the country, rather than engaging in politics.

By: Ousman F. M’Bai

Financial Crime, Regulation & International Asset Recovery Lawyer/UK;
Founder: ProffMaXX (Gambia) Ltd (Ground Water Drilling, Exploration & Production)

FAR Ltd: Jeopardising The Gambia’s Oil & Gas Prospects

FAR Ltd.’s handling of The Gambia’s oil and gas prospects in the Senegal/Gambia shared sub-basin has raised serious concerns about its operational competence and judgement that may have negatively impacted the nation’s resource future. Yet, the response from The Gambia’s government and other entities involved has been astonishingly muted. It begs the question: why has there been no investigation into how this debacle was allowed to unfold?

Despite FAR Ltd.’s troubling conduct, it continues to hold its 100% licence stake in The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks, with seemingly no repercussions. The Gambia’s government, along with the governments of Senegal, Woodside Energy, and Petronas, have all remained conspicuously silent. The inertia surrounding the matter signals more than mere oversight; it points seemingly to a potential systemic lack of scrutiny and accountability.

The Gambia’s Missed Opportunity and Senegal’s Tainted Windfall

The Gambia’s government, having effectively surrendered the country’s economic sovereignty to Senegal, maintains the position that there are no oil and gas resources in The Gambia. Remarkably, the Petroleum Minister recently issued a communiqué downplaying the nation’s oil and gas potential, reinforcing the false narrative that no significant resources exist within the country. This conclusion—potentially influenced by FAR Ltd.’s poor performance and Senegal’s control over the country’s unsophisticated elites overlooks a crucial fact: the issue is not whether oil is directly found in The Gambia, but rather The Gambia’s undeniable right to a fair share of the resources from the Senegal/Gambia sub-basin, which straddles the maritime boundaries of both countries.

Meanwhile, Senegal and its state-owned oil corporation Petrosen, together with Woodside Energy, celebrate what they claim is a monumental discovery. They proudly assert that this will contribute to Senegal’s sustainable development and provide lucrative returns for investors, notably Woodside Energy. However, they appear to omit critical discussion of how they stand to gain significantly from FAR Ltd.’s controversial claim that the SNE Sangomar oil and gas field does not extend into The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks. The ethical implication of this omission raises significant concerns and questions about transparency in the management of shared resources. At the core of this issue is the exclusion of The Gambia from its rightful share of the sub-basin’s resources. There can be no valid explanation for this mistreatment and exploitation of The Gambia, especially given that Senegal has resource-sharing agreements with both Mauritania to the north of the MSGBC basin and Guinea-Bissau to the south.

3D Seismic Data and FAR Ltd.’s Dubious Findings

Woodside Energy, Petrosen, and Petronas, through its Gambian subsidiary PC(Gambia) Ltd, all possessed clear 3D seismic data indicating that The Gambia’s A2 block is a contiguous extension of the prolific SNE Sangomar field. Yet rather than critically evaluating FAR Ltd.’s findings, these entities accepted without question the conclusions from FAR Ltd.’s failed drilling programme— raising concerns about the adequacy of due diligence.

From the outset, FAR Ltd lacked both the capital and technical expertise necessary for successful exploration. When it entered The Gambia in 2016, the country’s institutions were in disarray. FAR Ltd secured 100% stakes in the A2 and A5 blocks through a deal that has not been fully disclosed, raising concerns about transparency and potential exploitation of weak governance. A strategy often associated with problematic investment practices is to identify a gateway to the heart of government decision- making, then appoint the son, daughter or relative of that individual to represent the so- called investor’s interest.

Facing an inability to meet its obligations, FAR Ltd brought in Petronas as a joint venture partner through its subsidiary PC(Gambia) Ltd. However, Petronas’s presence in The Gambia has been equally shrouded in mystery. It has made no public disclosures, offered no transparency, and failed to release any transactional accounts or information regarding its operations in the country. FAR Ltd.’s assertions are the only source of information on this partnership.

FAR Ltd.’s Inadequate Drilling Programmes

FAR Ltd.’s amateurish approach to drilling was evident in the failure of its first well, Samo, in the A5 block, based on less accurate 2D seismic data or none. Unsurprisingly, FAR’s Chief Geologist admitted they had “drilled low.” Nonetheless, the company reported encountering two structures but failed to disclose any details regarding their relationship to the SNE Sangomar reservoirs. For its second well, Bambo, FAR Ltd concealed significant issues, including a major accident during drilling. Both the primary and secondary wells missed their targets, leading FAR Ltd to wrongly conclude that the Bambo and Soloo prospects were commercially non-viable. This conclusion ignored

clear evidence from 3D seismic data showing that the SNE Sangomar field extends into The Gambia’s A2 block. And FAR Ltd.’s own findings that both prospects have easy access to the prolific source kitchen that feeds oil into the SNE Sangomar field.

FAR Ltd.’s Financial Collapse and The Senegal Deal

Adding to the intrigue, in June 2020, FAR Ltd defaulted on a capital call for its joint venture stake in the SNE Sangomar field. In response, it was forced to sell its 13% stake to Woodside Energy for $126 million in July 2021. This transaction, structured to guarantee FAR Ltd future payments up to $55 million, raises serious questions. It appears that Woodside Energy and Petrosen conducted no meaningful due diligence before finalising this deal, preferring instead to validate FAR Ltd.’s dubious findings and dismiss The Gambia’s rightful claim to a stake in the SNE Sangomar field located inside the Senegal/Gambia sub basin.

Despite repeated requests for clarification from Woodside Energy, Petrosen, and Petronas on their role in this saga, no substantive responses have been provided. Woodside Energy’s reply, in particular, ignored the crux of the matter, deflecting to its pre-emption of FAR’s sale in the Rufisque, Sangomar, and Sangomar Deep (RSSD) joint venture. It made no mention of the default notice served on FAR Ltd, nor did it acknowledge the implications of FAR Ltd.’s actions in The Gambia. The strategic silence on these matters is telling.

FAR Ltd.’s poor financial standing left it ill-prepared to meet its obligations regarding development, production, and royalty payments under its licence, had it confirmed that the SNE Sangomar field extended into The Gambia’s A2 block. Such a finding would have compelled Woodside Energy and Petrosen to acknowledge The Gambia’s shared stake. FAR Ltd.’s ineptitude has effectively made The Gambia the sacrificial lamb.

The Case of Petronas and Lack of Transparency

In August 2022, barely a year after Woodside’s acquisition of FAR Ltd.’s stake, Petronas surrendered its interest in The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks back to FAR Ltd for an undisclosed amount. This move raises disturbing questions about the nature of the transaction, the nature of the relationship between Petronas and FAR Ltd and the potential denial of The Gambia its rightful share of the sub-basin’s resources. Petronas has yet to respond to inquiries on whether its actions comply with local and international regulations.

In an era where corporate transparency and accountability are paramount, the actions of Woodside Energy, Petronas, Petrosen, and FAR Ltd stand as an affront to ethical standards. The ongoing denial of The Gambia’s rights to its resources condemns millions of Gambians to perpetual poverty while benefiting a select few. This level of corporate governance raises serious ethical concerns that must be met with international outrage.

Environmental Risks Posed by the FPSO Vessel Near The Gambia’s Territorial Waters

Amidst all of this, The Gambia’s entire maritime coast and ecosystem is exposed to a significant risk of serious pollution from oil spills and leaks due to the presence of the FPSO Leopold Sedar Senghor in close proximity to its territorial waters. An FPSO (Floating, Production, Storage, and Offloading) vessel is a modified oil tanker, redesigned for use at sea as a facility for oil and gas production, processing, storage, and offloading. These vessels are directly connected to production wells deep below the seabed by numerous interlinked pipes, often spanning hundreds of kilometres. The multipurpose function of the vessel, combined with the extensive network of pipes, increases the risk of accidents through leaks and spillage. However, there is no evidence of any coordinated collaboration between The Gambia’s government, the government of Senegal, and Woodside Energy to implement proactive emergency safeguarding measures in the event of an accident.

Paralleling Precedent: The Mozambique Tuna Bonds Case

In the recent landmark corruption case in the High Court Commercial Division in London, the Mozambique “Tuna Bonds” case, Justice Robin Knowles described the scale of the scandal as “nothing short of a tragedy.” He criticised the defendants for focusing solely on their own financial gain, rather than on assisting Mozambique in making the most of its resources.

The parallel with The Gambia is clear. Just as Mozambique was exploited, The Gambia’s vulnerabilities as a small, weak state are being exploited by external entities and internal enablers. The international community must not allow this injustice to persist.

Conclusion: FAR Ltd, Woodside Energy, and The Gambia’s Future

The Gambia’s rightful share of the oil and gas resources in the Senegal/Gambia sub- basin has been sacrificed due to FAR Ltd.’s incompetence and the complacency, if not the lack of action from companies like Woodside Energy, Petrosen, and Petronas. FAR Ltd.’s reacquisition of 100% of The Gambia’s A2 and A5 blocks has put the nation in a perilous position, effectively holding the country hostage with a gun to its head.

Gambians must not remain silent in the face of this corporate exploitation. The ethical and legal failings of those involved must be addressed, and those who have sought to profit from The Gambia’s resources at its expense must be held accountable.

Woodside Energy, now holding 82% of the RSSD, has the power to right this wrong. However, their willingness to engage meaningfully with the reality of The Gambia’s situation will serve as a true measure of their commitment to justice, transparency, and the right to development. The world is watching.

Editor’s Note: On 28.08.24 The Fatu Network wrote to Woodside Energy, Petrosen and Petronas seeking clarifications and their response to the issues raised in this expose. To date, Petronas and Petrosen have not responded. Woodside Energy provided the following response attributable to a Woodside Energy spokesperson:

‘In December 2020 Woodside exercised pre-emption rights to acquire FAR Senegal’s participating interest in the Rufisque, Sangomar and Sangomar Deep (RSSD) joint venture. The transaction completed in 2021 and in no way related to any of FAR’s assets in The Gambia. Further details can be found in the announcement released to the Australian Securities Exchange at the time of the transaction.’

The Fatu Network wrote to FAR Ltd on 5.08.24 and they have not responded to date.

By: Mama A. Touray

Following the interview of the United Democratic Party leader on Kerr Fatou, where he stated that if the government tampered with the original 2020 draft constitution, his party’s parliamentarians would not vote for it, Momodou Sabally, special adviser to President Adama Barrow, has pleaded with opposition members to reverse their stance on the draft constitution.

“I am pleading with the opposition members who are saying that if there is any change to the 2020 draft constitution, they will not agree. I urge them to revise their position because it is not the correct position and will not benefit the country. Democracy is about consensus, debate, consensus-building, and compromise,” he said.

Sabally challenged, “Who can tell me that the 2020 draft constitution was perfect? Let one person stand and tell me it’s perfect. Those who are saying to bring back the 2020 draft constitution cannot say that it’s perfect. A draft that is plagiarized from the Kenyan constitution — you bring that and say it should be the holy book, and no one should question it.”

He continued: “You are not democratic; you are not behaving democratically. Perhaps you are not even interested in the country’s best interests. If your opinion is that we should have a new constitution, and the draft is presented, yet you say if they change anything, you won’t agree — then what you want cannot happen. You don’t own the country. There are political parties, interest groups, religious groups, and other stakeholders in the country.”

Sabally added that he was one of the first to criticize the Constitutional Review Commission, saying, “I didn’t agree with the way they were operating, and I believe that where it was heading was not what Gambians wanted.”

He urged stakeholders, including political parties and CSOs, to allow the process to go through the National Assembly. “It’s not like only National People’s Party parliamentarians are there. We have UDP NAMs and other NAMs to see how we can have a process of discussion and consensus to have a constitution that will move this country forward.”

On the issue of consultation, Sabally said the process taken by the Constitutional Review Commission was sufficient. “They traveled around the entire country, using our money, and even went abroad all in the name of consultation, only to plagiarize a foreign constitution. That’s enough consultation.”

“The draft constitution involved consultation, it included everyone’s views, and the government made adjustments that I believe were necessary. Government is not theoretical, it’s practical. Giving the National Assembly the powers of the President undermines the work of the National Assembly. If you are in the executive and understand how the country should be governed, you will understand why President Barrow and the cabinet made these adjustments,” he said.