Why did Lawyer Ousainou Darboe refuse to become a novelist? Because he’s already a master of fiction, creating his own tales to suit his political agenda. In a political climate where loyalty is king, it’s not uncommon for those who fall from grace to try and claw their way back to power. Lawyer Ousainou Darboe is no exception, and he’s recently shown his true colours in a series of attacks on President Barrow’s decision to investigate local government councils.

But as the saying goes, “the leopard cannot change its spots,” and it’s time to call out Darboe’s double standard. In this op-ed, we’ll delve into the facts and set the record straight, exposing the truth behind Darboe’s accusations.

Lawyer Ousainou Darboe’s recent criticism of President Barrow’s decision to investigate local government councils is nothing short of hypocritical. As the former Foreign Minister in the transitional government and later Vice President was the brainchild behind a good number of similar commissions, such as the Janneh Commission and TRRC. Yet, he has now lost his moral compass, launching an attack on the President’s motives by accusing him of playing politics ahead of the upcoming local government elections, where Darboe’s party, the UDP, is set to go head-to-head with the ruling NPP. But this accusation couldn’t be further from the truth.

President Barrow’s decision to hold the local government councils accountable is a step in the right direction. Corruption is a cancer that erodes the fabric of society and undermines democracy. It is not something that should be overlooked or swept under the rug, especially during an election year. It is Darboe who has “burnt his bridges” and is now trying to discredit the President’s motives, engaging in “sour grapes” and “crying over spilt milk.”

Darboe’s criticism is particularly ironic, given that his party is set to retain two of the largest municipal council seats of Banjul and Kanifing. He has no right to accuse the President of playing politics, when it is he who is benefiting from the current status quo. He has “taken the wind out of his own sails” by criticizing the very thing he was once an architect of similar commissions in the early days of the transition.

The president’s decision to investigate the local governments is a deft and sagacious move and I must say that Mr. Darboe’s remarks are nothing but a cacophonous display of political standing.
Instead of attacking the president’s motives, Darboe should be supporting this effort, and working to ensure that the local government councils are held to account for their actions.

In conclusion, the president’s decision to investigate local government councils is a step in the right direction. It is time to crack down on corruption, regardless of the timing. Darboe’s recent criticism is nothing more than a “red herring,” designed to distract attention away from his own party’s shortcomings.

~ Concern Citizen

By: Cherno Baba Jallow

At Independence In 1965, they called The Gambia an “improbable nation” because they weren’t sure she could survive on her own — too small, too young. But survive she did, and has been ever since.

It is always a good feeling knowing you have a homeland you could call your own. More than that, a homeland you live peacefully in. The Gambia has persevered in peace and stability. Many countries in the subregion have gone through internal upheavals blowing up their territorial sovereignties and social order, pillaging their infrastructure and uprooting their people.

Their people: they became refugees and stateless across International boundaries. I met with Sierra Leoneans, Liberians, Iraqis and others displaced from their own countries because of bad leadership and internal strife. They had lost hope in their countries. ‘‘I am not returning home; I am staying here,’’ a common theme ran through my interactions with these nationalities.

I knew I was an exile in America and couldn’t visit home. From 1996 to 2017, I couldn’t visit The Gambia because of the fear of one man: Yahya Jammeh, a vicious trampler of human rights and murderer of his own people. It is a terrible feeling knowing you are a wanted man in your own native land, and therefore, can’t visit and see your people. But then I always said to myself, ‘you will go home someday as long as the country remains intact and doesn’t plunge into a civil war.’

The Gambia came to the brink of a national crisis. The drums of war could be heard from the distant horizons. The tell-tale signs were there. If Jammeh had won in 2016, it would have triggered a seething cauldron of political despair, and before long, a march to debacle.

But sanity prevailed. Gambians, still availed of the peaceful routes to leadership change, finally summoned the courage to kick out their oppressive dictator. And the international community finally listened to our cries and came to our defence.

Independence Day celebrations aren’t just about a cheerful throwback to the past, when colonies broke free from the strangleholds of their mother countries, when the umbilical cords of colonialism finally got severed and buried by the shovelful. These celebrations are also about national progress, about how much nations have done to advance the public good for their citizenries and about how much these nations have done to right their past wrongs and change course for the better.

In 2016, Gambians restored democracy and constitutional order. And they didn’t resort to violent means. They did it peacefully. This is first-rate political maturity. On any day, and certainly, on one like today’s, Gambians should remember their ingenuity in removing their dictator without having to kill each other and cause undue destruction. They still kept their country intact.

“As the country is gearing towards celebrating fifty-eight years of nationhood, the ethos of self-reliant and independent informed people has been bundled away due to the disrespectful attitude of the so-called government that is well-known for strengthening the begging bowl syndrome and lost confidence in people’s voice and power.

As this connotes, we are calling on the government to practice good governance in providing effective service delivery and improve public institutions that fit for purpose. Our independence is meaningless when our government fails to provide basic needs to the citizens; when our hospitals remain death traps, and our daily activities remain under pressure. Our independence is useless when society feels less important, and the schools remain underperformed.

We urge the government to take this opportunity as we mark independence to ensure the word independence comes with vigorous transformation of our nation without serving as second fiddle to other countries for their selfish desire.”

MUSA Ousainou Yali Batchilly
Secretary General and Party Leader of Gambia Action Party.

By Musa Touray
Sandu Kuwonku

The security situation in The Gambia is getting traumatic by the day in spite of the laudable efforts of our men and women in uniform. Insecurity, which some say was not a worrisome phenomenon in the past, is taking a scary dimension. That security officials were attacked with one PIU officer severely beaten, the other shot in the hand and one disarmed of his fully loaded rifle by transnational armed delinquents portends a disturbing precarity of our country’s security architecture.

Let’s put aside, in the meantime, the nocuous and far-reaching consequences of fleeing with an unauthorized firearm replete with “30 live rounds of ammunition” and delve into a broader assessment of the whole issue.

Anyone who has read The Alkamba Times’ story about what happened in Fass Njaga Choi in the early hours of Sunday morning will relate what I am trying to put across. The medium broke hair-raising news that an amorphous group of highly armed men “stormed the North Bank settlement of Fass Njaga Choi” and “mercilessly beat up police intervention unit personnel at a checkpoint before seizing his rifle and disappearing into Senegal.” This incident evokes genuine public concerns about the fate of our security. It’s not only a threat to our lives and livelihood but also an impugnation of our sovereignty as a nation.

If it’s established that the armed syndicate consists of Senegalese nationals, as was the case in a similar incident in Farafenni, casual observers would understand it to mean another episode in which our sovereignty as a nation has been undermined. Gambians in Foni, for example, have serially faced the brunt of sporadic geopolitical upheavals occasioned by the longstanding hostility between Senegalese forces and Cassamance secessionist rebels, which often subside in nondiplomatic, nonetheless volatile, Mexican standoffs. This has had egregious impacts on the residents, denying them the placidity of mind that citizens in other parts of the country have enjoyed until recently.

The group’s fleeing the scene with a seized weapon is as worrying as the whole incident. Since it was not reported that the attackers wore uniforms, only God knows what sort of human beings this armed group is composed of. As of now, there is no evidence to infer that it’s a rebellious group. Based on what followed the armed invasion of the village, which include breaking into shops and stealing thousands of dalasi as reported by The Alkamba Times, we will be right to call them armed robbers.

However, this is how most rebel groups around the world started. Fortifying themselves gradually with illegal weapons to launch insurgent offensives on military groups that strike fear in civilians’ hearts. If left unhunted, rebellious movements expand their base and increase their forces through willful recruitment and recruitment at gunpoint of captured, even if unprovoking, civilians.

This calls for immediate and proper reinforcement of our security officers as they strive to ward off aggression and criminality from our shores. This, of course, should be accompanied by incentives.

In the current state of affairs, it seems that the President of the Republic of Gambia, His Excellency Adama Barrow, has taken the path of grandiloquence, as he advocates for the delivery of mandates by public institutions. However, a closer examination of the situation reveals that his assertions are shrouded in hyperbole and lack substantive evidence to back his claims. This op-ed serves as a harbinger of dissent, a beacon of reason that exposes the flaws in the President’s argument and presents a counter-narrative to the current discourse.

In recent times, there has been a growing trend of African leaders calling for the improvement of public institutions. The Gambian President, Adama Barrow, is one such leader who has made a similar call. While the intention behind such calls is commendable, the reality of the situation is far from simple. In this op-ed, I will be examining the flaws in President Barrow’s plan for state-owned enterprises (SOEs).

First, it is important to note that the problem of ineffectiveness in SOEs is not unique to The Gambia. This is a problem that has plagued African economies for decades. Despite the massive investments made by the government, many SOEs continue to post losses. As a result, it is not enough to simply call for the improvement of these institutions. A more comprehensive approach is needed.

Second, President Barrow’s plan relies heavily on performance contracts. The idea of performance contracts is not new and has been used in various countries with limited success. The reason for this is that performance contracts only work when the underlying issues that are causing poor performance are addressed. In The Gambia, it is not enough to simply sign performance contracts and hope for the best. The root causes of poor performance must be addressed, such as corruption and mismanagement, before performance contracts can have a significant impact.

Third, the focus on SOEs as a solution to the country’s problems is misguided. The Gambian economy is not primarily driven by SOEs. The majority of economic activity takes place in the private sector. By focusing too much on SOEs, the government risks neglecting the private sector, which is the primary engine of economic growth.

Fourth, President Barrow’s plan assumes that the government is capable of effectively overseeing SOEs. However, this is not always the case. In many African countries, the government has limited capacity to effectively regulate and supervise SOEs. This is due to a lack of resources and technical expertise. Without the necessary capacity, the government’s ability to ensure that SOEs are operating in an efficient and effective manner is limited.

Furthermore, the President’s plan lacks the consideration of external factors that can impact the success of the State-Owned Enterprises. For instance, the global economy, political instability, and fluctuations in commodity prices can have significant impacts on their performance. Ignoring these variables will only lead to unrealistic expectations and ultimately disappointment. It is imperative that the government takes a comprehensive approach, factoring in all relevant circumstances, before setting targets and expectations for the SOEs. Failing to do so would be like trying to row a boat upstream without considering the current of the river – a fruitless endeavour.

Finally, the focus on SOEs as a solution to the country’s problems is a form of government intervention that has been discredited in many countries. The experience of many countries, including The Gambia, has shown that government intervention in the economy often leads to inefficiencies, corruption, and mismanagement. This is because the government does not have the same incentives as the private sector. The private sector is driven by the desire for profit, while the government is driven by political considerations.

In conclusion, President Barrow’s plan for SOEs is well-intentioned, but it is flawed. The focus on SOEs as a solution to the country’s problems is misguided, and the reliance on performance contracts is unlikely to have a significant impact. A more comprehensive approach is needed, one that addresses the root causes of poor performance and recognizes the limitations of government intervention.

As the old adage goes, “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” In this op-ed for The Fatu Network, we delve into the political landscape of the Brikama Area Council elections, where Sheriffo Sonko, the current chairman, has thrown his hat in the ring for a re-election bid through the ruling National People’s Party (NPP). And in the case of Sheriffo Sonko, the current chairman of the Brikama Area Council, the smoke of scandal and corruption that has surrounded his first tenure in office is thick enough to choke a horse. As he now sets his sights on a re-election bid through the ruling National People’s Party (NPP), one cannot help but wonder if the party is about to step into a political inferno of its own making by endorsing such a problematic candidate. Will the NPP be lured by Sheriffo’s flimsy promises, or will they choose to distance themselves from the fires of scandal that threaten to engulf his campaign? 

The recent announcement of Sheriffo Sonko’s application for the National People’s Party (NPP) ticket for the upcoming local government elections has left many scratching their heads. The Brikama Area Council Chairman is seeking re-election, but this time through the ruling party, and will face competition from seven other aspirants including Ahmad Gitteh. But the question remains: why should the NPP even consider Sheriffo Sonko as a candidate, let alone pick him to run for the Brikama Area Council Chairmanship?
To begin with, Sheriffo’s past is littered with scandals, ranging from sex tapes to allegations of corruption and mismanagement of funds. In an era where political correctness and integrity are crucial, Sheriffo’s scandals are enough to sink any political career. Choosing him as a candidate would be like a red rag to a bull, giving the opposition United Democratic Party (UDP) all the ammunition they need to discredit and undermine the NPP.

Furthermore, Sheriffo’s performance during his first tenure as BAC Chairman was nothing to write home about. Despite being in office for several years, he failed to improve the condition of the Brikama market, which continues to be in a deplorable state. This, coupled with his scandals, paints a picture of a man who is more interested in personal gain than serving the people of Brikama.

In sharp contrast, other candidates like Brikama’s own son, Canada-based Ahmed Gitteh, would make a much better candidate. Gitteh has zero scandals and is well-acquainted with Brikama’s issues, especially grassroots politics among young people. He has been influential during the 2021 presidential elections and helped re-elect President Adama Barrow under the NPP ticket. These qualities, along with his zero scandals, make him the right choice for the NPP.

In conclusion, Sheriffo Sonko’s aspirations for the Brikama Area Council Chairmanship should be thrown out the window. He is a man with a tarnished image, whose scandals and past performance make him a liability for the NPP. Choosing him as a candidate would be political suicide, and the NPP would be wise to look elsewhere for a candidate who is more in line with the values and aspirations of the people of Brikama. Candidates like Ahmed Gitteh, who have a proven track record of service and integrity, would be a much better choice and would help to restore the NPP’s image as a party that is committed to serving the people of The Gambia.

By: Alieu Fatty; student, International Ahmadiyya University of Theology and Scholastic Sciences in Ghana

It is often the custom of some people that whenever they have a desire to practise anything for personal gains, they obsessively use religion as a scapegoat in filling their vested interest. One such very common and debatable issue is the practice of FGM (Female Genital Mutilation).

The 6th of February every year is commemorated as the International Day of Zero Tolerance to Female Genital Mutilation around the world. The United Nations declared this day in 2003 as part of its blueprint to bring a total end to the genital mutilation of women and girls across the world and to raise awareness against its practice and dangers.

A few days ago, I read from an online news website in the Gambia that reports that ‘an elderly woman’ was monitored by GAMCOTRAP an anti-FGM campaign group for subjecting some young girls to this barbaric and cruel act around the province of the Gambia in the Central River Region, although, the Constitution of the Gambia outlaws the practice of FGM. However, the Gambia isn’t alone in this evil practice, there are pelting records which indicate its practice in other parts of Africa and the large world. (Blocktvgambia.come/2023/01/30/a-woman-is-under-investigation-for-allegedly-circumcising-girls)

Inherently, what makes this atrocious and ungodly practice seemingly difficult to abolish is the fact that many folks have falsely taken it to be endorsed by religion, more especially, the religion of Islam just to achieve their self-centred goals. Some of its ardent advocates have argued how the practice is important to ensure a woman’s virginity before marriage and is symbolic of a woman’s virtue and dignity.

In the Holy Qur’an, Allah, the Almighty has very beautifully addressed the Muslims that He created wives for men so that they find ‘peace of mind’ together and that ‘He has put love and tenderness’ between spouses. Nothing in this verse gives the understanding that FGM would be necessary or desired, to attain the ideal marital relationship.

So, the truth of the matter remains, as far as Islam is concerned this practice is inhumane, it has no room in Islam and it’s a total violation of the human right of girls and women.

There are no Quranic or Hadith commandments that substantiate the practice of FGM. Any teaching which is against the human right of women and girls can’t be taught by the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw). For example, according to a companion of the Holy Prophet (saw), Abu Shuraim Khuwailad ibn Amr Khuzai relates that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) said: Allah, I declare sinful any failure to safeguard the rights of two weak ones, orphan and women (Nisai). Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, Women in Islam (Tilford, Surrey, UK Islam International Publications Ltd, 2008) P 31.

What is FGM?

FGM “entails all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injuries to the female genital organs for a nonmedical reason”. “Female Genital Mutilation”, World Health Organization, last modified February 2014, http.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/.

The practice of FGM is highly conducted in most African countries, Gambia, Nigeria, Somalia, Ghana, Egypt etc.

An estimated record by WHO states that “between 100 and 400 million women and girls in the world have undergone some form of FGM. Although overall figures are difficult to estimate, they do indicate the massive scale of this human rights abuse. FGM affects far more women than previously thought”.

Moreover, it’s also estimated that based on survey data suggests that in Africa 91.5 million girls and women aged 10 years and above have been subjected to this practice. Of these, 12.4 million are between 10 and 14 years of age (3). Looking at the high ratio of its practice, it’s assumed that if such an alarming situation should continue to exist in our civilized world, then some 86 million girls are more likely to experience some form of the practice by 2030.

Cultural Origin of FGM?

The custom of Female Genital Mutilation is considered to be 2000 years old. It’s believed that FGM hails back from the ancient Egypt Empire where it was practised on female slaves with the aim of controlling their sexual libido. With the passage of time, this practice found itself escaping from the borders of Ancient Egypt to other Arabian countries thus, it became widespread in other parts of the world.

According to independent research conducted by UNICEF, regarding the root of FGM explicitly explains the role of religion in its practice states:

“FGM/C is often seen to be somehow connected to Islam; a view that is perhaps unsurprising given the frequency with which it is practised by many Muslim African groups. However, not all Islamic groups practise FGM/c, and many non-Islamic groups do… Despite the fact that FGM/C predates the birth of Islam and Christianity and is not mandated by religious scriptures, the belief that it is a religious requirement contributes to the continuation of the practice in a number of settings.” Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Statistical Overview and Exploration of Dynamics of Change”, UNICEF, accessed December8th,20214,http//www.chilinfo.org/FGM_Lo_res.pdf, p.69.

According to Professor Barbara Crandall regarding the history of FGM, he states:

“Female genital mutilation is an ancient practice dating back to the Pharaohs. Its goal is to control female sexuality and parents promote it to make their daughters acceptable as wives. It is not confined to Islamic countries but is more common there…and it is not mentioned in the Qur’an “. “Barbara Crandall, Gender and Religion: The Dark Site of Scripture, 182.

Why FGM not Islamic?

The Holy Prophet (saw) said: ‘Five practices are of the inborn characteristics of man: circumcision, shaving the pubic region, removing hair under armpits, clipping the nails and cutting the moustaches short’. (Bukhari).

The Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) had several daughters but there isn’t a single narration which proposes that they have undergone this practice or been subjected to it. Even not a single narration. On the contrary, whatever Islamic law he taught Muslims he would first set an example for others to follow. For example, with regards to the punishment of theft, he would say even if it were my daughter Fatima(ra) who committed theft she would be subjected to the same punishment.

Additionally, it’s implausible to hold the belief that the Holy Prophet (saw) who laid down every detail regarding all aspects of a Muslim’s life, including internal female processes such as menstruation, would overlook female circumcision if Islam had allowed it. No narration of female circumcision is found amongst the wives of the Holy Prophet (saw).

Some people try to find a way out of continuing this demoralizing practice by arguing that the practice was too embarrassing which is why the prophet (saw) didn’t teach it to his follower. However, this presumption is wrong because the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) has in detail very briefly and in clear language taught the Muslims about every Islamic Law to the extent that once a Jew was prompted to state that the Muslim prophet had taught them everything including how to wash after answering to the call of nature.

Regarding shyness, the Holy Prophet (saw) said ‘Shyness is part of faith’ however shyness doesn’t stop Muslims from asking for every minute explanation of faith. For example, Hazrad Aisha (ra) said: ‘The best of the women are the women of the Ansar; shyness wouldn’t prevent them from inquiring about religion and acquiring a deep understanding of it’. (Sunan Abu Dawood.)

How about this hadith?

‘Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision (on females) in Medina. The Prophet (saw) said to her: “Don’t cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband” (Sunan Abu Dawood).

The followings are the reasons why this hadith is dubious, unfounded and unreliable.

Sahih Bukhari, the most authentic source of the tradition of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) doesn’t relate to any such tradition.  Second to Bukhari in terms of authenticity is Sahih Muslim, which again doesn’t record any tradition about this matter. Indeed, of the six authentic books of traditions, five don’t contain any mention of the subject.

Only the sixth authentic book of traditions, Sunnan Abu Dawud mentions a tradition. Abu Dawud has a note recorded with this tradition which reads,” this report is Da’if (substandard)”.  Similarly, in the account of Islamic Law offered by Sunnan Abu Dawud, states, “The tradition reporting female circumcision has many different versions and each of them is substandard, unsound and seriously doubtful.”

There is no Quranic injunction that supports this hadith.

However, we read in a hadith that the Holy Prophet (saw) circumcised his grandsons Al-Hasan and Al-Hussein (ra). But we don’t read anywhere that he commanded his granddaughters or any daughter of his companions to be circumcised.

The Health Dangers and Complications of FGM

Medical reports have it that the practice of FGM includes the following harms such as severe bleeding, infections, problems in urinating and increased risk of new-born death.

Unqualified people with no prior medical training normally carry out this practice using non-sterile instruments, which can cause infections, gangrene and sepsis.

The process can also be a source of transmission of blood-borne infections such as HIV, etc.

The entire process of FGM put young girls into both physical, and psychological disorders, which may take a long duration before they are relieved of it or sometimes its complications may cause one to succumb to death.

In a nutshell, this practice cannot be either attributed to Islam or to its holy founder the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) who has always stood tooth and nail in fighting for the rights of women and girls in all situations from the time that the rights of women and girls were usurped by the majority of societies.

The Gambia Civil Aviation Authority’s recent decision to raise passenger service and security charges, as well as introduce a new passenger safety levy at Banjul International Airport, has sparked controversy and raised concerns about its impact on the country’s fragile economy and the tourism industry. In this op-ed, we delve into the potential consequences of these new levies and call for a more responsible approach to managing Banjul International Airport.

The Gambia Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) recently announced its decision to raise passenger service and security charges, as well as introduce a new passenger safety levy at Banjul International Airport. While the GCAA claims that these increases are necessary to recover the cost of investment and improve airport services, the move is short-sighted and could have a detrimental impact on the country’s already fragile economy.

The GCAA’s claims of needing to recover costs for infrastructure and equipment upgrades are flawed, as they have not provided any concrete evidence of how these charges will be used to improve the airport experience for passengers. This claim of ‘improving infrastructure and services at Banjul International Airport is nothing but a smoke screen for their true intentions of lining their own pockets.

“The new charges and levy are in line with international standards and similar to those imposed at other airports” – The GCAA is trying to pass off their decision as a standard practice, however, this statement is far from the truth. Many airports in the region do not impose such high charges and levies, and it is not comparable to international standards.

First and foremost, raising charges and introducing new levies will likely deter tourists from visiting The Gambia. The country’s tourism industry is a major contributor to its economy, and any move that makes travel more expensive will likely lead to a decline in the number of visitors. This, in turn, will lead to a decline in revenue for the country and further damage its economy.

Moreover, the GCAA’s move is also likely to result in an increase in airfare. The airlines are likely to pass on the additional charges and levies to their customers, resulting in a higher airfare. This will further deter tourists from visiting the country and will have a negative impact on the country’s economy.

Additionally, it is important to question the transparency and fairness of the GCAA’s decision-making process. The GCAA states that the charges have remained constant for over 30 years, yet they fail to provide any concrete data or evidence to support their claims that the airport has undergone significant transformations or that their proposed increases are minimal and reasonable.

Furthermore, the GCAA’s decision to introduce a new levy to support aviation safety in the country raises concerns about where the money collected will actually be going.

The GCAA’s press release also states that “the airport is still contending with challenges which require huge capital outlays and immediate solutions” however it is unclear what those challenges are and if they cannot be addressed without increasing charges.

Tellingly, it is important to note that the GCAA’s decision to raise charges and introduce a new levy is not a sustainable solution to addressing the airport’s challenges. Instead of increasing charges, the GCAA should be looking for ways to increase revenue, such as by attracting more airlines and flights to the airport.
Apparently, the GCAA’s decision to implement these charges without proper consultation and consideration of the impact on the industry and passengers raises serious concerns about the transparency and accountability of the organization.

However, what is often overlooked is how these new airport levies may actually benefit neighbouring countries such as Senegal while hurting The Gambia. The additional charges and levies imposed by the GCAA may serve as a deterrent for tourists, making other nearby destinations, such as Senegal, more attractive to travellers. As a result, this could lead to a decline in revenue for The Gambia’s tourism industry and a shift in the flow of tourists to neighbouring countries.

It is imperative that the GCAA takes a more transparent, consultative and responsible approach to manage Banjul International Airport. The GCAA must engage with stakeholders, provide concrete evidence of how the additional revenue will be used to benefit passengers and the airport, and take into account the potential impact on passengers and the tourism industry as a whole before making any further decisions.

The recent passing of the Vice President Alieu Badara Joof has left a vacuum that must be filled. As the Gambia continues to grapple with the loss of its Vice President, the question of who will take on the mantle of leadership has become increasingly pressing. However, it’s important to look ahead and consider who would make the most suitable successor.

In this Fatu Network op-ed, I argue that Dr. Ismaila Ceesay, a seasoned political science scholar and accomplished politician, is the right candidate for the job.

Dr. Ceesay’s qualifications are impressive. As a native of Brikama, a town that has been a kingmaker in Gambian politics, but has been historically underrepresented in the upper echelons of government, his appointment would signify a step towards a more inclusive and representative government.

Dr. Ceesay brings a unique blend of academic knowledge and political experience to the table. He holds a PhD in political science and has served as a professor and political commentator for many years. This combination of education and practical experience has equipped him with a deep understanding of the complex issues facing Gambia today, as well as a clear vision for the country’s future.

Additionally, as a vocal critic of the Barrow administration, but also one of his biggest supporters in pushing for national development. This balance of constructive criticism and support is crucial for any Vice President and would serve as a powerful symbol of the president’s commitment to transparency and accountability.

Moreover, Dr. Ceesay has demonstrated his commitment to the people of Gambia through his actions. He left the diaspora and returned to serve his country, renouncing his Swedish citizenship in order to be eligible to participate in Gambian politics. He supported President Barrow’s re-election and asked his base to do the same, demonstrating a willingness to put aside personal ambitions for the good of the country.

It’s also worth mentioning that Dr. Ceesay has a proven track record of working well with young people. Given that a significant portion of Gambia’s electorate is under 30, having a Vice President who can connect with young voters could be invaluable.

In addition, Dr. Ceesay is a charming figure, eloquent and knows how to connect with people from all backgrounds. This is a valuable asset for any leader, as it allows them to communicate their message effectively and build support across the country. His charisma and ability to connect with people would be an asset in building support for the President’s agenda.

Dr. Ceesay’s ability to understand and navigate the complex issues of international politics and international relations makes him an ideal candidate to serve as Vice President. He has a deep understanding of the political dynamics of the international community and is well-versed in the intricacies of international diplomacy. This knowledge and experience will be crucial as Gambia continues to forge relationships with other nations and play an active role in international politics.

In conclusion, the appointment of Dr. Ismaila Ceesay as Vice President would be a major win for Gambia.

He is a highly qualified candidate with a deep understanding of the issues facing the country, a proven commitment to serving the people, and the ability to connect with young people. The appointment of Dr. Ceesay as Vice President would be a historic move that would demonstrate the President’s commitment to inclusive governance and to representing the interests of all Gambians, including those of Brikama and its people.
Tellingly, his level of humility and service orientation is exactly what Gambia needs in a Vice President.

I’m more than convinced, he will work alongside the President, not against him, to ensure that the country is on the right track.
I strongly encourage President Barrow to consider him for this important role.

~ A concern Gambian.