Gambian Economist, Nyang Njie has noted that although the country may face economic challenges like most other countries, the issues confronting the small West African country are purely social in nature. These issues he identified include tribalism, envy and opportunism among others.

He noted that these are born out of a poor social contract that existed since 1956 when The Gambia gained her independence.

“Fixing Gambia starts with an equitable society. We are all first amongst equals and no Gambian is more Gambian than the next one. Instant gratification and glorification of wealth have taken away the humanity in us.

Corruption is embellished and most care less to question the source of wealth. The issues confronting Gambians are purely social in nature (tribalism, envy and opportunism). These are borne out of a poor social contract we lived under since 1965,” Nyang Njie said.

He further noted that a society without upright virtues is bound to be decadent. And subsequently, a decadent society is chaotic and lawless. 

Meanwhile, he prays that God would save, “our dearly beloved nation” The Gambia.

By: Professor Abdoulaye Saine

Though I do not care much for his politics, like him or loath him, I take my hat off for Fabakary Tombong Jatta. As the new Speaker of the National Assembly, he presided over the somber swearing-in of the new, recently nominated, and continuing members of the National Assembly. By aligning his splinter/break-away faction of the APRC, Jatta, a political animal, and strategist helped orchestrate Barrow’s NPP, to a clear victory in the presidential election, and now the National Assembly election with a slight edge made stronger by five additional nominated members.

Jatta, in my book, is the undisputed King-maker, and political operative who had for most of Yayah Jammeh’s tenure, and now Barrow’s helped direct, among others, both the content and direction of  Gambian politics. When one expected Jatta to be discarded and disgraced in the aftermath of APRC’s pre-election internal criss, he took the calculated risk of building an alliance between his APRC faction with Barrow’s APP, for which he is now handsomely rewarded.

With Sida, Halifa, Ya Kumba Jaiteh, and Ousman Sillah gone, the National Assembly will likely become Jatta’s new platform to drive through, with few obstacles, Barrow’s political agenda- using his folksy carrot and stick approach to hatch out political deals in the Peoples’ Assembly. Talking about the Peoples’ Assembly; except for a few, most members are political novices who have not distinguished themselves in the professions or academically- some could barely read the oath. But here lies their individual and collective charm(s). This is because the presidential and assembly elections may have very well occasioned a sea change, a new chapter in Gambia’s modern politics where the high-brow elite and highly educated politicians and their supporters have been smartly  out maneuvered, “bested” by a less lettered/credentialed, non-elite political class including the likes of Barrow and his advisors. Call it a “class coup.”

This is truly remarkable, as this underrated bunch of (respectfully) “half-baked” politicians, despite their party affiliation together now hold the key(s) to Gambia’s future in the next five years, and perhaps, beyond. Think back for a moment of the Parliament, and Parliamentarians of the immediate post-independence era, and you get my point.

Perhaps, the electorate voted the way they did, in both elections, like it or not, partly because they lost all hope in the elite and elitist politicians and voted for the current assembly members without the blink of an eye. Could it be that the current crop  of assembly members have their ears closer to the ground and speak the language of the masses? Is it also because the electorate would rather vote in a president and assembly members who will likely meet some of their expectations rather than the old and relatively more lettered political elite?

We must never underestimate the Gambian electorate, as they are more astute and sure of what they want than we ordinarily give them credit for. Similarly, we must not underestimate this “new class” of relatively young, novice politicians, as we did the A(F)PRC and Jammeh, specifically. We do so at our peril. You may like, or loath them but they hold the keys to our futures and our nation’s.

I knew Fabakary Tombong Jatta at Armitage High. He was an unassuming, soft-spoken lad with a slight stutter- perhaps the most unlikely candidate for the post of Speaker in hind sight. But was I/were we wrong in underestimating Tombong then, as he has risen high to assume one of three key political positions-  Speaker of the “Peoples’” Assembly. Congratulations to Speaker Jatta and new NAMs. For the older and elite/elitist politicians, and supporters, you have work to do.

By Sharon L. Cromer, Ambassador of the United States to the Republic of The Gambia

Of all the times to arrive in The Gambia, I came at one of the best. A few weeks after our plane touched down, I witnessed the National Assembly election. The Gambia has achieved another milestone for the democracy that its people have worked so hard to restore.

The election marks a positive inflection point and offers much promise. Particularly inspiring are the many committed young adults who actively worked on the elections and participated in civil-society-led voter education and election observation. There is a clear desire to improve on the bold steps that Gambians took toward democracy in 2016, and that is cause for optimism.

Make no mistake. The Gambia, like the United States, has its challenges as we both strive to strengthen our democracies. As The Gambia’s partner, we do not have all the answers, but in the spirit of collaboration, we want to help create a better future for our nations.

During my tenure, I pledge that the United States will be steadfast in helping The Gambia build democratic institutions, promote respect for human rights, and strengthen inclusive, country-led economic development—all goals that we share as free people.

As your partner, we will move ahead on many important ongoing bilateral and multilateral initiatives. These include our new USAID development agreement to strengthen judicial institutions, along with other initiatives such as donating – in partnership with COVAX – safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine doses, grants for educating women and girls, support for the media sector, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation Threshold Program to develop and implement strategic reforms for the energy sector.

I hope to do even more, especially in pursuing initiatives that promote transparency, good governance, respect for human rights, and self-reliant economic development. We will help Gambians increase accountability and give a voice to all the people of this great nation. I have seen firsthand the power of these partnerships in other countries and look forward to moving forward with many here in The Gambia.

Most of all, I hope to meet more of the many Gambians who are working to build a better future for themselves and their families. Forty years ago, I traveled through The Gambia and was so impressed by the warmth and optimism of its people that I never forgot it. It is good to see this spirit has not changed.

There is so much to look forward to. For now, I thank you for the most positive welcome—both in terms of the people I have met and the events I have just witnessed. My Embassy colleagues and I are so enthusiastic about partnering with the people of The Smiling Coast of Africa. The Gambia has a special place in my heart, and I am eager to lead my team as we work with you.

By: D. A. Jawo

Gambians have spoken through their ballots by electing those they want to represent them in the National Assembly for the next five years. It had been an election full of anticipations as well as surprises.

In view of President Adama Barrow’s landslide victory in the last presidential elections, most members and supporters of his National People’s Party (NPP) and indeed many other Gambians had anticipated that they were going to sweep clean the legislative elections and dominate the next National Assembly.

However, even though they managed to scrape a slight majority President Barrow and his supporters are no doubt quite disappointed with the results. One would therefore wonder what had become of their acclaimed strategists who helped them win the presidential elections barely three months ago. There is no doubt that the NPP hierarchy would meet to analyze the results and find out what went wrong.

Among the numerous surprises is the fact that this is the first time in the history of the Gambia that a ruling party has not won a single seat in the Greater Banjul Area and virtually annihilated the populous West Coast Region as well. The party has been consigned to be a ‘Bolongkono’ party.

It is quite unprecedented that President Barrow lost even in the very constituency that he cast his vote, which is Banjul Central, and that is quite symbolic. One would therefore wonder how the NPP lost all the seats in Banjul, despite all the noise and capital they were making out of the Banjul rehabilitation project.

We will now eagerly wait to hear what explanation those who gave President Barrow the solemn promise that the people of Banjul were grateful for what he had done for them and that they would accompany him all the way, would give for their dismal performance in Banjul. It is a similar situation with his vocal militants in the West Coast Region who had promised to deliver the whole region to the NPP while ending up with a single seat out of the 12 constituencies of the region.

While the jury is still out as to why the NPP performed far less than expected, the overwhelming evidence is that many Gambians are disappointed with the performance of the Barrow administration, especially in the face of the daily price hikes of basic commodities and the mounting corruption perception, and the apparent failure of the government to be seen to do much about it. Just as President Barrow himself is often quoted saying; “You can say you own your party but the people own themselves”.

Therefore, the people have clearly demonstrated that they own themselves and make their own decisions as to whom to support.

Another possible reason why the NPP performed poorly is the selection criteria for their candidates. It is alleged by some NPP supporters that instead of following the dictates of their constituency committees, most of the candidates were imposed on them by the top echelons of the party. That eventually led to some aspirants rebelling and contesting as independents, thus causing some confusion within the party’s ranks.

Among the many surprises of the results of the elections is no doubt the failure of two veterans of the People’s Democratic Organisation for Independence and Socialism (PDOIS); Sidia Jatta and Ousman Sillah, to get re-elected.

The most shocking of them was no doubt the defeat of Ousman Sillah in Banjul North, who everyone had thought would be re-elected with a landslide, and he ended up being defeated by a virtually unknown quantity.

Therefore, just like the NPP, PDOIS also need to sit down and do some soul searching as to what may have gone wrong with their strategies. However, while five other new parties; the Gambia Moral Congress (GMC), Citizens Alliance (CA), Gambia For All (GFA), All People’s Party (APP) and National Unity Party (NUP) contested and failed to win a single seat, two parties that seem to have suffered the most humiliation are the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) and the Gambia Democratic Congress (GDC).

They have not only failed to win any seat, but they also failed to defend the seats that they held before the elections. Another group that has been humiliated is no doubt the APRC (Fabakary Tombong Jatta faction) who lost all their five seats in the Fonis to their bitter rivals, the ‘No to Alliance Movement,’ who they had always branded as an insignificant group of rebels who had no effect on the APRC power base.

However, now that those ‘rebels’ have wrested the whole of Foni from the APRC, one would wonder how Fabakary Tombong and his group would continue to demand some political concessions from President Barrow when the results in Foni have shown that they have minimal control over the APRC general membership and as such, they have little to bring to the dining table. It is probably time for President Barrow to re-assess the weight of his numerous allies to see whether they add any value to the relationship between them and the NPP.

While the United Democratic Party (UDP) lost quite a lot of ground as they were not able to maintain all the seats that they won in 2017, under the circumstances, they seem to have a cause to be satisfied with the results, especially when they succeeded in not only warding off a strong NPP assault but even went on to defeat five of their former recalcitrant members who were among those who gave the UDP leadership a tough time.

Now that the National Assembly elections are over and no doubt President Barrow has a good idea about the weight of some of his allies, we now expect him to go ahead and form his new cabinet. There is now hardly any reason why he should continue to keep members of his interim cabinet in suspense, wondering whether or not they would be re-appointed in the new cabinet.

Another significant outcome of the elections was the fact that five of the most vocal opponents of the draft Constitution in the National Assembly; Fatoumata Jawara of Tallinding Kunjang, Saikouba Jarju of Busumbala, Saikou Marong of Latrikunda Sabiji, Baba Galleh Jallow of Sannementereng and Alhagie Jawara of Lower Baddibu, have all been defeated, apparently as a punishment for their part in voting out the draft Constitution that cost the Gambian taxpayers millions of Dalasis, without any remorse. We can all recall how they were seen dancing and jubilating after they voted to throw away the draft, to the chagrin of many Gambians.

We expect that before the swearing-in of the new members of the National Assembly, President Barrow would reveal the list of five nominated members that the 1997 Constitution empowers him to do. However, we have seen that in the past, the letter and spirit of that provision of the Constitution was not given the merit it deserved. Instead of nominating people to represent certain marginalised groups, which include the women, the youth, the disabled and also members of the Christian community, President Barrow instead has the tendency to use it to compensate his political allies.

For instance, the last legislature was the very first in the history of the Gambia which did not have a single member of the Christian community. While President Barrow had the opportunity to address that in his nominations in 2017 by nominating at least one Christian, he failed to do it.

There are even speculations that he may nominate some of those who failed to get elected during the elections, which would be tantamount to disrespecting the wishes of the Gambian electorate who rejected them at the polls.

This time around also, as there is not a single Christian among those elected, and unless he uses his prerogative to nominate at least one member of them, there will again be none. Therefore, rather than nominate NPP militants, we expect him to use the opportunity to pick those who deserve it most.

By: Christian Conteh

Legal luminary M. Robertson Roberts has commended President Adama Barrow for delivering a speech he describes as brilliant but says the head of state must now work towards translating his words into actionable policies and progressive governance.

Roberts Esq was commenting shortly after the president delivered his address to the nation on Monday night following the conclusion of National Assembly Elections over the weekend.

“An absolutely fantastic speech by President Adama Barrow. This is the most well-crafted speech he has delivered since taking office. The entire speech kept me mesmerized and this is not something that I experience often. It was a very substantive piece of work and it showcased humility, maturity and willingness to work and improve,” he said.

He further noted that the President’s speech showcased a longing for national unity and respect and regard for political diversity geared towards a common good. The president he maintained spoke and did not throw shades nor did he use a single political innuendo, thus demonstrating class and dignity from start to finish.

This Barrister Roberts says is what The Gambia needs and it is indeed a breath of fresh air to listen to the President speak like he did.

“Mr. President the words are brilliant, however, it is now time to translate those words into actionable policies and progressive governance. Let it not stop with words alone Mr. President. The entire country now wishes to see how your words will commensurate with the appointment of your new cabinet; the country waits,” He said.

By: Christian Conteh

There is visibly a low turnout of voters in the 2022 National Assembly Elections here in The Gambia. This state of affairs was predicted by experts.

They (the experts) suggested that a low turnout of voters on Saturday (today) will be due to a sense of apathy and distrust for politicians by the Gambian people.

The people the experts say are already focused on finding a way to survive during these trying times. 

Adama Gaye is a political analyst who has a vast knowledge about political systems in West Africa, he is also a former director of information of ECOWAS. He believes that the economy is going to be Barrow’s “main challenger” in the legislative elections.

“These shocks from outside have not been helpful to Barrow,” said Gaye. “Since he has been re-elected, the economy has been worsening so the population may blame it on him.”

The Gambia is among the world’s 15 least-developed countries in the world, according to the United Nations.

Tourism, which is the backbone of the country’s economy, was squashed by the coronavirus pandemic, putting at risk the nearly 140,000 people involved in the sector. To further exacerbate the situation, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered a hike in fuel and food prices across West Africa, including The Gambia.

Gaye added that issues related to sovereignty could haunt the president and deliver more votes to opposition candidates.

“Some Gambians feel the need to re-assert their country’s sovereignty over Senegalese and hence give a signal to Mr Barrow, making him understand that either he distances himself from Senegal or they will challenge him at the elections,” he said.

The reference is to the ongoing hostilities between Senegal’s breakaway region of Casamance pushing people to cross over and seek refuge in The Gambia.

Author: Sulayman Njie, Ph.D.–Dallas, Texas

When the ruling comes down, a great many people would either rejoice or be crestfallen, which would be expected, because, you see, the art of politics is a sport — anything for the home team. And, in a hyper-polarized political atmosphere, partisans tend to see their opponents as “enemies” and/or “haters” who should be shunned or banned from the discourse, all the while sanctifying and defending their teammates.

Be that as it may, the idea or practice of banning political parties or politicians from running for office is, in my view, antithetical to the very idea of democracy — government of, by, for the people — where the supreme authority should rest upon and represent the will and whims of the electorate.

I have said this in many think pieces that democracy is not a destination, it’s a process and, in this process, the electorate, case in point — the people of Busumbala — should be the ones deciding the viability of representatives, not bureaucrats, commissions, or even unelected judges. The idea that unelected officials can ban politicians from running for public office should scare the bejesus out of us all.

Granted, Momodou Sabally is a hugely polarizing figure. He has been since the Jammeh days when he was one of the staunchest defenders and effective enablers of the Jammeh administration. Lest we also forget his infamous speech threatening an entire ethnolinguistic group. In addition, he is one of the most vocal political and dissenting voices in The Gambia.

I have had my fair share of disagreements with Mr. Sabally; however, that doesn’t mean that I, or anyone with principle, should join the chorus of detractors trying to deny him his birthright as a Gambian — the right to run for public office. Sabally and all Gambians of age should have the right to run for office.

It’s very possible that the decision to deny him of his birthright — the right to run for office — is legal, but just because something is legal doesn’t make it right or even democratic. In such a case, we need to revisit such laws because laws that infringe upon, arguably, the most sacrosanct aspects of democracy — the right to vote and run for office — should be corrected — amended.

And, yes, I have read some well-grounded, articulated, and nuanced legal arguments as to why Sabally can and cannot run for office. I’m not delving into the legalese arguments, I will leave that to the legal scholars. However, as a political scientist, my arguments here are mostly anchored in the idea of the demos and the state and why we should not limit the rights of individuals related to running for office, and why the voice of the people of Busumbala should triumph over any recommendation by a commission and unelected officials.

I hope the courts will do the right thing and leave it up to the people of Busumbala — and come to the April election — if they don’t want him — they would vote for another candidate. However, banning political aspirants based on recommendations by a commission and bureaucrats is bad policy and sets an illiberal, anti-democratic, and — potentially — dangerous precedent. If this works, who would be next? I mean, the executive can and will create another commission to go after its political detractors.

It’s chilling to think that executive branch bureaucrats — whose ranks swell with the most corrupt of personnel — can decide who’s fit and who’s not fit to run for public office.

I hope that the court, in the name of democracy, would do the “democratic” thing and allow Sabally to exercise his birthright and take his message to the demos of Busumbala.

To that end, I studiously submit to you that the collective employment of a humanist approach to politics — as opposed to parading history for condemning, banning, or for our collective feel-goodism — is one we should try to emulate.

Because, my folks, we do not want to perpetuate an illiberal system where we give the executive unchecked powers to arbitrarily ban individuals from running for public office. That’s an affront to democracy. It creates more crises than it solves and to that, I say, the answer to a conundrum in democracy, in essence, is more democracy, not less.

Let the people of Busumbala decide, man

By: Amie Bojang-Sissoho: Director Press and Public Relations

Allow me to take a close look at DA.  Jawo’s article, “Meet The People Tour:  Another abuse of incumbency?” was published on Monday, 21st March 2022, in the Standard newspaper.

D.A started by doubting himself.   He questioned if the President’s Meet the People Tour is another abuse of incumbency?

From the onset, let us get this clear, the President is on a tour that takes him around the country, thus nationwide.  He meets people of all walks of life, which he does for different purposes.  The constitutionally sanctioned “Meet the People Tour” is fully funded by the State.  That should not be confused with this particular nationwide party-political tour the President undertook as Secretary-General of his party.

The press release on social media the author referred to was from a party official, thus distinguishing between Barrow the President and Barrow the Secretary-General this time around.  A press release on the President’s constitutionally sanctioned tour would come from his office as President and not his party official.

Regarding a said letter for institutions to provide vehicles for the tour, the author should ask if the Head of State is entitled to State protection and essential services when he is on any mission?  If so, providing vehicles for his security and immediate entourage is not an abuse of incumbency but a privilege he enjoys as President.  The author should not forget that wherever the Head of State is on The Gambian territory, the State apparatus has a responsibility towards him and deserves the services.  That is a privilege he has as President.  Just like when D.A Jawo was a State Minister, there were privileges he enjoyed which were not “abuse of incumbency”.

“President Barrow’s such outings are more political in nature and reality than discussing issues affecting the farming community.”  The author fails to acknowledge that the President is also a politician and would engage in political missions when necessary.   President Barrow’s nationwide tour this time is to thank the voters.  Gambians could recall that he canvassed for their votes, and about 90% of those who turned out voted for him.

Moreover, his party and his allies have put up candidates, and he would campaign for his party to win the majority in the National Assembly.  What is the abuse of incumbency in that?

To demonstrate that President Barrow is not an abuser of incumbency, he got the private vehicles that he would use for his purely political party dominated missions.  As Secretary-General, he ensures that he and his party take care of his party officials and militants during the tour.  That does not stop the State from taking its responsibility towards him as a sitting President.

On access to airtime, one would have expected the author to monitor and validate before assuming whether GRTS would give more airtime to the candidates of the President’s party or not.  Slanting a story to focus on the President is different from giving prominence to a candidate who happens to be where the President is present.  Teasing out news stories on the President’s mission is attractive to the media.  It depends on the angle they would take.  While some are interested in facts, some are interested in gossipy entertainment news, and others would keep informing and educating about what happens during the tour.

The biggest disappointment in the article is the comparison of the former President’s “notorious” use of “state resources for his own political activities…” to how President Barrow conducts his political activities.  Most Gambians and observers would note how President Barrow distinguishes state resources from his resources during political activities.

Additionally, if anyone is in Barrow’s position, would you undermine yourself to lose power when people have given you the mandate to rule the country?  The President has the legitimate right to consolidate power and convince citizens to support his development plan.

He is determined to focus on and not derail his development agenda.  Also, President Barrow is the Secretary-General of his party, and it is legitimate to campaign for its candidates.

Finally, I hope these observations will help the author answer the question mark he had over the President’s “Meet the People Tour and whether it is an abuse of his incumbency or not.

By: Lamin J. Darbo

He is a towering intellectual and first rate orator, served simultaneously as Secretary General and Minister of Presidential Affairs under His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhagie Dr Yahya A. J. Jammeh (the Professor). In that role he met all stripes of leaders domestic and international and participated in the great public dramas of the day at the policy councils of the Gambian state.

Allowing for the authoritarian vagaries of the system installed by the Professor, Momodou Sabally (Sabally) was for a year the great supervisor of the Public Service, sounding board of the President, his preeminent confidant, and primus among the Ministers. Having presided, or somewhat participated over the hiring and firing of senior government figures, including some cabinet colleagues, he knows a thing or two about policy and its implementation.

After all, he is the Gambia’s Pen and vigorously expresses his enlightening and entertaining perspective on the burning public questions of the day. If his great and controversial mind was a source of joy and annoyance to the intellectual community, they were projected on a larger canvass when he joined the United Democratic Party (UDP) and campaigned vigorously for its agenda across the country, thus making himself a household name.

No surprise therefore that Sabally’s expression of interest in contesting the Busumbala Constituency for the UDP in the April National Assembly Elections captured public attention. The run-up to nomination day on 10 March was crowded with great excitement as Sabally has all the ingredients of a great parliamentary statesman: intelligent, outspoken, controversial entertaining. He may be among the few candidates capable of generating cross party support at the polls but for the Independent Electoral Commission’s (IEC) decision to reject his application for nomination under the UDP ticket.

According to the IEC, Sabally was adversely mentioned in THE REPORT OF THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO THE FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES OF PUBLIC BODIES, ENTERPRISES AND OFFICES AS REGARDS THEIR DEALINGS WITH FORMER PRESIDENT YAHYA A.J.J. JAMMEH AND CONNECTED MATTERS

The Government’s White Paper on the matter as concerns Sabally states at paragraphs:

216:-    Mr. Momodou Sabally started at the Central Bank as an Economist from

1999 to 2009. He was Director of Budget at the Ministry of Finance from 2010 to

2013. He was appointed as Acting Secretary General in June 2013, and then

subsequently confirmed as Secretary General and Minister for Presidential Affairs

in the same year. His service was terminated in June 2014.

217:-    The Commission found, inter alia, that during his tenure as Secretary

General, Mr Momodou Sabally was signatory to various public accounts and was

involved in the withdrawal of large sums of public funds, some of which were not

accounted for, on the instructions of former President Jammeh. The Commission

found that Mr Momodou Sabally and former President Jammeh are jointly and

severally liable for the said amounts of money misappropriated by former President

Jammeh.

218. The Government notes that Mr Momodou Sabally’s many involvements in the

financial transactions of former President Jammeh, which was not part of his

official duties, especially as Secretary General, demonstrate the enthusiasm with

which he facilitated these transactions. His conduct fell far short of the standard of

professional conduct expected of the Head of the Civil Service at the time.

219. Consequently, the Government accepts the Commission’s recommendation

that Mr Momodou Sabally should not serve in any public office again or be

appointed as Director for any State Owned Enterprise for at least ten years. Mr

Momodou Sabally is hereby banned from holding public office for the remainder of

his life. He is also banned from holding any director positions in any State Owned

Enterprises in The Gambia for ten (10) years. Both bans are effective from the date

of publication of this White Paper. The monies shall be recovered from the assets of

former President Jammeh.

Clearly, a member of the National Assembly is not a public office holder (see section 166 (4) (a) of the 1997 Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia (the Constitution). Viewed in isolation, this provision would appear to suggest the IEC was wrong in rejecting Sabally’s application for nomination as a candidate in the upcoming National Assembly Elections.

However, the IEC specifically rejected Sabally’s application for nomination on the basis of section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution that “no person is qualified for election as a member of the national assembly if he or she has been found by a report of a commission or committee of inquiry (the proceedings of which are have been held and published in accordance with the relevant law) to be incompetent to hold public office by reason of having acquired assets unlawfully or defrauded the state or misused or abused his or her office, or wilfully acted in a manner pre-judicial to the interests of the state, and the findings have not been set aside on appeal or judicial review”.

It is common knowledge that Sabally lodged an appeal against the adverse mention, and the bans imposed on him, by the Janneh Commission, and the Government. Until they are “set aside on appeal or judicial review”, section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution continues to operate against him. A convicted prisoner remains a prisoner until his appeal is allowed. On the particular facts of Sabally’s case, his impediment remains pending the hearing and determination of his appeal.

As to whether the IEC has the competence to interpret section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution at its level, I merely state it is performing a legally permitted intermediate gate keeping function which can only be conclusively ratified by a competent court where its perspective is contested. However, the Janneh Commission Report and its accompanying White Paper are public documents available to the IEC and it can act upon them where deemed necessary.

Albeit on contested understandings, it is far from clear that the IEC operated outside the law when it rejected Sabally’s application for nomination as UDP candidate for Busumbala. With the clarity of section 90 (1) (e) of the Constitution, he appears not to have a snowball’s chance in hell in overturning the IEC decision.

Of course the cases of the current Chief of Protocol, and the likes of Mamburay Njie, were given lighter treatment by the Government, and these were picked on by observers. What is clear is that they and others similarly situated cannot contest in National Assembly elections under the law.

As to the protests that the law is differentially applied, I suggest the facts are distinguishable in that the Sabally saga was triggered by the National Assembly qualification regime.

On a lighter note, maybe we should proceed with Mr Bumble when confronted with the postulation that as between him and his wife he was “… the more guilty of the two, in the eye of the law; for the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction.”
Mr Bumble protested that “If the law supposes that, the law is a ass — a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience — by experience”

I urge Sabally to deploy his immense talents in helping others this election season and to accept that on current facts, he cannot serve as a National Assembly Member until his appeal is allowed.

By: Madi Jobarteh

The violent actions of these citizens [as seen in a video carried by Kerr Fatou] should be investigated and those found stoning the police should be brought to book. Citizens must recognize and uphold the fact that they should always remain peaceful and nonviolent even in their strongest disagreements about anything.

Political parties, and in this case, UDP in particular should enlighten their members or supporters to exercise restraint and maintain peace at all times even if they disagree. It serves no party’s interest to have its supporters engage in violent acts. Even when provoked, citizens must seek the path of peace and human rights.

Above all, citizens must not violently vent out their grievances on law enforcement officers. Much as we condemn police brutality so also should citizens refrain from violently attacking the police, threatening lives and causing damage to property.

There exist the necessary mechanisms in this country through which citizens, politicians, communities, associations and political parties can employ to seek and obtain justice and accountability. We have seen these mechanisms being utilized to that effect from 2017 to date. This option should always be used.

At this juncture it is utterly necessary to highlight the urgent need for robust security sector reforms to empower and enable the police to better respond to public assemblies. Both the police and the public should be responsible enough not to provoke violence in anyway. Apparently, this was the case in Brikama on March 10, unfortunately.

Police officers must particularly be told that while they have a right to defend themselves from violent rioters. However, the moment a rioter is overpowered by officers, there’s no justification anymore to hit that rioter.

In the meantime, the authorities and all stakeholders should demand an investigation into the acts of police brutality and the violent actions of these citizens in this Kerr Fatou video.

I hereby call on the IGP to open investigations on the actions of his officers as well on the actions of violent protesters to ensure accountability.

No to police brutality. No to a culture of violence.

For The Gambia Our Homeland

By: Toney F Mendy 

The comments of Chebbo Cham on The Standard News Paper [March 3, 2022] that The Gambia should be an Islamic State are an expression of potent delusional wishes, but even beyond that, a futile agenda long pursued by a considerable lot of citizens devoid of the very basic essential understanding of the tenet of The Gambian nationhood.

Chebbo Cham, like Yahya Jammeh… like all others who stood for this ignoble agenda, is a threat to the very foundation of this nation. But what distinguished Chebbo Cham from a lot of brainwashed fellow citizens is his position as an imam, the timing of his comments (Christian- lent period), and manifested desire to embrace the open faults of a “former” despot of endless controversies, these, which highlight the epithets of the psyche of imam Cham, stand testimony of the reasons why he should not be left unanswered.

Regardless of his psyche, belief, or his wishes, the very essential point of schooling for Imam Cham, is that The Gambia is a secular state, and it shall remain so, even against his wishes. The above means every citizen and other persons living in The Gambia have a fundamental right to ascribe or quit whatever religion they so desire.

It means that one may decide to not even believe in God/Allah. It means that as a collective, we ought to be governed by our Constitution and not personal beliefs and principles. It means that Islamic or Christian principles shall not be the basis for constituting or governing the Gambian state. It means that we as a People would continue to be governed by “conscience”. Furthermore, it means that we are all nothing but human beings before the law Gambian citizens!

In part, I did note, that Imam Cham should not operate in metaphysical deduction of his belief. Instead, he should embrace reality, and I would welcome him politely to the reality of what the Gambia society is: A secular state.

Nothing captures the spirit of the secular status, and conductive cosmopolitan dwelling of Gambians than the peace, love, tolerance, and struggles historically shared. The catalogue of the threat to these unique characteristics of The Gambia is rooted in comments such as those of Chebbo Cham.

Cunningly, almost hypocritically, when posed as to what would happen to Christians and atheists in his dreamed Islamic Gambian State, he stated “they will be protected just like Muslims, including their rights. Nothing will happen to them”. What sort of sharia would permit “Christians and atheists” to live and operate in the dream Islamic Gambian State “by their rights”? “By their rights”!  Nothing could be more nonsensical and to even suggest that they (“Christians” and atheists) would be protected “LIKE MUSLIMS”. “Protected like Muslims”? What can be more condensing than that! Oh, imam! The author can’t wait, when thou shall grant him right (in the dream Gambian Islamic State) to drink whiskey and pure libation to his Ancestors!

Suffice it to say, I trust my imam more than Chebbo Cham, because he taught me genuinely what would become of the duo (Christians and atheists), and even African traditionalists under a theocratical Islamic-sharia state. Such thing as Christian and atheist’s “rights” exist only in the context of the very Islamic beliefs of Chebbo Cham, and nowhere else. Thus, respectfully, Ya-imam is not being honest or rather shy of laying bare what Islam degreed of Christians, atheists, and African traditionists in an Islamic State.

While the echoes of Imam Chebbo Cham do not explain, embody, or represent the true-genuine aspiration of the absolute majority of well-informed Gambians, it has the potential of inciting the less informed citizens to agitate for an ideal that is widely distant from their understanding and appreciation. 

Nevertheless, I remained persuaded that in the details of religious conversations, and tolerance, The Gambia remains a unique opportunity and culture above all nations to continue to manifest, that, diversity is indeed in and of itself a beauty.

There is, of course, more to discuss the deeper challenges that face all facets of our society, including the “killings” referred to by imam Chebbo. But for him to reason that “killing killers” (in his sharia state of mind) is a solution, highly contravenes the contemporary well informed, and progressive Gambian minds.

The future of The Gambia must be guided jealously against religious fanatism, tribalism, and against any activity that threatens our being as a People and nation. Both our actions, and utterance must be guided towards the course of OUR collective progress. With all due respect, those who seek to alter the foundation of the state, such as imam Chebbo must be treated as agents of cataclysm.

In the grand sphere of things, most of what emerged from public discussions and occupy public media should be of absolute concern to any leadership. Consequently, the decisiveness, and unequivocal position of those in charge of administering the day-to-day affairs of the state, should be stressed. I need not remind the imam of the sacred foundation of our State. The government needed to. State institutions such as the National Human Rights Commissions needed to. This way, and by any standard, the well-being of the State and its People of any orientation would be guaranteed.

I would like to conclude by urging all Gambians of goodwill to never permit decisive narratives to dominate our public discourses. It requires demonstrating unity by condemning the statements of Chebbo Cham which are every sense, against the spirit and letters of our founding instruments. 

By: Abdoulie Njie (Chairman KS Global Group)

Russia is the world’s second-largest producer of natural gas and one of the world’s largest oil-producing nations, exporting 197.2 billion cubic meters of pipeline gas in 2020.

Russia and Ukraine are also leading exporters of grains, metals, wood and plastics, all used worldwide in a range of products and by a multitude of industries from steelmakers to car manufacturers. Together both countries make up nearly 30% of global wheat exports.

Because of how much both countries produce their conflict will have a substantial impact on the global economy and financial markets, with significant spill over effect on other countries including The Gambia.

Effect on The Gambia

Unfortunately, the conflict comes at a moment when The Gambia like many other countries is on the verge of economic recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic.

As bad as things already are Gambians especially those struggling to feed their families will now get to experience a dramatic rise in the price of basic food commodities as a result of disruption in the global supply chain and economic sanctions on Russia.

The average Gambian is bound to be affected because goods such as eggs, cheese, chicken, sunflower oil and all other products made from wheat come mostly from Ukraine. It is important to emphasise that Ukraine and Russia collectively produce 30% of wheat the world uses.

Since they are a major exporter of crude oil the conflict (as we have already seen) will lead to a rise in price. The rise in fuel price will have a trickledown effect on all other goods. Fuel price increase means higher transport cost, which means higher price of commodities since transportation cost will factor into the price of the goods.

What Should The Gambia Government Do?

As a businessman with vast experience in the sector, I would encourage our government to be proactive in its effort to mitigate the potential effects associated with this crisis. Being proactive starts with wide consultations from stakeholders in the business sector, these include the business community, importers, traders, private and public financial institutions and international partners.

These consultations will bring about a unified solution and will go a long way in guaranteeing food security until things get to normal. The Government should also consider subsidies on essential commodities, cutting taxes on goods that are directly affected by the crisis can also go a long way to cushion the effects of the crisis.

Nonetheless, I strongly believe that government must take a tough stand against businesspeople who might want to hike prices or hoard goods.

Appeal To Businessmen

We all know food shortage or price increases could stroke social unrest. Therefore, I wish to use this opportunity to appeal to fellow businessmen to show the highest form of compassion and humanity towards the Gambian people and not take this as an opportunity to rob the Gambian consumers when the anticipated effects intensify.