In what I will characterize as the most baffling revelation by Mr Frederic Tendeng in his article published by The Gambia Chronicle Newspaper on November 18, 2020, entitled Post ECOMIG Exit-Barrow leans on ‘Big Brother Nigeria’, the story literally forewarns us to brace for the possibility of the redeployment of another Nigerian Army Training Assistance Group (NATAG) in the Gambia, reminiscent of the one Sir Dawda Jawara’s PPP government had brought us in 1992. According to Mr. Tendeng, an MOU between the Gambia and Nigeria has already been drafted to that effect with strong indications of its ratification as manifested in a special visit to Nigeria by Foreign Minister Dr. Mamadou Tangara and Defense Minister Shiekh Omar Faye on Tuesday October 6, 2020.

The author didn’t necessarily mention the exact date of the meeting, but only the month it happened in October; however, on Friday October 9, 2020, the Gambia Standard Newspaper carried a publication on the same event, captioned, Nigeria will Increase Trade Volume With Gambia, published verbatim from a press release dispatched by the Gambia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In the Standard’s story, no word was mentioned about Defense Minister Shiekh Omar Faye being part of the delegation which simply spoke about Dr. Tangara and his visiting team with all key statements at the meeting delivered by him alone.

It was essentially about Dr. Tangara meeting his Nigerian counterpart, Foreign Minister Geoffrey Onyeama in his office in Abuja where his team arrived “to push for increasing the volume of trade between the Gambia and Nigeria and strengthening bilateral relationship across all spheres”.

Anyway, upon a quick verification, folks familiar with our trade relationship with Nigeria disclosed its nonexistence, expected to at least commence first before talking about increasing its volume. However in Mr. Tendeng’s article whose details will be examined below, at some point, one of the Nigerian members of their delegation only reminisced over how they used to send cargos in the Gambia. On what? It wasn’t explained.

But Dr. Tangara in his quintessential diplomatic silver tongue “expressed Gambia’s appreciation of Nigeria’s support to the Gambia Armed Forces (GAF) and the judiciary without which those institutions, he said, would have completely been crippled”. Hmmmm!

He then told his counterpart how President Barrow had decided to posthumously honor the late General Abubacarr Dada, (Commander of NATAG in the Gambia from 1992 to July 22, 1994, the day the AFPRC toppled the PPP government).

Dr. Tangara called Gen. Dada the Nigerian soldier who helped in the formation of the GAF with Gambians not able to discuss the GAF today without mentioning Nigeria. That Nigeria had sent us the right forces to setup the Gambia Armed Forces, and that Gen. Abubacarr Dada is still a household name in the country. Does Dr. Tangara believe that the Nigerians have not been watching Essa Faal’s TRRC where Gen. Dada and his group were portrayed by the GAF soldiers and officers in not-that-kind-of flattery image?

But it wasn’t after all surprising that among those present at the Abuja meeting when Dr. Tangara was enunciating all those accolades on the late General was his blood brother, an important and powerful figure in their government, one Ambassador Subaru Dada who in turn expressed his gratitude to the Gambian delegation about his brother.

Now, juxtaposing Mr. Tendeng’s story in The Gambia Chronicle to that of the one published by the Standard Newspaper, the former clearly illustrated the presence of Defense Minister Shiekh Omar Faye as a co-leader of the delegation with Dr. Tangara for the mission, which was initially conceived in March 2021 at the 44th Ordinary Meeting of ECOWAS Mediation and Security Council in Niamey, Niger.

Faye was in Niger where ECOWAS member states emphatically warned the Gambian delegation to speed up their Security Sector Reform for ECOMIG to finally pack-up and leave in 2021.

The idea of funding and extending the stay of ECOMIG in the Gambia was a critical concern to member states that, thanks to Mackey Sall, France was convinced to continue funding the troops six-more months.

But in the midst of such uncertainty in the future, it’s hard to tell exactly why, but Nigeria instead of Senegal seemed to have taken over the future security arrangements of the foreign troops in the Gambia. That’s what Mr. Tendeng exactly informed us.

Here, I think we need to read between the lines to understand how Mr. Tendeng tried to rationalize the motive. He highlighted how Nigeria may be consolidating its control of Anglophone West-African Nations in its quest for the ECO, the subregional currency that France is doing everything to be in the vanguard against Nigeria’s membership.

The question therefore is, did France through Mackey Sall warned President Barrow to join the French-ECO-initiative or risked losing Senegal’s participation and by extension, French funding of ECOMIG which if the Dakar forces are to unilaterally withdraw from will certainly expose the Barrow government to the same risk of a possible coup that the Jawara government faced after the unceremonious withdrawal of the Senegalese troops from the confederation in 1989? Or has Barrow like Jawara come to the realization of the unsustainable overbearing presence of the Senegalese around him, constantly reminding him of his dependency on Mackey Sall’s mercy?

Hence, again, like in Jawara’s case, could we conclude that Barrow also had nowhere to run for help under such a looming threat other than to Nigeria?

Anyway, in Mr. Tendeng’s story, Foreign Minister Dr. Tangara and Defense Minister Shiekh Omar Faye discussed and had arrived to an agreement with their counterparts in Nigeria about the necessary military assistance upon the withdrawal of ECOMIG in 2021. That the two governments of Buhari and Barrow have already drafted an MOU to be ratified soon, although according to Tendeng, efforts to secure a copy from Nigeria and Gambia for his story both failed.

Is it going to be another hidden document from the Gambian people, privy to only a few at the top in the same manner the Jawara government kept their MOU on NATAG top secret, or will it be brought before the National Assembly for scrutiny and ratification?

Comparing what was reported by the Standard Newspaper about the statements uttered by the two Gambian ministers in Abuja, it somehow looks like Minister Shiekh Omar Faye said a lot in that meeting including what the Standard published as Dr. Tangara’s statements.

In attendance were top-Nigerian military officers. To name a few there were the Nigerian Minister of Defense, General Magashi, their Permanent Secretary Ministry of Defense Babangida Hussain and their Director of Joint Services Department, Ministry of Defense Mrs Olu Mustapha who represented the Nigerian negotiating team while the Gambia was represented by Foreign Minister Dr. Mamadou Tangara, Defense Minister Shiekh Omar Faye, the Gambia High Commission to Nigeria Mr. Amadou Taal and the Gambia Defense attaché to Nigeria, Commodore Assan Sarr. Why all these people were left out in the press release from the Gambia Foreign Ministry is doubtful.

Shiekh Omar Faye was however quoted to have said that “The Gambia government is planning to posthumously immortalize the late General Abubacar Dada for his role in establishing the nucleus of the GAF” while in the press release that cited Dr. Tangara for that utterance stated that President Barrow had already decided to honor the dead general posthumously. Of course Faye was not truthful in saying that the Nigerians established the nucleus of the GAF which was credited to the British Army Training Team (BATT) in 1984; but like I said, his presence in Abuja was not even mentioned in the Foreign ministry’s press release. WHY?

I am also flabbergasted by the fact that the National Security Adviser, Retired Col. Momodou Badjie was not part of the delegation in the endeavor that had a lot or everything to do with his area. But well, factoring that Col. Badjie has recently in an SSR press-conference update made it clear to Gambians that the whole process to complete their work could take about ten years whereas the conditions laid by ECOWAS at Niamey was the swift implementation of a validated national security policy document along with a National Security Strategy and of course the much awaited SSR for the ultimate withdrawal of ECOMIG before the 2021 general election, taking him to Abuja with his funny idea wouldn’t have made any sense.

But It was also reported that Defense Minister faye not Foreign Minister Tangara commended the Nigerians by stating that “the lifeline for the sustenance of Gambian democracy, its military and judiciary relied entirely on Nigerian support”. The press release from the Foreign ministry ascribed that statement to Minister Tangara.

Could we also in our fertile imaginations conclude that it was Mackey Sall, whom most scholars believe enjoys greater loyalty from Dr. Tangara than the foreign minister is to even Adama Barrow who persuaded him not to report anything about the military agreement and MOU between Gambia and Nigeria which could anger France? Their press release said nothing about the MOU.

Dr. Tangara was accordingly reported to have been secretly decorated in Senegal sometime last year or the year before by President Mackey Sall with the Highest-National Order for his role in the 2016 impasse that gave Senegal and France the lead role in flushing the APRC out of power and ensuring their control of the Barrow government.

Because soon after Dr. Tangara and Mr. Faye left Nigeria, Mackey Sall and President Umaro Sissoco Embalo of Guinea Bissau flew together, to Abuja to meet President Buhari and discuss current and future security concerns of the subregion with the Gambian situation exhaustively dissected. Why Mackey Sall and Umaro Embalo would go to Abuja for an important dinner-meeting like that with Muhammadu Buhari and leave Adama Barrow behind, is another conundrum. They could have at least taken him along to enjoy the delicious meals, couldn’t they? Time will tell.

Samsudeen Sarr

Banjul,The Gambia.

For many countries, including The Gambia, that today celebrate World Children’s Day to commemorate the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, COVID-19 presents development challenges like never seen before. In the 55 years since The Gambia attained statehood, the country has never had to shut schools for more than six months, close markets, and impose widespread restrictions for long periods.

The trails of devastation left by COVID-19 are being felt in every community, town and city in the country. Families have lost their livelihoods; businesses have shuttered; the economy has been shaken to its roots; and children’s survival and development are being compromised.

The COVID-19 crisis is a child rights crisis. The costs of the pandemic for children are immediate and, if unaddressed, will persist throughout their lives. For example, it is estimated that 700,000 children in The Gambia were temporarily out of school for up to six months. This is an entire generation whose education was threatened by the pandemic, and while the spread of the virus appears to have ebbed, the risks persist.

Since the outbreak of the pandemic, we have been engaging children and asking them how they feel about the virus, how it has been affecting them, and how they think we can avert a crisis of this magnitude in the future. Their answers are clear – put children’s rights at the center of recovery efforts.

Can we build back better?

Yes. In fact, UNICEF advocates for a new normal because the old normal has not worked for the millions of families stuck in poverty, the millions of young people out of school and unemployed, and the growing number of women and children who live in constant fear of violence, abuse and exploitation.

Amidst COVID-19, UNICEF invites everyone to join the charge to respond, recover and reimagine a world fit for every child. Together with all our partners, we can prevent the COVID-19 pandemic from becoming a lasting crisis for children, especially the most vulnerable. We must take this opportunity to invest in their futures and build back better.

How then can we build back better?

By partnering with and listening to children and young people, we can ensure that recovery efforts are meaningful and sustainable for them as we work together to design a better future. The future is theirs and they have a vision. With 63% of the population being under the age of 25 years, The Gambia has so much to win if we engage them in the design of the country’s future, by providing them a platform to express their opinions on the content and quality of the policies and programmes that adults design on their behalf.

Across the world, children are calling on governments to reimagine education. COVID-19 has shown us how we further perpetuate exclusion when we fail to invest in digital technology and bridge the digital divide. Children are exhorting us to reverse the learning crisis – demanding that we ensure that when they are in school, they have the resources to learn and complete their education without obstruction.

Children and young people are demanding more investment in their mental health, calling on us to bring an end to abuse, gender-based violence, and neglect. The world they envision ensures that every child and young person has access to quality mental health services and are involved in building a society based on respect, inclusion and non-discrimination. We must prepare them for the future.

They are also calling on us to break the cycle of child poverty, which has increased during the pandemic, and to ensure an inclusive recovery for all. COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, a devastating impact on families, and we should work with children and young people to devise strategies to guarantee a better life and future for all families.

The pandemic has also underscored just how important access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene is and how providing handwashing facilities could make a difference for millions of people. Yet for two in every three families in The Gambia, even this most basic of services is out of reach; therefore, we must begin to see water, sanitation and hygiene as a human rights issue.

Where do we start?

With the basics. At home, parents need to listen to children and consider their views when forming any decision. In communities, we must consult with and put their interest first when developing and/or implementing any activity. In schools, children must be involved in how education is delivered to ensure quality learning. At national level, laws, policies and development plans must be child rights-centered and focused on the inclusion of the most vulnerable children and young people.

Building back from COVID-19 will require sustained and long-term planning as well as proactive budgetary allocations to prevent the COVID-19 pandemic from becoming a lasting crisis for children and young people, and to be more crisis-ready in the future. In many instances, these long-term plans will be implemented by young people as they grow and assume positions of responsibility in governance, community development, and the private sector amongst others. When children and young people are involved from the outset in these processes, sustainability will be more easily guaranteed.

The writer, Gordon Jonathan Lewis, is UNICEF The Gambia Representative.

A recent media dispatch by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) cautioning RADIO stations against the broadcasting of certain content has sent shivers down the spines of many associated with the Gambian media industry and by extension non-media people. It has raised genuine fears in many quarters that the old older is primed to be midwifed once more. The thing is: we cannot afford to have newsrooms morphed into panic rooms. That will be a slippery treadmill on the democratic path.

A week can be a long time in (not) only politics

“Abusive, uncouth and incendiary language.” These were the key words that stood out in the press release issued by PURA on Wednesday, November 18 2020. Apparently, the country’s independent multi-sector regulator established by Parliament under PURA Act 2001 to regulate the following sectors: Broadcasting, Electricity, Telecommunications (mobile, landline and ISP), Petroleum (downstream), Water and Sewage, wasn’t livid with content from RADIO stations.

The irony is that it comes barely a week after Gambian journalists under the aegis of the country’s press union held a symbolic procession calling for an end to all forms of impunity against media practitioners. It must be said the event in question was not staged by the GPU in isolation of the government as can be alluded to by images of the Minister of Information and Communications Infrastructure Ebrima Sillah nestled amongst journalists. In all fairness to the current dispensation, the breathing space accorded to Gambian journalists thus is a far cry from the previous regime. But that is no favour and must in no way be considered so, for freedom of expression and of the press are in principle guaranteed by the laws of the land. However, what no one can guarantee is that with the passage of time, the same government that promised the media heaven and earth would not also move heaven and earth to suppress dissent? No one should feel perplexed if that were to be the case as similar rhetoric and pledges of media freedom have had been made in several countries only for the rails to come off in catastrophic fashion.

Call a spade a spade and adopt a multi-actor approach in tackling industry related matters

If PURA does have substantive evidence that some radio stations are falling short of the standards expected of them, it would have been appropriate on their part to not only call them out but go further to engage the Broadcasters Association and more crucially the Gambia Press Union and Media Council of The Gambia in nipping the bud anything that may be deemed distasteful, threatening the peace and social fabric of our dear country. And since the press release only made a generalization of radio stations, the impression is that every radio station in town is culpable and that out of all the news media outlets in our country, it is radio stations that are not playing by the rulebook. Hence, one fundamental issue with this is that must every radio station operate as television stations that rarely say a thing that is at odds with the powers that be?

The Pa Modou Bojang Effect and the conspiracy theories

In the wake of the PURA press release, it was being bandied around certain social media channels that the press release in actual sense was some sort of a bidding job by the regulatory authority on behalf of the government to cower into silence certain unnamed radio stations that have proven to be in a thorn in the flesh of government. Chiefly among these is Pa Modou Bojang and his Brikama-based Suu Radio. Whether such interpretations of the press release are off the mark or not, Pa Modou has become a popular voice for the ordinary citizen, especially those within the West Coast Region. No one needs an audience research to establish that. Perhaps the answer can be found in the issues that he forays into – issues that touch on not just the political front but more importantly the daily socio-economic woes of the jobless youth, the market woman, the underpaid civil servant, to name a few. To put to bed any such speculations, the government may as well consider having its image makers at other radio stations beyond Peter Gomez’s West Coast so the citizenry can be engaged in discussing government policies and connected matters

Democracy needs a vibrant media to thrive

Whether the whispers that Pa Modou and Co are the target of government censorship hold water or not, one thing is not in doubt – democracy needs a vibrant media to thrive. There is no better potent avenue at the disposal of the masses than the media that allows them to make their voices heard. It is also the same media that enables journalists to keep the executive accountable by holding their feet to the fire. To understand the evolution of the media in relation to public participation the democratic process, Peter Dahlgren, Professor Emeritus at the Department of Communication and Media at Lund University, Sweden, separates the mediated public sphere into four dimensions for better comprehension: The media can be studied as an institution. Is the media independent or state owned? Do they serve the public’s interest or a narrow range of interests belonging to the owners of the media? Are government funded and government regulated media institutions used for public service or are they propaganda mouthpieces? When private corporations own the media are they furthering their own commercial interests or the public’s?

In the grand scheme of things, all these are pertinent issues that should capture the attention of PURA in its watchdog role rather than zooming it on few morality questions in the name of our norms and values.

Parting Shot: Fix the big boys too!

Whilst PURA came out of the blocks to fire a warning shot to radio stations, the institution might as well do the public a massive service by dealing with GSM companies and other corporate giants that continue to treat helpless customers as cash cows. Frequent hike in internet tariffs are becoming commonplace whilst service delivery and customer care tend to get worsen by the day with little to show for in the realm of corporate social responsibility.

And maybe , just maybe, the government itself should be leading the way in publicly frowning upon inflammatory verbal salvos shot from within its base.

Famara Fofana is a freelance journalist and a student of media and communications studies. He is also the author of ‘When My Village Was My Village’.

Once again, the Barrow Administration has provided budget estimates for 2021 only to reflect more of the same. This draft budget is not only irrelevant to the rights and needs of the people rather it is only intended to promote selfish political objectives hence pillage public wealth and entrench poverty. I hereby call on the National Assembly Members to totally reject these estimates.

Rather what should happen is for the National Assembly to draft its own budget and approve it and then send it to the Executive to implement accordingly. One of the fundamental purposes of the National Assembly is to distribute the national cake. This is why the Executive brings national budget estimates before them for review. Secondly, a budget is the second most important piece of legislation, next to only the Constitution. Thus, another function of the National Assembly is to make laws, hence nothing bars the National Assembly from drafting and approving a national budget and then give it to the Executive to enforce.

I will repeat once again that it is this National Assembly that will make or break the Gambia simply because it is this body that stands between Dictatorship and Democracy in the Gambia. In other words, it is this National Assembly that should institutionalise system change to deliver the Gambia to democracy and good governance. Failure to do that they would have maintained the Gambia as that same banana republic filled with abuse of power, corruption and inefficiency as it was under the Tyrant Yaya Jammeh.

Our NAMs must realise that, both individually and collectively they owe allegiance to no one but to the Constitution of the Republic of the Gambia. Under Section 112 of that Constitution, it says NAMs should only be guided by their conscience and the national interest. Hence our NAMs have a unique opportunity to either change or to maintain the status quo. If they wish to change then they must fundamentally change the budget making process of this country, as a start, in the interest of the people.

The reason the National Assembly should take active leadership and full control over the budget is because these draft estimates are not realistic and only represent fraud. For example,

Why give OP D663 million but give only D156.6 to the National Assembly when it is the National Assembly which is the key accountability institution in the country. It has a mandate to monitor OP and all public institutions and society as a whole. How could they perform their duties if they are underfunded? It is because of this underfunding of the parliament that they have been largely ineffective since Independence.

Similarly, why allocate D747.6 million to Defence yet give only D1.02 billion to Interior which houses the police, prisons, immigration and drug agency? How big an army do we want? Our issues are not external defence challenges rather our focus should be to build strong law enforcement institutions. Despite so much money being given to the military it is sad to note that barracks across the country suffer from poor conditions while the lives of soldiers remain deplorable with poor salaries.

Law enforcement agencies are severely under-resourced which is basically the reason why there is a high incidence of corruption and inefficiency within them. Hence a realistic budget should have provided much more money to the Interior since we face a lot more internal security challenges than external defence issues. Visit any police and immigration station or the prisons to realise the level of deprivation of these places!

Similarly, the amount of money given to Foreign Affairs is unsustainable. This country has opened foreign offices in so many countries unnecessarily. Rather the country needs more money to go to the Judiciary which is an entire State organ of its own, yet poorly funded. The need for effective justice delivery to ensure access to justice by the masses of Gambians warrants that this institution is well resourced.

One wonders why would the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs be allocated the huge sum of D1.03 billion! To do what, when critical sectors such as Youth and Sports, or Justice got less than D150 million each, with the Ministry for Women, Children and Social Welfare being allocated a paltry D87 million!

The need for more investment in sectors that serve women, children and social welfare is more than urgent. These are the sectors that could make a whole lot of difference in ensuring a healthy population, guarantee equality and justice by ending social exclusion, discrimination and enhancing the education and development of girls and women and persons with disabilities among other marginalised groups hence spur national productivity.

What is even more perplexing is ‘Centralised Services’ which is allocated a whopping D1.99 billion – the third highest budget item after debt servicing D5.99 billion and MoBSE at D2.8 billion. What are ‘centralised services’ when in fact each and every ministry has its own recurrent and development budgets?

Every public institution or civil service office has its own utility supply, internet, security, fuel supply, pool of vehicles and so on. What ‘services’ therefore exists for which offices share that will cost almost 2 billion dalasi? I hope NAMs will delete this dubious budget item as the first step!

In that regard, one can now see the reason for the high national debt given the amount of money being put into sectors that neither need that much money nor generate any revenue such as the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs itself.

It is obvious that the allocation to this ministry will only go to unnecessary foreign travels and procurement of all sorts of goods and services that will not be used anyway. One evidence of that is the hiring of UK consultants, Ernst & Young LLP to conduct a forensic audit of 7 SOEs at a cost of millions of dalasi only for the Minister to ignore that final report when it came out in February 2019.

Similarly, another sector that highlights selfish interest is the Ministry of Transport, Works and Infrastructure which has the fourth highest vote at D1.96 billion! Because of projects like the Banjul Road Rehabilitation Project, the Hakalang and Badibu road projects, the budget has shot up!

A critical look at these projects will show that they do not meet due diligence standards and processes. Rather they are imposed to serve a particular purpose different from the welfare of the people which is being used as the pretext. These are indeed political projects intended to win the 2021 elections.

Look at the higher education, research and technology sector with a mere allocation of D224 million! Go to the UTG campuses and classrooms to see the poor state of their facilities which lack basic services such as efficient internet connectivity.

Clearly it shows that this Government is not interested in building a strong human capital and guaranteeing economic growth and securing a better future for this country which is why this very important sector is neglected. Rather this Government wants quick and immediate things that they can use to hoodwink the poor masses into believing that they are working. Roads and bridges serve such purposes quite well.

NAMs must recall that in a span of 22 years there was no kind of infrastructure that the Jammeh Regime did not construct in this country. Yet after 22 years, not only are these infrastructures found to be substandard but also, they were procured in a way that was not transparent and in total disregard of due process.

Consequently, these massive infrastructure projects by AFPRC and APRC regimes have only made the country even more highly indebted and poorer. Look at the Banjul International Airport, for example, which was built in 1995 at a cost of 10 million dollars yet today it is being rehabilitated for 14 million dollars! How come within 25 years such a massive infrastructure would incur more money to renovate if it was indeed built properly in the first place?

But a serious Government would have looked at the strategic needs of its country and make objective investment decisions that will build stronger foundations for the nation. Yes, roads and bridges and other public infrastructures are utterly necessary. But it is foolhardy to invest all of your money into roads and bridges to the total neglect of investing in people. A smart and concerned Government would have identified other sources of funding that can build roads and bridges while investing national revenue into other strategic sectors of the nation.

What this 2021 draft budget reflects, as the other budgets before it, is that the Gambia has an inept and corrupt Government that is prepared to plunge the country into higher taxes and deeper debts just to satisfy selfish political objectives. The end result of this is the killing of the national economy and retarding human development.

Therefore, NAMs must closely and severely scrutinise every budget line because this draft budget is not realistic. This 2021 estimates are not intended to develop the human capital and economy of the Gambia rather it is designed to serve political interests, undermine the development of the private sector, especially Gambian businesses because of high taxes and then plunge the country into even deeper debt. This means once again, this is a budget designed to entrench poverty, deprivation and corruption.

Let our NAMs realise that in the final analysis they bear primary responsibility for the success and failure of the Gambia. Not the President nor the people. It is the NAMs who have all the powers and tools to correct this country including checking and disciplining the President and his Government.

Hence after all the high-sounding slogans and eloquent speeches by NAMs on the floor of the National Assembly, if they did not bring about durable prosperity, dignity and security to each and every Gambian and end public sector corruption and inefficiency, abuse of office and disregard of the rule of law then their time was a waste of resources – a gross failure and shame! Let NAMs bear that in mind!

For the Gambia Our Homeland

By Babucarr Gaye

The Sisters Show quickly set itself apart from other shows when it came onto the scene a few months ago. It’s the newest show in town, but the buzz surrounding it is enough to intrude into anyone’s consciousness. Despite their best laid plans to avoid it. And efforts.

What strikes you pretty early on is the total elusiveness of a label for the show. It simply defies categorization. The choice of name lends an air of levity to the show. But appearances can be deceptive.

Started by five Gambian Sisters in the US with the goal of empowering women and inspiring people, especially people of African descent, the show has found itself in trouble of late.

The five sisters who comprise the show are Juka, Jay, Olay, Amy and Mamaran Ceesay. They all have different personalities, but Juka, Olay and Amy are known for their liberal views. Mammaran leads the conservative pack in concert with Dr Jay among them.

Amy is fun and has an edgy flair. She likes to be a goofball, but don’t take that to mean she won’t give you her intelligent opinions straight. She is a model and beauty director, and it’s her job to keep the ladies on the straight and narrow of her runway.

Juka is an entrepreneur who has worked in the entertainment industry in Los Angeles where she is based-she is a joy to watch. She is zany, smart, and also quick to set things straight.

Olay has been a leader in the tech industry for almost 15 years, and works as chief of staff and Vice President in a Fortune 500 company. She is passionate, engaging, and always well-prepared. With Amy and Juka, she forms the crazy, liberal squad on the show. She has a quiet demeanor which she quickly loses once on air.

Dr Jay has worked in the medical field for over two decades. She is precise and a stickler for facts. She is determined to get her point across and holds her own with her fellow medical doctor, Mammaran, on a show where the other ladies often do not share their opinions.

With two medical doctors in the house ,one would have thought common sense is in good supply. If it’s there at all, it’s not evident. That’s a graphic way to put it, but I hope it helped to get my point across. And you will discover soon enough I’m right.

Discussing relationships in the Hot Soup segment of the show looked good on paper, until Amy blurted out Gambian men are not romantic.

The story was picked up by The Gambia’s version of TMZ Whatsongambia. This sparked a furious response from angry men whose bruised and battered egos left them screaming liberal abuse at the model for giving them low marks in matters of romance, something they consider themselves skilled at, and always straining to improve.
‘Amy walahi I can give you a good experience, I’m ready to spoil you with romantism’, Da Saints Fadera, a renown Gambian satirist and young politician counters while offering to show his supreme romantic skills. I wonder if his offer stands a cat’s chance in hell given Amy’s declared total lack of interest in Gambian men.

For Bakary Sanyang, national pride is at stake and Amy’s comments represent a call of duty to salvage the national brand. He sees an opportunity to shape perceptions and served an ace. He riposted: ‘Maybe the ones she interact with ain’t romantic. That’s why whenever you have a date or outing with someone from another nation do it well because you are representing the whole nation’.

But in their defense, the show’s knack for getting on people’s nerves is counter-balanced by more serious discussions on women’s health, disability, cancer awareness and international development.

But that’s to ignore the fact that one of the more reckless freaks on the show, Juka, recently stated women should not be checking their husbands’ phones to avoid marital strife. Juka espouses the philosophy of ‘feminine energy’ which aims to achieve holistic wellness in relationships.

But social media got zero chill. Deservedly, she was roasted with a vehemence that a lesser show wouldn’t have survived in the era of pervasive cancel culture.

And that’s the problem with The Sisters Show. Its weaknesses are its strengths. Highly educated, empowered and independent, they don’t chafe at making their opinions known on issues which never fails to leave you entertained and educated all at once. And pissed off sometimes if you don’t share their views. Even the hot button issues of racism and criminal justice reform in the US, where they are domiciled, haven’t gone unscathed.

Although The Sisters Show airs every Saturday on Facebook, I won’t be tuning in without company. Because I can’t, on account of a sense of guilt keeping a good thing all to myself.

But you sure can count on the controversial Hot Soup section to rile you up one way or another. Which I don’t think am duty-bound to deal with all by myself. Because I can’t. As a media friend observed, ‘nothing is off-limits on the Sisters Show’ which I hope gives you an enhanced understanding of my reluctance in case it makes you think less of me.

Now am being ridiculous. That’s exactly the kind of paranoia that makes me weary of spending time with myself on Saturdays without The Sisters Show.