OPINION
By Dave Manneh
A Symptom of Suppression
The Gambia Police Force’s denial of the “Request For a Permit to Hold a Peaceful Demonstration” on Saturday, 17 May, highlights the urgent need to repeal the Public Order Act. The denial of a permit, however, is not an isolated incident, but a reflection of a pattern of suppressing dissent.
The Area councillor for Sukuta, the protest’s lead organiser, expressed his disappointment at the unexplained refusal, calling it a betrayal of democratic rights. This pattern of vague denials and forceful crackdowns suggests a deliberate strategy to shield systematic asset stripping and land dispossession from public scrutiny.
The timing of the denial, particularly following The Republic’s investigative reporting, which subsequently spurred the GALA (Gambians Against Looted Assets) protest, suggests a deliberate tactic by the authorities. That peaceful show of displeasure led to the arrest of 27 peaceful protestors.
Coupled with the Indemnity Act, which protected police involved in the 2018 Faraba Banta killings, these laws foster impunity; and contravene Section 25 of the 1997 Constitution and Article 21 of The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Silencing a Plea for Accountability and Justice
Assistant Inspector General Ebrima Bah’s refusal in his letter, citing undefined “security reasons“, silenced the community’s plea for accountability and justice. This law suppresses dissent, and stifles democratic expression, violating fundamental rights. Its removal is crucial to dismantling the legal framework that stifles expressions of disquiet and dissatisfaction with the political situation.
A Colonial Legacy of Suppression
Enacted in 1961 under British rule (with Section 5 mandating police permits to control dissent), its purpose reveals itself in colonial patterns: suppressing anti-British sentiment as nationalist movements and Workers’ Union activities took root. This permit system prioritised colonial power over democratic expression, creating a framework that post-independence governments retained to serve authoritarian ends. Jammeh used it to crush the 2000 student protests (resulting in 14 deaths). The same law imprisoned Ousainou Darboe in 2016, for participating in a protest demanding justice for the late Solo Sandeng.
It is all the more disheartening to see its use under Barrow.
The police invoked it to deny the Sukuta Salagi victims their voice, effectively shielding the system responsible for their dispossession. The Act has thus transitioned from a tool of colonial control to a legal shield to suppress outrage over land dispossession. The planned peaceful protest, with victims having prepared placards reading “Free Our Lands” and “Our Lands Are Our Life“, exemplifies the silencing of legitimate grievances.
Challenging the Justification of Order Versus Freedom
In defence of the Act, some argue that it prevents chaos. However, this concern is overstated.
Rights-respecting alternatives, such as Sweden’s notification system, can ensure public safety without discretionary control. The Act’s fundamental colonial design, prioritising order over freedom of expression, constitutes suppression of legitimate views under the guise of law.
The fact that The Gambia has not repealed the Act, despite its questionable justification, reveals the true purpose behind its continued use: obstructing dialogue on systematic misgovernance while maintaining a superficial democratic image.
When authorities deny permits for peaceful protests, our country risks descending into “competitive authoritarianism“: elections without genuine accountability and institutions lacking true independence.
A Call for Review and the Human Cost
Reflecting this growing concern, the National Council for Civic Education’s (NCCE) call for a review reflects growing public awareness that democracy is undermined when laws protect legally questionable acts. Civil society should urge the National Assembly to initiate a legislative review, involving citizens, police, and legal experts, to develop a rights-based framework that reinforces democratic accountability.
Moving Towards Genuine Democratic Transition
Moving beyond its colonial origins, the Public Order Act is an active instrument in suppressing contemporary political activism. Recent revelations concerning asset underselling, land dispossession, and institutional compromise demonstrate how post-Jammeh Gambia continues to use authoritarian tools while claiming democratic advancement. Genuine democratic transition necessitates the complete dismantling of this colonial relic.
Replacing it with transparent, rights-based frameworks would signal a genuine commitment to accountability. Only then can the voices of the dispossessed, like those in Sukuta Salagi, and the broader issues they represent, find the democratic space they deserve.
Decisive action to ensure that progress, peace, and prosperity benefit all Gambians, not just a privileged few, is both necessary and urgent.
Dave Manneh – Research Lead
Securing Futures: Land Rights Action Collaborative
Securing Futures: Land Rights Action Collaborative, a registered NGO-think tank hybrid based in The Gambia committed to empowering Kombo’s dispossessed land-owning communities and advocating for equitable governance policies.
