PROOF OVER PROPAGANDA: Yaya Dampha Calls Out Lamin Manneh’s Baseless Electoral Fraud Claims

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator

It is becoming increasingly difficult to take Mr. Lamin Manneh seriously when he repeatedly chooses sensationalism over substance. For someone who prides himself on intellectualism, his recent claims regarding voter registration fraud fall far below the standards expected of responsible national discourse. The Gambian people deserve facts—not recycled propaganda framed as concern.

Mr. Manneh is fully aware, or ought to be, that The Gambia’s electoral system is governed by clear legal frameworks designed to ensure transparency and accountability. The voter registration process is not conducted in secrecy, nor is it monopolized by any single political party. On the contrary, all political parties—including the UDP—are legally entitled to deploy agents at every registration centre. These agents are mandated to observe, record, and report any suspected irregularities.

If indeed there are instances of underage individuals or non-Gambians being registered, the law provides a clear and credible path: gather verifiable evidence and present it before the revising courts. That is how serious allegations are handled in a democracy. The burden of proof lies with the accuser—not with the public, and certainly not with those being accused without evidence.

What is deeply concerning is the persistence of a familiar pattern. For over three decades, the UDP has participated in electoral processes, yet the narrative remains unchanged—whenever outcomes are unfavourable, allegations of fraud and unfairness quickly follow. At some point, a political movement must rise above perpetual grievance and embrace democratic maturity: winning with humility and accepting defeat with dignity.

The attempt to implicate individuals without substantiated proof is not only reckless but also undermines the integrity of public discourse. Allegations of this nature demand credible evidence capable of standing the test of legal scrutiny—not speculation, hearsay, or viral audio clips circulating on social media.

Yes, electoral integrity must always be safeguarded. Allegations—especially serious ones—should be thoroughly investigated. But they must be pursued through lawful channels, not through media sensationalism that risks inflaming tensions and eroding public trust in national institutions.

Education should cultivate discipline, responsibility, and respect for truth. Unfortunately, what Mr. Manneh has demonstrated is the opposite—an abandonment of intellectual rigor in favor of unsubstantiated claims.

Politics is not a refuge for excuses. It is a contest of ideas, credibility, and organization. The Gambian people are discerning, and they expect leadership—not noise.

If there is evidence, present it before the appropriate legal bodies. If not, then it is time to put an end to the cycle of baseless allegations and allow the democratic process to proceed with the seriousness it deserves.

GID Clarifies Reports on “Fraudulent Gambian Passports” Seized in Canada

By Jarranews Staff Reporter

The Gambia Immigration Department (GID) has issued a clarification following reports by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) regarding the interception of fraudulent passports allegedly linked to The Gambia.

In a press release dated April 16, 2026, the GID stated that it had taken note of a CBSA announcement on April 14, 2026, which reported the seizure of five passports described as “fraudulent” and bearing identical photographs but different identities—an indicator commonly associated with counterfeit documents.

The Department emphasized that references to “fraudulent passports from The Gambia” relate only to the apparent origin or resemblance of the documents and do not suggest that they were officially issued by Gambian authorities. According to the GID, it remains the sole institution legally mandated to issue Gambian passports, all of which are produced through secure and verifiable systems.

The GID categorically stated that the passports in question were not issued by the Department and are therefore considered counterfeit reproductions.

Authorities further disclosed that the Department’s Intelligence and Investigation Unit has initiated direct engagement with the CBSA to gather more details surrounding the seizure and to support ongoing international efforts to combat document fraud.

Reaffirming its commitment to international standards, the GID noted that its passport issuance system aligns with best practices set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), ensuring the integrity and security of Gambian travel documents.

The Department also assured both the public and international partners of its firm stance against document fraud, highlighting continued collaboration with global law enforcement agencies to tackle transnational crime and irregular migration.

The statement was signed by Inspector Siman Lowe, Public Relations Officer of the Gambia Immigration Department.

WhatsonGambia’s Reporting on Alleged Passport Fraud Is Misleading And Unprofessional

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

Concerns are mounting over the professional standards of the media platform WhatsonGambia following its recent publication of a misleading report regarding an alleged passport fraud case involving a Nigerian national in Canada.

The outlet reported that a woman, identified as Nnenna Oketa, had been arrested in possession of multiple Gambian passports, all bearing the same photograph but different names. However, critics argue that the report lacked critical context and failed to present the full facts surrounding the incident.

According to verified information from the Canada Border Services Agency, the suspect was found with seven fraudulent travel documents concealed in a shipment. These included five Gambian passports and two South African passports. Importantly, all the documents were counterfeit, a key detail that WhatsonGambia reportedly omitted in its coverage.

Authorities confirmed that the passports carried identical photographs but different identities, pointing to a coordinated fraud scheme rather than any legitimate issuance of official documents. The case has since been referred to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for further investigation, and the suspect faces charges related to possession of forged passports under Canadian law.

The issue of foreign nationals attempting or requiring national documents fraudulently is very common.  Recently over 400 Nigerian nationals were arrested in Ghana for illegal possession of Ghanaian passport.

Media observers have criticized WhatsonGambia for what they describe as selective reporting, accusing the platform of publishing sensational claims without adequate verification or context. Such omissions, they warn, risk misleading the public and unfairly damaging the reputation of national institutions.

The incident has reignited calls for greater adherence to journalistic ethics, particularly in an era where digital platforms play an increasingly influential role in shaping public opinion. Observers stress that responsible journalism requires accuracy, balance, and full disclosure of facts—standards that must be upheld regardless of editorial stance.

As the investigation continues, Jarranews is urging media outlets to exercise caution and professionalism, emphasizing that credibility remains the cornerstone of public trust.

GRTS Journalist Refutes SIS Questioning Claims, Calls Reports Misleading

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

A journalist with the Gambia Radio and Television Services (GRTS), attached to the Office of the Vice President, has strongly refuted reports circulating online alleging that he was arrested and questioned by national security authorities.

Omar P. Jallow dismissed the claims as “false, unfounded, and misleading,” insisting that he has not been invited or interrogated by the State Intelligence Services (SIS), nor has his service passport been confiscated.

“I have not been invited or questioned by SIS in relation to these allegations. Additionally, my service passport has not been seized, nor was I denied any official travel,” Jallow stated in a message posted on his Facebook page.

The reports, widely shared by some online activists and commentators, also attempted to link Jallow to a purported controversy surrounding a recent community fundraising event in Sare Gainako. According to those claims, the situation was allegedly tied to dissatisfaction from senior political figure Seedy Njie over the invitation of Kanifing Municipal Council Mayor Talib Bensouda.

However, Jallow rejected the assertions, describing them as speculative and without basis. He clarified that he did not personally invite Mayor Bensouda, emphasizing that the invitation was extended collectively by members of the community.

“The event was a community-driven initiative, reflecting the collective decision and participation of the village,” he explained, urging the public to disregard what he termed misinformation.

The development comes amid growing concerns over the spread of unverified information in the country’s media space. Observers note that the incident underscores the increasing need for responsible journalism, professional ethics, and regulatory frameworks to safeguard the credibility of the media landscape in The Gambia.

On David Kujabi’s Commentary: Why Dr.Ismaila Ceesay is not Yahya Jammeh

 

By Alagi Yorro Jallow

Selective outrage and inherited grievances undermine public debate in The Gambia, resulting in tribalized criticism and silencing dissent until it becomes convenient. We must commit to principled and honest intellectual discourse.

Selective outrage and borrowed enemies undermine honest debate. Some who were silent under dictatorship now speak out in democracy. Criticism should be principled, not tribal or inherited. A democracy cannot survive on selective courage. Too often in The Gambia, attacks are based on popularity rather than principle. People chase applause by holding grudges rather than developing independent convictions. This is conformity disguised as courage. I've challenged Dr. Ismaila Ceesay’s policies and decisions. That is legitimate, democratic, and necessary. But my criticism is never personal or inherited; it is always about ideas, not vendettas or tribe.

Our national discourse is suffering from a crisis of selective outrage, borrowed enmity, and intellectual dishonesty. Too many people attack individuals not because of principle, but because it is fashionable. Too many inherit other people’s enemies rather than form their own convictions. Too many speak loudly only when the target is safe, and remain silent when courage is costly. This is not the civic culture The Gambia needs. This is not the intellectual maturity our democracy requires.

There is a truth that must be said with dignity: Anyone who refused to criticize Yahya Jammeh’s 22‑year dictatorship has no moral authority to lecture anyone today. For two decades, Gambians were detained, exiled, tortured, disappeared, and silenced. Journalists were hunted. Students were shot. Families were torn apart. Entire communities lived in fear. During those years, many of the loudest voices today were silent. Not a word. Not a whisper. Not a sentence of solidarity. Some refused to criticize Jammeh because he was from their tribe. Some refused because silence was safer. Some refused because neutrality was more comfortable than truth. Yet today, these same voices find extraordinary energy to condemn a civilian minister in a democratic government. This is not courage. It is convenient. It is selective outrage masquerading as principle.

Fatoumatta: I have challenged Dr. Ismaila Ceesay in government on his arguments, decisions, and positions. That is necessary and democratic. But Dr. Ceesay is not Yahya Jammeh; he did not run a dictatorship, torture Gambians, or preside over a reign of terror. To equate his role in government with the brutality of a 22‑year autocracy is not analysis. It is an exaggeration. It is historical amnesia. It is the kind of intellectual dishonesty that weakens public debate.

What Dr. Ceesay taught as a political science lecturer is not identical to the constraints of governing. Theory and governance are not the same terrain. One is a classroom; the other is a battlefield of competing interests, institutional limitations, and political realities. Critique him, yes. Hold him accountable, yes. But do so with fairness, context, and intellectual honesty.

David Kujabi’s recent commentary on Dr. Ceesay is notable for its literary style, which is eloquent, poetic, and sharply written. But eloquence is not evidence. Poetry is not proof. And metaphor is not analysis. However, rhetorical skill is not a substitute for a substantiated argument. It is relevant to observe, factually and dispassionately, that Mr. Kujabi worked in the Gambia Police Force during a period when state institutions, including the police, were implicated in repression. This is included solely as historical background.

During those years, many Gambians suffered under state power. Yet we did not hear Mr. Kujabi’s voice in the national struggle against dictatorship. Silence is a choice, and he had the right to make that choice. But silence during tyranny and loudness during democracy is a contradiction worth examining, especially when that loudness is directed at individuals who never presided over repression.

To criticize Dr. Ceesay today while never having criticized Jammeh yesterday is not a matter of principle; it is a matter of selective courage. And selective courage is the enemy of intellectual honesty.

 One of the most corrosive habits in our political culture is the tendency to inherit other people’s enemies. Some individuals attack public figures not because they disagree with their ideas, but because they have adopted someone else’s grudges. Others criticize leaders from different communities while protecting those from their own. This is not justice. This is not activism. This is tribalized criticism, and it is dangerous. A democracy cannot grow on borrowed hostility. A nation cannot mature on inherited grudges. A public debate cannot thrive on selective outrage. The Gambia deserves a higher standard of debate. We must cultivate a political culture where criticism is principled, not tribal; disagreement is intellectual, not personal; accountability is consistent, not selective; and truth is universal, not seasonal.

I will continue to critique policies, ideas, and governance failures. I will continue to defend truth, justice, and accountability. But I will not participate in the politics of personal destruction. The Gambia deserves better. Our democracy deserves better. Our public discourse deserves better.

Dr. Ismaila Ceesay Is More Trustworthy Than David Kujabi A Man Who Helped Dictatorship

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator

The recent commentary by David Kujabi, attempting to question the integrity of Dr. Ismaila Ceesay, is not only unconvincing—it is profoundly undermined by his own record in office.

I write not from speculation, but from lived experience.

As a local contact for Amnesty International, I can vividly recall numerous instances in which we reached out to David Kujabi in his capacity as Police PRO, seeking urgent clarification on the whereabouts and conditions of individuals held in police custody. These were not casual inquiries—they were matters of human rights, often involving detainees held without due process under the regime of Yahya Jammeh.

Yet, time and again, those calls went unanswered.

On several occasions, they were outright rejected.

This was not mere administrative delay—it was a pattern of deliberate silence at moments when transparency and accountability were most needed.

Even more troubling are the memories surrounding the case of Alagie Abdoulie Ceesay, a respected radio journalist who, along with his brother, was detained and reportedly held incommunicado under conditions that raised serious fears of torture. During this period, families, journalists, and human rights actors sought answers. The public needed reassurance. The international community demanded clarity.

But again, silence prevailed.

Ceesay was eventually released, but tragically passed away only months later—an outcome that continues to cast a long shadow over that episode and raises serious moral questions about the treatment he endured in custody.

These are not distant or abstract issues. They are part of a documented period in our national history when fear overshadowed freedom, and when those entrusted with public communication often chose silence over truth.

It is against this backdrop that Kujabi’s current attempt to lecture the nation on “principle” and “political truth” must be assessed.

Today, he speaks loudly, casting doubt on the credibility of a sitting minister who operates in an environment where criticism is not suppressed but openly expressed. Yet, when he himself occupied a position of authority—one that demanded courage, clarity, and accountability—his voice was conspicuously absent.

This is the contradiction that cannot be ignored.

Dr. Ismaila Ceesay represents a different trajectory—one of engagement, reform, and institutional openness. His transition from critic to policymaker reflects growth and responsibility, not betrayal. In contrast, Kujabi’s trajectory reflects a troubling shift from silence in times of repression to selective outrage in times of freedom.

The Gambian people deserve honest discourse, grounded in facts and consistent principles—not revisionist narratives shaped by convenience.

Before David Kujabi positions himself as a moral authority, he must first reckon with a simple and unavoidable question:

Where was his voice when citizens were detained, when journalists were silenced, and when families were desperately seeking answers?

Until that question is answered, his criticisms will continue to ring hollow—drowned out by the echoes of a silence that history will not forget.