Selective Justice and Its Implications: Biases Within Civil Society Selective

Alagi Yorro Jallow Fatoumatta: Selective justice is one of the most contentious issues facing Gambian society, particularly in the post-Jammeh era. Justice systems—both transitional and institutional—are meant to be bastions of fairness and accountability. Yet, when justice is perceived as selective, it undermines trust and deepens societal divides. In The Gambia, the outcomes of the Truth, Reconciliation, and Reparations Commission (TRRC) have sometimes been viewed as biased. While the TRRC has successfully uncovered stories of oppression and facilitated justice for many, critics argue that certain individuals have evaded accountability due to their political connections. This threatens the integrity of the justice system, creating a hierarchy where the politically influential escape consequences that ordinary citizens cannot. The situation becomes even more troubling when individuals with links to oppressive regimes or questionable dealings are embraced by political factions. Such actions send a clear and disturbing message: justice is not blind; it is selective. To rebuild trust, we must have a justice system that is transparent, impartial, and insulated from political interference. Justice must be equitable for all Gambians, ensuring that reconciliation is grounded in fairness rather than exclusion. The challenge of selective justice and bias in Gambian society not only erodes trust but also jeopardizes national unity, particularly in terms of international representation.

Fatoumatta: It is disheartening that Gambians are often treated unequally regarding nominations and support for prestigious global positions. Instead, personal biases, political allegiances, and hypocrisy frequently overshadow principles of fairness and merit. A glaring example of this troubling pattern is the recent endorsement by the United Democratic Party (UDP) of Abubacarr Tambadou for the honorable position of Judge at the International Court of Justice, a moment celebrated as a national triumph. In stark contrast, the same enthusiasm was conspicuously absent when Dr. Mamadou Tangara, the country’s Foreign Minister, was nominated for the role of Secretary-General of the Commonwealth. Rather than rallying support, a wave of significant opposition emerged from certain political quarters, including UDP supporters, despite Dr. Tangara’s commendable record in promoting Gambian diplomacy. This raises a pressing question: why the inconsistency?

Ideally, civil society should function as a neutral advocate for equity, justice, and progress. However, when biases infiltrate this sphere, the capacity to hold political actors accountable diminishes, further weakening the democratic framework of the nation. In The Gambia, civil society organizations (CSOs) have been pivotal in championing human rights and good governance. Yet, their autonomy is often called into question due to perceived allegiance with political parties or individuals. Such biases erode the moral authority of CSOs, hindering their effectiveness in advocacy and mediation. Selective advocacy—where some issues receive attention while others are sidelined based on political or personal motives—significantly undermines public trust. A robust and unbiased civil society is essential for nurturing national dialogue, advocating for marginalized voices, and ensuring that leaders are held to account. To achieve this, CSOs must firmly commit to neutrality, inclusivity, and transparency, prioritizing the collective good over individual or partisan interests. The failure to adopt a new constitution serves as a stark illustration of how political self-interest can stall national progress. Fatoumatta: A new constitution was envisioned as a fresh start for The Gambia, embodying the principles of democracy, equality, and justice. Its rejection, however, has left many Gambians disillusioned, sowing deeper divisions within society. The rejected draft constitution was crafted to address pivotal issues—such as term limits, enhanced checks and balances, and robust protections for human rights. The rejection of this crucial document, influenced primarily by partisan interests, not only reflects a disinterest in national priorities but also underscores the challenges of uniting a fractured political landscape on matters that should unify the nation. Moving forward, the adoption of a new constitution must be treated as a national imperative. This undertaking requires authentic dialogue among all stakeholders, free from political gamesmanship. Gambians deserve a constitution that resonates with their aspirations, champions fairness, and establishes a solid foundation for sustainable governance. A Path Forward: To confront these interconnected challenges, The Gambia must embark on a collective journey of introspection and action. Reforming Justice Systems: We must create robust mechanisms to safeguard the justice system from political interference. This includes a thorough review of TRRC recommendations to ensure accountability and fairness for everyone. Strengthening Civil Society: It is crucial that civil society organizations uphold strict neutrality, diligently holding all political actors accountable. The time has come for a united commitment to justice, equity, and genuine democratic progress for all Gambians. Fatoumatta: The Gambia stands on the brink of transformation. By confronting the critical issues of selective justice, inherent biases, and the urgent need for a new constitution, the nation can embark on a path toward unity and prosperity. To realize the vision of inclusivity and progress that its people deserve, The Gambia must embrace fairness, transparency, and a steadfast commitment to national interests. Selective justice poses a significant threat to social equity in The Gambia, eroding the foundational principles of fairness, equality, and trust that are vital for a just society. Consider its far-reaching impacts: Selective justice undermines public confidence in the legal and judicial systems. When people perceive that certain groups or individuals receive preferential treatment based on political affiliations, social status, or connections, it breeds a profound sense of injustice. This disillusionment discourages citizens from seeking justice through legal channels, fostering a culture of impunity and deepening societal resentment. The inequitable application of justice exacerbates existing societal disparities. Marginalized groups often bear the brunt of selective justice, lacking the political power and resources to influence outcomes in their favor. This deepening of social inequities fuels divisions along class, ethnicity, and political lines, further fracturing the social fabric. Fatoumatta: In a politically polarized environment like The Gambia, selective justice heightens tensions and divisions within society. When justice appears to favor one group over another, it fosters mistrust and animosity between communities. This polarization not only undermines national unity but also hampers collective efforts to tackle shared challenges. In the context of transitional justice—especially with the ongoing work of The Gambia's Truth, Reconciliation, and Reparations Commission (TRRC)—selective justice can derail attempts at reconciliation. If certain individuals or groups are perceived as immune to accountability due to political biases, it compromises the legitimacy of reconciliation processes and further exacerbates wounds from past injustices. When citizens lose faith in justice due to perceptions of bias, they often disengage from civic life. This apathy can lead to lower voter turnout, diminished community involvement, and a pervasive sense of hopelessness regarding the potential for positive change. The economic ramifications of social inequity driven by selective justice are equally concerning. A culture in which corruption and nepotism thrive stifles investment and innovation while restricting opportunities for upward mobility. Access to justice and resources should not depend on connections but rather on merit. Furthermore, selective justice undermines the rule of law, creating a system in which laws are applied inconsistently. This not only weakens the foundation of governance but also cultivates the perception that the system serves the privileged few rather than the populace at large. Fatoumatta: To address these pressing challenges, The Gambia must prioritize comprehensive reforms that promote transparency, accountability, and impartiality within the justice system. By strengthening institutions, fostering a culture of meritocracy, and ensuring the judiciary is free from political influence, The Gambia can achieve social equity and restore vital public trust. The time for action is now—together, the nation can forge a brighter and more equitable future.