Editorial: Darboe’s Dangerous Rhetoric and the Violence It Emboldens

The events that transpired at the United Democratic Party (UDP) meeting in New Yundum — where a female UDP supporter was assaulted, humiliated, and mobbed by her own party comrades — are not only disgraceful but symptomatic of a deeper rot within the political culture that some leaders continue to nurture.

On that very day, UDP leader Ousainou Darboe delivered a speech extolling women in the UDP for their so-called “fierce resistance” and “courageous fight,” framing the party’s legacy in the language of struggle, aggression, and combat. Instead of championing democratic values like dialogue, unity, and peaceful engagement, Mr. Darboe glorified a history of confrontation, implicitly validating violent behavior as a badge of loyalty.

His remarks, far from empowering women, have emboldened a factional, hostile environment where female militants now feel justified — even celebrated — for attacking their fellow citizens, including women within their own ranks. This is not bravery. This is not political engagement. This is thuggery dressed in yellow. The irony is glaring: while Mr. Darboe romanticized women “tightening their waists” to “rescue the country,” a loyal UDP woman was being dragged, beaten, and publicly shamed — not by her political opponents, but by UDP women at a UDP event, under the watch of UDP leadership.

This culture of glorified resistance and selective victimhood has devolved into something dangerous. One must now ask: is the United Democratic Party a platform for democratic ideals or a breeding ground for political hooliganism? Mr. Darboe cannot continue to bask in the glow of past struggles while turning a blind eye to the violence committed in his name. His silence on the attack is complicity. His praise of past aggression is incitement. We condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the violence committed by UDP women at the New Yundum meeting. And we hold Ousainou Darboe morally accountable for fostering an atmosphere where such acts are not only tolerated but seemingly encouraged. The Gambia deserves better. Our politics must be guided by respect, not retaliation — by principle, not provocation. Leaders who cannot rise above personal cults and partisan brutality are unfit to lead a nation striving for peace and progress.

Zero Tolerance for Corruption as Justice Ministry Staff Face Prosecution

By JarraNews Staff Writer President Adama Barrow has reaffirmed his government's commitment to accountability, declaring that no individual found culpable in commission of inquiry reports or audit findings will be shielded from justice. Sources close to JarraNews reveal that several cases investigated by the police and forwarded to the Attorney General’s Chambers are slated for prosecution, in what is seen as a strong message against corruption and the misuse of public funds. These impending legal actions aim to serve as a deterrent to public officials, civil servants, and others entrusted with managing state resources. In a major development underscoring the administration’s anti-corruption stance, three staff members of the Ministry of Justice have been formally charged in connection with alleged financial misconduct. The accused are Seedy Jammeh, Yusupha M. Cham, and Matarr Sylva—officials at the Intellectual Property Registry Office—who are alleged to have misappropriated over D14 million in public funds between 2018 and 2019. According to the bill of indictment filed by the State Law Office, the trio are facing six charges: conspiracy to defraud, theft, economic crime, forgery, official corruption, and abuse of office. Details of the Charges Count 1: Conspiracy to Defraud – The accused allegedly conspired to defraud the Government of The Gambia by issuing fraudulent receipts and misappropriating fees collected for trademark applications and renewals. Count 2: Theft – It is alleged that the trio dishonestly converted GMD 14,395,620 in public funds to their personal use. Count 3: Economic Crime – The accused reportedly engaged in willful financial misconduct, causing significant economic loss to the state. Count 4: Forgery – They are accused of falsifying IFMIS records to conceal the alleged embezzlement. Count 5: Official Corruption – Cham and Sylva, both public officers, allegedly received unlawful financial benefits by abusing their positions. Count 6: Abuse of Office – The same two defendants are charged with failing to adhere to financial procedures, leading to a substantial loss of public funds. All three defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges when they appeared before the High Court in Banjul. Bail Hearings and Court Rulings During the bail hearing, State Counsel M. Sarr did not oppose bail but requested stringent conditions to ensure the accused remain available for trial. Defence Counsel S. Sonko, representing the first and third accused, argued that his clients had complied with previous police bail terms. He urged the court to maintain similar conditions. Counsel L.J. Darboe, representing the second accused, called for fair and practical bail terms, stressing that bail is a constitutional right and should not be used as a punitive tool.

In his ruling, Justice Jaiteh acknowledged the presumption of innocence under Section 24(3)(a) of the 1997 Constitution and noted the state’s lack of objection to bail. He further emphasized that there was no evidence suggesting the accused posed a flight risk or had attempted to tamper with witnesses. Justice Jaiteh granted bail under the following conditions: Each accused must provide bail in the sum of D16 million, along with one Gambian surety. The surety must be the registered owner of landed property within The Gambia, with a verified value of at least D16 million. A certified estate valuer must appraise the property, and a valuation report submitted to the High Court Registrar within ten days. Original title deeds must be deposited with the court for safekeeping. The accused must attend all court proceedings unless formally excused. Justice Jaiteh warned that any breach of these conditions would result in automatic revocation of bail and the issuance of a bench warrant. This latest development marks a critical test of President Barrow’s pledge to uphold transparency and justice within the public service.