Rearrest After Acquittal: Understanding the Law Beyond Social Media Noise

By Yaya Dampha

There has been a wave of heated reactions across social media following the rearrest of Ousainou Bojang and his sister after their release from Mile Two Prison. Many young Gambians and so-called cyber warriors are portraying the development as unlawful or a violation of justice. However, a basic understanding of criminal law and police procedure tells a different story.

It is important to educate the public that an acquittal and discharge in a particular case does not automatically grant permanent immunity from arrest. Where investigators believe that new evidence exists, a different offence has been identified, or a fresh charge can be lawfully framed, the police are legally empowered to arrest the same suspect again and commence a new investigation or prosecution.

In many jurisdictions — including systems modeled after the common law tradition such as The Gambia’s legal system — it is not unusual for police officers to position themselves outside courtrooms or prison gates to rearrest released suspects. This practice may occur when investigators are pursuing separate charges, newly discovered evidence, or procedural corrections to earlier investigations.

Those familiar with policing understand that criminal investigations are dynamic. Evidence may emerge later, witnesses may become available, or investigators may reorganize a case to ensure a more diligent and legally sustainable prosecution. In such circumstances, the law allows the police to take suspects back into custody and initiate fresh proceedings.

This does not automatically mean persecution or abuse of power, nor does it mean that the suspect has been found guilty. It simply means that the criminal justice process is continuing under a different legal framework or evidentiary basis.

Gambian youths must therefore resist the temptation to turn every legal development into political propaganda or social media outrage. The rule of law functions through procedures, evidence, and due process — not through trending hashtags or street speculation.

The real test of justice will still occur in the courtroom, where the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and where the accused persons retain their full constitutional right to defend themselves.

Until then, the public should allow the legal process to unfold calmly and responsibly. In a democracy governed by law, courts determine guilt or innocence — not social media tribunals.

Farafenni General Hospital Dismisses Whatson Gambia's Ambulance Story As False

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

Farafenni, North Bank Region — The management of Farafenni General Hospital has dismissed as false reports circulating on social media suggesting that the hospital was unable to dispatch an ambulance to assist an alleged assault victim because the vehicle had been assigned to a presidential tour.

In a clarification issued on March 29, 2026, hospital authorities described the publication as misleading and inaccurate, stressing that none of the hospital’s ambulances were ever deployed for the presidential convoy.

According to the hospital management, presidential movements are always accompanied by ambulances from the State House, which operate independently and do not rely on ambulances stationed at public health facilities across the country.

The hospital further explained that the patient involved in the incident—who was reportedly assaulted in Farafenni—was escorted to the facility by the police and promptly received medical attention from clinicians on duty at the Accident and Emergency Unit.

Medical personnel immediately attended to the patient upon arrival, and hospital officials confirmed that she is currently in stable condition and receiving treatment.

The management reaffirmed its commitment to delivering quality healthcare services and maintaining the trust and confidence of the public.

“We remain committed to providing quality healthcare services at all times and value the trust and confidence the public places in us,” the hospital stated.

The clarification was issued by Mr. Sainey Dibba, Public Relations Officer of Farafenni General Hospital, who also urged members of the public and media outlets to verify information before publication to prevent the spread of misinformation that could undermine confidence in the country’s healthcare system.

Restoring Professionalism and Patriotism in The Gambia’s Justice System

By Yaya Dampha
NPP Diaspora Coordinator, Sweden

Nearly a decade after the political transition of 2017, Gambians continue to cherish the freedoms and democratic space that replaced the dark days of authoritarian rule. However, democracy does not merely thrive on freedom of expression and political pluralism. It equally depends on strong, disciplined and professional institutions — particularly the judiciary and the police force, which together form the backbone of law, order and justice.

Regrettably, the performance of the Gambia Police Force and significant segments of the Judicial Service since 2017 has raised serious concerns among citizens who expect a justice system that inspires confidence, professionalism and national pride.

Across the country, there is a growing perception that many criminal cases are poorly investigated from the very beginning. Arrests are sometimes carried out hastily, often without the level of evidence required to sustain a prosecution. Suspects are paraded, detained and sometimes publicly condemned, only for the cases to collapse in court because the investigations were weak or incomplete.

Such failures do not only waste public resources; they also erode public trust in the very institutions mandated to protect society.

Equally troubling is the lack of diligent prosecution in many cases that reach the courts. Prosecutors often appear unprepared, witnesses are poorly guided and inadequately briefed, and basic evidentiary standards are sometimes ignored. When witnesses take the stand, their testimonies frequently fall apart under cross-examination because the groundwork for a solid case was never properly laid.

Justice cannot be achieved when investigations are shallow and prosecutions are weak.

Another worrying trend is the unprofessional conduct displayed by some officers within the security and justice sector. The culture of leaking classified or sensitive information has become disturbingly common. Information meant strictly for official processes finds its way onto social media platforms or into the public domain through individuals who justify their actions under the banner of freedom of expression and democracy.

But democracy does not mean recklessness.

Freedom of expression should never be used as an excuse for breaching professional ethics, betraying institutional confidentiality or undermining ongoing investigations and judicial processes. When police officers or judicial staff compromise confidential information, they do not only damage specific cases — they weaken the entire justice system and betray the public trust placed in them.

At this critical moment, leadership and decisive action are required.

President Adama Barrow must take bold steps to restore professionalism, discipline and patriotism within both the police force and the judicial service. The time has come for what can metaphorically be described as the use of the “electric broom” — a firm and systematic effort to weed out unprofessional, incompetent and unpatriotic officials whose actions continue to tarnish the credibility of our justice institutions.

No government in the world can function effectively without a loyal, disciplined and professional police force. Likewise, no democracy can survive without a judiciary that commands respect, competence and independence.

Institutional reform must therefore go beyond rhetoric. It must include stronger internal accountability mechanisms, improved investigative training for police officers, better prosecutorial preparation, and strict enforcement of professional ethics within the judiciary and law enforcement agencies.

Furthermore, the government should not hesitate to strengthen the system through international collaboration. One practical step would be to invite experienced Commonwealth judges and prosecutors to work alongside our Gambian legal professionals. While many Gambian judges and lawyers possess solid academic qualifications, judicial experience accumulated over decades in more mature legal systems can provide valuable mentorship and institutional strengthening.

Such partnerships are not a sign of weakness; rather, they are a demonstration of a nation’s commitment to improving its institutions.

The Gambia is still building the foundations of a stronger democracy after years of institutional decay. That rebuilding process requires courage, honesty and the willingness to confront weaknesses within our own systems.

The police must investigate professionally. Prosecutors must prosecute diligently. Judges must adjudicate competently and independently. And above all, every official entrusted with public responsibility must place national interest above personal convenience or public popularity.

The Gambian people deserve a justice system that protects the innocent, punishes the guilty and operates with the highest standards of professionalism and patriotism.

Anything less undermines the very democracy we fought so hard to restore.

EDITORIAL Justice Must Not Be Reduced to Partisan Theatre

The acquittal and discharge of Ousainou Bojang and his sister by the High Court in connection with the tragic September 23, 2023 Sukuta–Jabang traffic lights shooting has once again exposed a deeply troubling pattern within our national discourse: the dangerous tendency to reduce serious criminal matters into partisan political contests.

Two officers of the Police Intervention Unit (PIU) were brutally killed while on active duty, and another officer sustained injuries. These were not mere statistics in a court record. They were sons, fathers, brothers, and public servants who wore the uniform and swore an oath to protect society.

The fundamental question confronting the nation should therefore be simple and solemn: Who killed these officers, and how will justice be served?

Yet in certain quarters, the public reaction has shifted away from this central question. What has instead emerged is an atmosphere of celebration—not necessarily because justice has been achieved, but because the accused persons have been freed.

Such a reaction should give every serious citizen pause.

The Legal Meaning of an Acquittal

In criminal law, an acquittal does not automatically establish factual innocence. It simply means that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the high evidentiary threshold required in criminal trials.

This standard exists to safeguard society against wrongful convictions and remains a cornerstone of modern justice systems. However, it also means that a failure of proof does not necessarily mean that a crime did not occur or that the real perpetrators are known.

Legal history across many jurisdictions offers numerous examples where innocent individuals were wrongfully convicted, while in other cases real perpetrators walked free because of weak investigations, flawed prosecutions, or procedural failures.

Such outcomes may arise from miscarriages of justice, poor evidence gathering, weak witness preparation, prosecutorial shortcomings, or the failure of investigators to strictly follow due process.

For that reason, the acquittal in this case should not be interpreted as a political victory for any group, nor should it be framed as a defeat for the State. It is simply a legal outcome arising from the evidentiary process within the justice system.

Justice Is Not a Political Contest

Unfortunately, sections of the political and activist space have chosen to frame the case as a trial of the State itself, rather than what it fundamentally was: a criminal case concerning the killing of two law enforcement officers.

Even more concerning is the conspicuous silence from many who claim the mantle of human rights advocacy when it comes to the victims of this tragedy.

Human rights advocacy must be universal and principled. It cannot selectively defend the rights of accused persons while ignoring the rights of victims and their grieving families. Justice demands balance.

The rule of law protects both the accused and the victims.

In this case, the accused were fully entitled to the protections of the law—the presumption of innocence, access to legal representation, and a fair trial based strictly on evidence presented before the court. These rights were respected.

However, the families of the fallen officers are equally entitled to truth, accountability, and justice. Their loss cannot be erased simply because a prosecution has failed to secure a conviction.

A Troubling Public Reaction

Equally disturbing is the tone of celebration seen on the streets and across social media following the acquittal.

In any mature democracy governed by the rule of law, the appropriate reaction to such a verdict should be sober reflection—not jubilation.

Two officers were killed in cold blood while carrying out their duties. When society celebrates the collapse of a murder prosecution without equal concern for the victims, it risks sending a dangerous message: that political allegiance matters more than justice.

No responsible society should travel that path.

Recognizing the Broader Democratic Context

While many on social media platforms are commending the defence lawyer Lamin J. Darboe for his legal performance in the case, it is equally important to acknowledge the broader democratic context that made such legal representation possible.

The government of President Adama Barrow deserves recognition for fostering an atmosphere that is legally conducive for lawyers—including those who once lived in exile—to return freely and defend accused persons in Gambian courts without fear or intimidation. The fact that a lawyer who once lived outside the country can appear in court, vigorously defend his client, and secure a favorable verdict speaks volumes about the current state of judicial independence and legal freedom in The Gambia.

Such realities stand in stark contrast to the era of dictatorship under Yahya Jammeh, when many lawyers, journalists, and activists were forced into exile simply for standing on the side of the law and justice.

The ability of defence counsel to operate freely, challenge the State’s case, and win in court is not a weakness of the system—it is evidence that the rule of law and judicial independence are taking root in post-dictatorship Gambia.

The Legal Process Is Not Over

It is important to emphasize that the legal process in this matter is not necessarily concluded.

The State retains the constitutional right to appeal, and the accused persons have been granted court bail pending any further legal proceedings. The appellate courts may now review critical legal issues arising from the judgment, including the evaluation of evidence and the interpretation of law.

This is how justice systems function. Courts correct potential errors through structured appellate processes—not through political outrage or celebratory street reactions.

The Question That Still Remains

Despite the verdict, one question continues to weigh heavily on the conscience of the nation:

Who killed the PIU officers?

Until that question is answered through credible investigation and lawful prosecution, justice remains incomplete.

The families of the slain officers deserve answers. The security services deserve accountability. And the Gambian people deserve the truth.

A Call for Sobriety and Responsibility

Recognizing the acquittal of Ousainou Bojang and his sister does not mean declaring them the killers. Nor does raising concerns about public celebrations amount to an attack on the judiciary.

Courts decide cases based solely on the evidence placed before them. When that evidence fails to meet the threshold required by law, acquittal is the only lawful outcome.

However, society must also acknowledge that legal outcomes can sometimes leave unresolved moral and investigative questions.

This case should therefore serve as a national reminder of the importance of professional investigations, diligent prosecution, proper witness preparation, and strict adherence to due process.

Without these foundations, justice—whether for the accused or the victims—can easily slip through the cracks.

Conclusion

The acquittal of the accused should not divide the nation along partisan lines. Instead, it should reinforce a fundamental principle that must guide any democratic society: the rule of law must prevail, and justice must ultimately be done.

Two police officers lost their lives while serving the public. Their memory deserves solemn reflection, not political theatre.

As the legal process continues, the nation must remain committed to the pursuit of truth, accountability, and justice.

For while justice delayed may be painful, justice abandoned is far worse.

GRA CHAMPIONS AFRICAN TAX SOVEREIGNTY AT WAUTI CONFERENCE IN SENEGAL

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

The Commissioner General of the Gambia Revenue Authority (GRA), Mr. Yankuba Darboe, has led a high-level Gambian delegation to the 12th Annual Conference of the West African Union of Tax Institutes (WAUTI) held in Mbour, Senegal, where regional leaders gathered to chart a stronger and more independent fiscal future for West Africa.

The Gambian delegation included Mr. Essa Jallow, Deputy Commissioner General and Head of Domestic Taxes; Mr. Yahya Manneh, Director of the Technical Services Department; Mr. Ebrima Sallah, Deputy Director of Legal; Mrs. Mariama Jobe, Senior Tax Officer and Country Representative of the Society of Women in Taxation (SWIT) Gambia Chapter; and Mr. Malayn Sanneh, Communication Sub-Officer II, alongside other supporting officials.

Speaking on behalf of the Gambia Revenue Authority and the Government of the Republic of The Gambia, Commissioner General Darboe delivered a powerful goodwill message highlighting the growing urgency for African nations to strengthen their tax systems and reclaim economic independence.

He commended WAUTI for sustaining an important regional platform that continues to bring together tax administrators, policymakers, academics, and financial experts to shape the fiscal destiny of West Africa.

“For twelve consecutive conferences, WAUTI has remained a beacon of professional collaboration and intellectual exchange,” Darboe noted. “Its consistency demonstrates vision, resilience, and an unwavering commitment to strengthening taxation across the region.”

This year’s conference was held under the theme “Taxation and Economic Sovereignty in West Africa: Harmonizing Fiscal Autonomy for Inclusive Growth.” According to Darboe, the theme resonates strongly with the realities facing African economies today.

He stressed that true economic sovereignty can only be achieved when nations finance their development through reliable domestic resources, rather than excessive dependence on external aid.

“Taxation is the most legitimate and sustainable tool available to governments,” he said. “It strengthens accountability between the state and its citizens and reinforces the social contract that underpins national development.”

The Commissioner General warned that many African countries are now confronting growing development challenges amid declining donor support, often described as “donor fatigue,” as the global economic environment becomes increasingly uncertain.

He further pointed to the alarming debt burden facing many African economies, noting that in some countries up to 60 percent of government revenue is consumed by debt servicing, leaving limited resources for vital sectors such as health, education, infrastructure, and social development.

Darboe therefore called on African governments to embrace home-grown solutions and strengthen domestic institutions, emphasizing that sustainable development cannot be outsourced.

“Our development must be driven by resilient economies, strong institutions, and efficient tax systems,” he stressed. “Africa must look inward and build the financial foundations necessary for its own progress.”

He also underscored the importance of regional cooperation, knowledge sharing, and continuous professional development among tax administrations in order to improve compliance, enhance transparency, and strengthen domestic resource mobilization across West Africa.

Beyond institutional reforms, Darboe urged a shift in public perception regarding taxation. Rather than viewing taxes merely as a burden, he said they should be seen as a collective investment in nation-building.

“When taxes are properly managed,” he explained, “they translate into roads that connect communities, hospitals that save lives, schools that educate future generations, and infrastructure that powers economic growth.”

The WAUTI conference brought together delegates from The Gambia, Senegal, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Ghana, Mali, Niger, Côte d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, and Liberia, reinforcing the growing determination among West African nations to build stronger and more self-reliant fiscal systems.

For The Gambia, participation in the conference underscores the GRA’s continued commitment to modernizing tax administration, strengthening regional cooperation, and advancing Africa’s economic sovereignty through effective domestic revenue mobilization.

Who Gave Baba Galleh Jallow the Moral Authority to Lecture the Nation?

By Yaya Dampha

NPP Diaspora Coordinator, Sweden

The recent article by Dr. Baba Galleh Jallow, written under the banner of the so-called Never Again Network, opposing President Adama Barrow’s potential third-term bid, is not only intellectually shallow but legally unsustainable and morally hypocritical.

Before Dr. Jallow attempts to posture as the national conscience on matters of democracy and constitutionalism, he owes the Gambian people a clear explanation for the deeply troubling legacy he left behind at the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC)—an institution he served as Executive Secretary.

The fundamental question therefore arises: who is Baba Galleh Jallow to lecture the Gambian people about democracy when the very institution he administered left many genuine victims unrecognized while elevating questionable testimonies to official status?

The Constitution, Not Baba Galleh Jallow, Determines Presidential Terms

Let us begin with the law.

The 1997 Constitution of the Republic of The Gambia, which remains the supreme law of the land under Section 4, clearly provides that the presidency is determined through democratic elections every five years.

There is no constitutional provision limiting a president to two terms in the current constitution.

Therefore, President Adama Barrow seeking another term—whether a third or otherwise—is not unconstitutional. It is simply a democratic right that must be decided by the Gambian electorate at the ballot box.

Dr. Jallow’s argument is therefore a political opinion disguised as constitutional authority.

In any genuine democracy, the decision does not belong to activists, networks, commentators, or former TRRC officials—it belongs to the sovereign will of the Gambian people.

Coalition Agreements Are Not Constitutional Law

Dr. Jallow’s argument about the 2016 coalition agreement is equally flawed.

While the coalition may have politically proposed a three-year transition, the reality remains that political agreements do not override constitutional law.

Once President Barrow was elected under the 1997 Constitution, his mandate became a five-year constitutional term, just like every other president elected under that same constitution.

No coalition document signed among political actors can supersede the legal authority of the constitution. To argue otherwise is to promote constitutional confusion dressed up as moral outrage.

The Hypocrisy of “Never Again”

The phrase Never Again should carry profound moral weight in The Gambia. It symbolizes a collective commitment to justice for victims of past abuses.

Yet under the leadership of Baba Galleh Jallow’s Secretariat, the TRRC produced outcomes that many victims consider deeply discriminatory and profoundly unjust.

One must therefore ask: how did the Commission determine who qualifies as a victim?

Why were individuals with clear historical records of arrest, torture, persecution and forced exile excluded from recognition?

Why was Musa Saidykhan—an internationally recognized torture survivor—excluded from the official list of victims?

Why were victims like myself, Yaya Dampha, and the family of the late Almamo Manneh, who was extrajudicially executed, not recognized by the Commission?

If we were not victims, why were we invited to testify before the TRRC?

Our testimonies are on record. The historical facts are documented.

Almamo Manneh was extrajudicially executed, just as Harouna Jammeh was.

Musa Saidykhan was tortured and permanently maimed, just as Bunja Darboe was.

Yet the TRRC under Baba Galleh Jallow’s Secretariat segregated victims—recognizing some while ignoring others.

Meanwhile, individuals whose testimonies raised serious credibility questions somehow found themselves included in the official reparations framework.

This raises troubling questions about transparency, methodology and integrity in the Commission’s victim determination process.

Accountability Must Begin with the TRRC Leadership

Before Baba Galleh Jallow lectures the nation about safeguarding democracy, he should first explain to the Gambian people:

What criteria did the TRRC use to determine who qualifies as a victim?

Who made the final determinations within the Secretariat?

Why were legitimate victims excluded from recognition?

Why were questionable testimonies accepted without sufficient scrutiny?

These are legitimate questions that deserve clear and honest answers.

Victims of the Jammeh era deserve justice—not selective recognition or administrative indifference.

The Convenient Return of Political Activism

It is also remarkable that some of the loudest voices today were silent when they held real institutional authority.

During their tenure at the TRRC, they possessed enormous power to ensure fairness, transparency and justice.

Instead, many used that platform to enhance international reputations, secure prestigious global engagements, and build impressive professional résumés before quietly moving on to greener pastures.

Now that some of those contracts and international engagements appear to be winding down, they suddenly reappear as political activists offering lectures on democracy.

The Gambian people are neither naïve nor forgetful.

They recognize opportunism when they see it.

Democracy Belongs to the Gambian People

Whether President Adama Barrow chooses to contest another election is not the decision of Baba Galleh Jallow.

It is not the decision of the Never Again Network.

And it is certainly not the decision of commentators seeking renewed political relevance.

It is a decision that belongs solely to the Gambian people through democratic elections.

That is the essence of democracy.

If Gambians believe President Barrow deserves another mandate, they will vote for him.

If they believe otherwise, they will vote him out.

That choice belongs to the electorate—not to self-appointed guardians of political morality.

The Real Betrayal

The real betrayal of the victims of the Jammeh era is not a presidential election.

The real betrayal would be a transitional justice process that failed to recognize all victims fairly and equally.

Until Baba Galleh Jallow confronts that moral failure and explains the inconsistencies of the TRRC’s victim recognition process, he lacks the credibility to lecture the nation on democracy and constitutionalism.

Those who presided over such a flawed process should approach the national conversation with humility rather than arrogance.

The Gambian people deserve honesty, fairness and accountability—not selective outrage and revisionist activism.

Democracy belongs to the people, not to self-appointed custodians of political virtue.

REJOINDER: HISTORY IS NOT YOURS TO EDIT, MADI JOBARTEH

Why the truth of the 2002–2004 media struggle must not be rewritten

By Alagi Yorro Jallow

In public discourse, disagreement is expected. What is not acceptable, however, is the deliberate distortion of verifiable facts in an attempt to recast history. Madi Jobarteh’s recent article in The Alkamba Times, purporting to revisit the 2002–2004 National Media Commission (NMC) struggle, falls squarely into that troubling category.

His account is not merely flawed—it is revisionist.

At the heart of this matter lies a simple, indisputable truth: the legal challenge against the NMC Act is a matter of public record. In Gambia Press Union & Others v. National Media Commission & Another (Civil Suit No. 5/2005), the Supreme Court of The Gambia clearly identified the plaintiffs who stood against the law. These included the Gambia Press Union (GPU), Deyda Hydara, Alagi Yorro Jallow, Demba Ali Jawo, and Swaebou Conateh.

This is not opinion. It is fact—documented, archived, and accessible.

Yet, in his attempt to reconstruct this pivotal moment in Gambian media history, Madi Jobarteh conspicuously omits my name while introducing individuals who were not party to the case. Such a departure from the record cannot be dismissed as oversight. It raises serious questions about intent and credibility.

Let us be clear: the constitutional challenge to the NMC Act was not a symbolic exercise. It was a defining confrontation with state power at a time when dissent carried real risks. The individuals named in the court filings were not commentators or retrospective analysts; they were active participants in a legal battle that helped shape press freedom in The Gambia.

To substitute or omit names from that record is to alter history itself.

It must also be stated that those referenced by Jobarteh—respected as they may be in their own right—were not plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case. They neither signed the legal petition nor stood before the court in that action. To suggest otherwise is to mislead the public and undermine the integrity of the historical record.

This discussion is not about personal differences. It is about preserving truth in a space where accuracy matters. The history of the NMC struggle is too important to be reduced to selective storytelling or retrospective positioning.

Indeed, Jobarteh is correct in one respect: contemporary legislative proposals echo troubling aspects of past regulatory overreach, now extending into the digital sphere. That is a conversation worth having. But any meaningful critique of present challenges must be grounded in factual integrity. One cannot defend democracy by distorting history.

If we are to invoke the legacy of figures such as Deyda Hydara, we must do so with honesty. The principles he stood for—truth, accountability, and courage—demand nothing less.

The struggle against the NMC Act was not fought in comfort or hindsight. It was waged in a climate of fear and uncertainty, where taking a stand came with consequences. Those who participated did so at personal and professional risk. That reality must not be diluted.

History does not belong to any one individual to edit or reinterpret at will. It is a collective record, anchored in evidence. Court documents do not shift with narratives, and facts do not yield to preference.

In the final analysis, attempts to rewrite this chapter of Gambian history say more about the reviser than the events themselves. The record remains intact. The names are documented. And the truth endures.

No amount of revisionism can alter that.

STATE-LED SKILLS DRIVE IGNITES NEW HOPE FOR PWDs NATIONWIDE

By Madi S. Njie

In a bold demonstration of its unwavering commitment to inclusive development, the Government of The Gambia, through the National Advisory Council for Persons with Disabilities (NACPWD) and the Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Welfare, has successfully delivered a transformative nationwide training programme aimed at economically empowering Persons with Disabilities (PWDs).

Held from 16th to 18th March 2026, the intensive three-day initiative is being hailed as a landmark intervention designed to unlock the potential of PWDs by equipping them with practical skills in entrepreneurship, digital innovation, and vocational development—key pillars of the country’s broader development agenda.

The programme commenced at the GOVI Resource Centre in Kanifing, where participants from Organisations of Persons with Disabilities (OPDs) under the Gambia Federation of the Disabled converged in large numbers, reflecting growing confidence in government-led empowerment initiatives. The momentum continued across the regions, culminating in a major provincial convergence at the Mansakonko Area Council, drawing participants from Lower River, North Bank, Central River, and Upper River Regions.

This strategic rollout underscores the government’s firm resolve to ensure that no Gambian is left behind. It directly advances the implementation of the Persons with Disabilities Act 2021, while reinforcing The Gambia’s standing commitment to global standards under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

Officials described the initiative as a game-changer in shifting PWDs from dependency to productivity. Speaking at the opening, Principal Social Welfare Officer Mr. Modou Suwareh emphasized that true independence can only be achieved when individuals are empowered with relevant, market-driven skills.

“Skills development is the cornerstone of dignity and self-reliance,” he declared, urging participants to seize the opportunity as a stepping stone to economic freedom.

Chairman of NACPWD, His Worship Muhammed Krubally, reinforced the government’s inclusive vision, stressing that equality and non-discrimination are no longer aspirations but actionable realities under the current leadership. He noted that empowering PWDs is central to building a resilient and equitable society.

“We are determined to see persons with disabilities rise as creators of wealth and drivers of national progress,” he affirmed.

Director of Social Welfare, Mr. Alaye Barra, acknowledged longstanding structural challenges but pointed to innovation and technology as powerful tools now being leveraged to bridge those gaps. He highlighted that digital skills, combined with entrepreneurship, are opening new frontiers for PWDs to compete and thrive in today’s economy.

Adding further weight to the initiative, Deputy Permanent Secretary Mr. Delo Bah described the training as a “defining milestone” in the government’s social inclusion agenda. He reiterated that empowering PWDs is not just a social responsibility but a strategic investment in national development.

“By providing practical tools and knowledge, we are enabling active participation in the economy and strengthening the country’s human capital base,” he stated.

The training sessions—facilitated by seasoned experts including Ms. Jobe, Alex Pratt, and Mr. Abdoulie Demba Bah—covered critical areas such as business management, digital marketing, and enterprise development. Participants also received assurances of continued mentorship, including free advisory support for business registration—further solidifying the programme’s long-term impact.

Across all regions, participants expressed renewed optimism, describing the initiative as life-changing. Many indicated readiness to launch or expand their businesses, signaling a shift toward self-reliance and economic independence.

Stakeholders have since called for sustained investment in disability inclusion, particularly in enhancing access to digital platforms, assistive technologies, and startup financing. They also emphasized the importance of forming cooperative structures to strengthen collaboration and ensure long-term growth.

This landmark initiative stands as clear evidence of a government not only listening but delivering—creating real opportunities, restoring dignity, and empowering every citizen to contribute meaningfully to national development.

Indeed, The Gambia is steadily advancing toward a future where inclusion is not a privilege, but a guaranteed right for all.

Another Major Endorsement: Jarra News Echoes My Call for Media Reform.

By Alagi Yorro Jallow 

 I am humbled to see Jarra News join the growing national conversation sparked by my recent commentary on the state of journalism in The Gambia. Their detailed analysis affirms what many of us have been warning for years: the crisis in Gambian journalism is internal before it is external.

Jarra News highlights critical issues that can no longer be ignored: the collapse of standards, the rise of untrained voices, the politicization of newsrooms, the erosion of ethics, and the dangerous normalization of defamation and misinformation. Their conclusion is clear and uncompromising: reform is no longer optional; it is necessary for the survival of the profession.

This endorsement follows the earlier editorial support from the Daily Observer, signaling a broader awakening within the media landscape. The message from both institutions is unmistakable:

Accreditation, professionalism, and ethical discipline are essential if journalism is to reclaim its dignity and public trust.

 welcome this growing alignment and hope it inspires deeper reflection, honest dialogue, and meaningful reform across the sector. The future of our democracy depends on a credible, responsible, and principled Fourth Estate. The unified essay, The Rain That Beat Us: A Manifesto for Redeeming Gambia’s Fourth Estate, is now available for publication and public engagement.

DEFENDING THE CRAFT: WHY PROFESSIONALIZATION OF GAMBIAN JOURNALISM CANNOT WAIT

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

The commentary by Alagi Yorro Jallow is not just timely—it is a necessary intervention in a profession that is rapidly losing its soul. What we are witnessing in The Gambia today is not merely a debate over accreditation; it is a full-blown collapse of standards, discipline, and identity within journalism.

1. The Collapse of Standards Is Real, Not Imagined

There is no denying it: journalism in The Gambia has shifted from a disciplined profession to an open marketplace where anyone with a smartphone claims authority. The absence of editorial control, fact-checking, and ethical restraint has turned many platforms into channels of confusion rather than sources of truth. This is not press freedom—it is professional decay.

2. Journalism Has Been Hijacked by Activism and Partisanship

The line between journalism and political activism has not just blurred—it has disappeared. Many who present themselves as journalists are openly aligned with political interests, acting as spokespersons rather than watchdogs. When journalists become political griots, public trust inevitably collapses.

3. Former Guardians of the Profession Have Abandoned It

It is deeply troubling that individuals who once led the Gambia Press Union now contribute to the very decline they should resist. Instead of defending standards, some have embraced propaganda, partisanship, and sensationalism. This moral inconsistency weakens their credibility in opposing reforms like accreditation.

4. Untrained Individuals Are Dominating the Media Space

A dangerous trend has emerged where comedians, entertainers, and social media influencers now occupy spaces meant for trained journalists. Without knowledge of media law, ethics, or verification, they produce content that misleads, defames, and inflames. Journalism is a discipline—not a hobby or a side hustle.

5. Social Media Has Become a Lawless Newsroom

Facebook “journalists” now publish anything—from private conversations to abusive audio recordings—without consent, context, or verification. The rights to privacy and dignity are routinely violated in the name of “breaking news.” This is not journalism; it is digital vigilantism.

6. Defamation and Character Assassination Are Becoming Normalized

The reckless publication of insults, especially targeting families and parents, reflects a dangerous erosion of ethics. Freedom of expression does not include the freedom to defame, insult, or destroy reputations without accountability. A profession that tolerates this loses its moral authority.

7. Absence of Regulation Has Turned Journalism into a “Dustbin Profession”

Without standards or entry requirements, journalism has become a dumping ground for individuals rejected by other professions. This lack of structure invites mediocrity and drives away serious practitioners who once upheld the dignity of the field.

8. Accreditation Is a Necessary Filter, Not a Political Weapon

As rightly argued by Alagi Yorro Jallow, accreditation is a global norm. It does not silence journalists; it distinguishes professionals from opportunists. It ensures that those who inform the public are trained, accountable, and ethically grounded.

9. Public Trust in the Media Is Rapidly Eroding

When misinformation, bias, and unverified claims dominate headlines, the public loses confidence in all media—both credible and non-credible. This erosion of trust is dangerous for democracy, as citizens can no longer distinguish fact from propaganda. 

10. Government Regulation Is Now Inevitable and Necessary

Given the current chaos, government intervention—if properly structured—is no longer optional. Regulation must not be confused with repression. Instead, it should

Establish minimum standards for practice

Enforce ethical codes

Protect citizens from defamation and privacy violations

Restore credibility to the profession.

Without such frameworks, the media space will continue to deteriorate into an uncontrollable информационный battlefield.

11. Freedom Without Responsibility Is Anarchy

Press freedom was fought for with sacrifice, including the ultimate price paid by Deyda Hydara. To misuse that freedom today through recklessness and indiscipline is a betrayal of that legacy. Freedom must be matched with responsibility, or it becomes self-destructive.

12. The Silence on Past Reform Failures Is Hypocrisy

It is valid to question why past reform efforts—such as those linked to Ndey Tapha Sosseh—were never implemented or defended. Those who ignored reform yesterday cannot convincingly oppose professionalization today.

13. Editors and Newsrooms Have Failed Their Gatekeeping Role

The disappearance of strong editorial oversight has allowed misinformation to flourish. A newsroom without standards is not a newsroom—it is a rumor distribution center. Editors must reclaim their role as custodians of truth.

14. Professional Journalism Requires Training and Discipline

Journalism is not defined by access to a microphone or camera. It requires mastery of language, understanding of context, commitment to verification, and respect for ethics. Without these, what exists is not journalism but noise.

Conclusion: Reform or Ruin.

The position advanced by Alagi Yorro Jallow is clear and justified: the crisis in Gambian journalism is internal before it is external. The profession is collapsing under the weight of indiscipline, politicization, and neglect.

The choice before The Gambia is stark: either restore standards through professionalization and accreditation, or allow journalism to disintegrate into irrelevance and public distrust.

This is not about silencing voices. It is about saving a profession that has lost its direction. The time for denial has passed. The time for reform is now.

Driving Justice Forward: Government Coordinates Nationwide Push to Implement TRRC Reforms

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

The Government of The Gambia has intensified efforts to translate the recommendations of the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) into concrete reforms, with a coordinated approach that now spans dozens of public institutions.

Ida Persson, Special Adviser on Transitional Justice and head of the Post-TRRC Unit at the Ministry of Justice, revealed that the implementation process is being carried out in collaboration with 59 institutions across the country. Her remarks came during a recent interview with investigative journalist Mustapha K. Darboe, where she shed light on the scale and complexity of the ongoing reform agenda.

According to Persson, her office plays a dual role—providing high-level strategic advice to the Minister of Justice while also steering the operational coordination of post-TRRC activities. She emphasized that beyond government structures, civil society actors remain key stakeholders in shaping public discourse and sustaining momentum around the reforms.

At the core of the initiative is a structured implementation plan managed by a dedicated team tasked with ensuring that responsible institutions are equipped with the financial and technical resources required to deliver. This includes mobilising funding through grants and fostering partnerships to maintain steady progress.

The reform agenda itself is extensive. It is anchored on critical pillars such as reparations for victims, justice and accountability mechanisms, institutional restructuring, legislative changes, and the promotion of national unity. In total, the plan encompasses 39 distinct activities and proposes reforms to more than 22 pieces of legislation.

Persson further disclosed that plans are underway to establish a Special Prosecutor’s Office to handle cases related to international crimes committed under the former regime. She noted that while an international tribunal could cost up to $16 million, pursuing domestic prosecutions presents a more viable option at an estimated cost of $2.5 million—offering a pragmatic pathway toward justice.

As implementation efforts gather pace, the government’s approach signals a determined shift from recommendations to action, with stakeholders across sectors expected to play a role in shaping a more accountable and just society.

Binta Jallow Nabbed in Drug Smuggling Attempts at Mile 2 Prison

By JarranewsTV Staff Reporter

Authorities have raised alarm over a growing trend of individuals attempting to smuggle prohibited substances into the Mile 2 Central Prison under the pretext of delivering food to inmates.

In recent weeks, security officials have intercepted multiple cases involving concealed drugs. Notably, a young man from the Yundum area was apprehended after allegedly attempting to sneak a prohibited substance locally known as “kush,” hidden inside packets of instant noodles.

In a similar development, on Monday, 16 March 2026, prison authorities arrested Miss Binta Jallow, a resident of Brikama Newtown, for allegedly attempting to smuggle drugs into the facility. According to officials, the suspect had visited the prison to deliver food to a remand prisoner when a routine security screening uncovered a plastic bag containing suspected cannabis and pills concealed inside a food bowl.

She was immediately detained and subsequently handed over to the Drug Law Enforcement Agency, The Gambia (DLEAG), for further investigation and possible prosecution in accordance with national drug laws.

Prison authorities, working in close collaboration with DLEAG, have reaffirmed their commitment to maintaining strict security measures and ensuring that correctional facilities remain free from illegal substances. They have issued a stern warning to the public that any attempt to smuggle contraband into prisons constitutes a serious criminal offence and will be dealt with decisively.

Editorial Note: A Call to Youths

The increasing involvement of young people in drug smuggling and trafficking is deeply troubling. What may appear to be a quick way to make money or assist acquaintances is, in reality, a dangerous path that leads to arrest, prosecution, and long-term consequences that can permanently damage one’s future.

Young people must understand that engaging in drug-related activities—whether as users, couriers, or dealers—comes with severe legal and social repercussions. It is not worth sacrificing your freedom, reputation, and opportunities for short-term gains.

Jarranews urge youths across the country to resist peer pressure, avoid criminal networks, and channel their energy into productive and lawful ventures. The fight against drug abuse and trafficking is a collective responsibility, and the future of the nation depends on the choices its young people make today.

Say no to drugs. Choose a better path.

Exposed in Broad Daylight: How Fatoumatta Jallow Tambajang’s False Claims Collapsed Under Facts and Accountability

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator

Alagi Yorro Jallow’s recent commentary stands as a timely and necessary intervention in a political climate increasingly threatened by misinformation and reckless public discourse. His analysis does not merely challenge a claim—it exposes a dangerous pattern that undermines democratic integrity and public trust.

The allegations made by former Vice President Fatoumatta Jallow Tambajang regarding the supposed diversion of European Union funds to the National People’s Party (NPP) were not only unverified but demonstrably false. As clearly outlined in Jallow’s fact-based critique, these claims lacked evidence, documentation, and any attempt at verification through established channels such as the Freedom of Information framework. In a democracy, such conduct is not just irresponsible—it is deeply damaging.

Both the NPP and the European Union swiftly and categorically refuted these allegations. The EU clarified its institutional position: it engages exclusively with the Government of The Gambia, not political parties. The funds referenced by Tambajang were not EU disbursements but voluntary contributions from supporters. Yet, despite these clarifications, the misinformation had already circulated widely, illustrating how quickly falsehood can distort public perception before truth catches up.

At a time when the nation requires sober reflection and responsible leadership, it is troubling that a figure of such seniority would choose speculation over facts. Fatoumatta Jallow Tambajang, with her vast political experience and generational influence, carries a responsibility not only to her peers but also to her children, grandchildren, and the wider Gambian society. Public trust is not a tool to be manipulated—it is a duty to be preserved.

Contrary to her claims, the NPP’s funding model is transparent and rooted in grassroots mobilization. The party relies heavily on membership dues, diaspora engagement, and voluntary contributions from supporters. On November 4th in Bañola, Spain, NPP diaspora groups organized a fundraising event that raised an impressive 24 million dalasis in a single day. Additional initiatives within The Gambia generated over 6 million dalasis, complemented by efforts from the party’s central committee. These are verifiable, people-driven contributions—not the product of any misappropriated international funds.

What makes this episode particularly concerning is its resemblance to past political behavior that Gambians have already rejected. The use of emotional rhetoric, religious overtones, and unverified claims to shape public opinion is not new. It is a strategy that has previously eroded trust and credibility in governance. The re-emergence of such tactics only reinforces the urgency of demanding higher standards in public discourse.

Alagi Yorro Jallow’s article methodically dismantles Tambajang’s assertions, exposing not only their inaccuracy but also the broader implications of such “shenanigans behavior” in our politics. When influential figures present conjecture as fact, they do more than misinform—they weaken the very institutions that sustain democracy.

This moment must serve as a turning point. Politicians must verify before they speak. Journalists must rigorously fact-check before they publish. Citizens must engage critically with the information they consume. Truth must not be optional; it must be foundational.

Fatoumatta Jallow Tambajang’s claims have been tested against facts—and they have failed. What remains is a clear lesson: misinformation may travel fast, but truth, when pursued with diligence and courage, will always prevail.

The Gambian people deserve leadership grounded in honesty, accountability, and respect for truth. Anything less is a disservice to the nation and a threat to its democratic future.

Hypocrisy, Habitual Negativity, and the Politics of Opposition for Opposition’s Sake

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator

The reaction of some supporters of the United Democratic Party to the government’s purchase of a modern state-of-the-art ferry is yet another embarrassing display of political hypocrisy and blind opposition.

For years these same voices have screamed that the ferries serving the Banjul–Barra Ferry Crossing are old, unreliable, and constantly breaking down. Every mechanical fault was turned into propaganda against the government. Every delay was framed as proof of incompetence.

Now that President Adama Barrow has taken the practical step of acquiring a modern ferry capable of carrying 800 passengers and multiple trucks, the same critics are suddenly outraged.

So which is it?

Were the ferries too old and unreliable, or should the government refuse to modernize them?

This is not criticism. It is pure political bad faith.

1. The Ferry Hypocrisy

UDP supporters complained relentlessly that ferries were outdated and unsafe.

Now that the government invests in a modern replacement, they complain again.

If government does nothing — they complain.

If government solves the problem — they complain louder.

That is not accountability; that is politics of sabotage.

2. The Electricity Hypocrisy

When rural electrification projects began under President Barrow, the same critics said:

“Those poles will never see electricity.”

But when electricity finally reached those communities, the narrative suddenly changed to:

“Those people are hungry; they need food more than electricity.”

So the question is simple:

Are rural Gambians not entitled to electricity and development?

Electricity powers schools, clinics, businesses, refrigeration, irrigation, and communication. Only those who have never experienced development planning would pretend otherwise.

3. The Road Development Hypocrisy.

When highways and rural roads are constructed, the UDP chorus repeats the same tired slogan:

 “Are we going to eat roads?”

This is perhaps the most economically illiterate argument in modern Gambian politics.

Roads are the arteries of development. They allow farmers to move crops to markets, traders to move goods, ambulances to reach hospitals, and businesses to expand into rural areas. Without roads, there is no commerce, no tourism expansion, and no regional trade.

Anyone who claims development should happen without roads clearly does not understand development.

4. Opposition That Opposes Everything

At this point, one must agree with a friend who once said:

 "It is dangerous for a political party to remain in opposition for too long"

The United Democratic Party has become so accustomed to opposing that it now opposes everything — even progress.

This is the same party that, while part of the coalition government from 2017 to 2019, organized protest marches against its own leadership. Imagine that level of confusion — protesting a government you are part of.

That is not responsible politics. That is political addiction to chaos.

5. The Bridge Argument Is Another False Narrative

Now they claim that because President Adama Barrow promised to build a bridge across the Banjul–Barra Ferry Crossing, he should not buy a ferry.

This argument ignores the basic reality of governance.

Major infrastructure projects take years of planning, financing, and construction. Governments must manage short-term needs while preparing long-term solutions.

The same logic applied to the Senegambia Bridge at Yelitenda–Bambatenda.

The idea of that bridge was first declared more than forty years ago by former president Dawda Kairaba Jawara. Yet it remained unfulfilled through his administration and for 22 years under Yahya Jammeh.

It was President Adama Barrow who finally delivered it.

That is the difference between talking about development and actually implementing it.

6. Development Requires Planning, Not Noise

Governments plan for the future through short-term, medium-term, and long-term strategies. Buying a ferry to solve immediate transport challenges does not contradict the vision of building a bridge.

Only those who deliberately refuse to understand governance would pretend otherwise.

Conclusion

At this stage, the pattern is obvious.

When development is proposed — the UDP attacks it.

When development begins — the UDP mocks it.

When development succeeds — the UDP changes the argument.

This endless negativity does not help Gambians. It only exposes a political culture that has become so obsessed with opposing President Barrow that it now opposes progress itself.

Gambia deserves constructive criticism, not reflex opposition driven by bitterness and political desperation.

Rebuttal to the UDP West Coast Region Chairman

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator – Sweden

The statement coming from the United Democratic Party (UDP) West Coast Region Chairman is nothing more than a desperate attempt to manufacture fear and suspicion ahead of the December elections. What we are witnessing is a classic political strategy: when a party begins to sense the possibility of defeat, it starts laying the groundwork to question the credibility of the very democratic processes it once benefited from.

First and foremost, it is important to remind the Gambian public that since 2017, the political environment in The Gambia has become more open, tolerant, and accommodating than at any other time in our history. Opposition parties, including the UDP, operate freely across the country. They hold rallies, organise meetings, and campaign openly without the intimidation and repression that once defined our political landscape. Security forces now provide protection to all political parties equally during campaigns and public gatherings. Therefore, the suggestion that the electoral playing field is somehow tilted against the opposition is simply not supported by the facts.

Secondly, the UDP’s sudden concern about “inflammatory speech” is deeply ironic. Anyone who follows Gambian politics knows that UDP supporters and activists are among the most aggressive voices on social media and political platforms. Daily insults directed at political opponents and even their parents have become a regrettable norm in some of their online spaces. In many cases, their supporters have even been involved in physical confrontations with political opponents on the streets. For such a party to now pretend to be the guardian of civil political discourse is nothing short of a mockery.

Thirdly, the voter registration process in The Gambia is governed by clear legal procedures under the electoral laws. If anyone believes that a particular individual has fraudulently obtained a voter’s card, the law provides a clear and legitimate path: raise the objection at the revising court and present evidence. The burden of proof lies with the accuser. It is not enough to stand outside registration centres and intimidate citizens by labeling them “foreigners” without evidence. Such behaviour undermines the rights and dignity of Gambian citizens and only creates unnecessary tension in communities.

Furthermore, the Gambian electoral system remains one of the most transparent in the region. From the campaign period to the actual voting process, counting of ballots, and announcement of results, every stage is monitored by party agents representing all contesting political parties. National and international observers are also present to ensure credibility and transparency. In fact, by the time the Independent Electoral Commission announces the final results, every political party already knows the outcome from each polling station through their own agents.

With the introduction of spot counting at polling stations, the process has become even more transparent. Results are counted openly in the presence of party agents, observers, and members of the public immediately after voting. This makes it virtually impossible to manipulate the outcome without detection.

What the UDP leadership should be doing at this stage is preparing their policies and programmes to convince Gambian voters—not attempting to cast doubt on institutions simply because they fear electoral rejection. Democracy requires maturity, responsibility, and respect for institutions.

The Gambian people are politically aware and capable of making their own choices. No amount of political alarmism will change that reality.

Instead of spreading mistrust, all political actors should focus on promoting peace, respect, and issue-based campaigning. The December elections will ultimately be decided by the will of the Gambian people, and that will must be respected by all.

Fear of defeat should never become an excuse to undermine the credibility of our democratic institutions.

Major Road Upgrade Begins in Gunjur

A major road construction project has officially started in Gunjur, bringing renewed optimism to residents who have long awaited improvements to the town’s main transport route.

Heavy machinery and construction crews from HAGE Group have begun work on the town’s principal road. The project will see the road built with a concrete surface, a more resilient material expected to better withstand heavy traffic and the harsh conditions that often affect roads during both the dry and rainy seasons.

The initiative forms part of the government’s nationwide road infrastructure drive under the administration of Adama Barrow. In recent years, the programme has focused on expanding and modernizing road networks across the country to improve transportation and stimulate local economies.

For decades, residents of Gunjur have struggled with difficult road conditions. During the dry season, thick dust clouds have been a common problem, while the rainy season often leaves the road muddy and nearly impassable. These conditions have frequently disrupted daily activities for motorists, traders, schoolchildren, and pedestrians.

The road runs through the heart of the community, connecting residential areas, local markets, schools, and neighboring coastal settlements. Its reconstruction is expected to ease transportation challenges and support economic activities within the town.

In addition to the main Gunjur road project, work is also progressing on another important route linking Gunjur to Jambanjelly through Kunkujang.

This road serves as a key connection for surrounding communities, facilitating the movement of farmers, fishermen, traders, and commuters between inland areas and the coast.

When completed, the projects are expected to strengthen transportation links across the southern parts of the West Coast Region, an area experiencing steady population growth and increasing economic activity.

For the people of Gunjur, however, the start of construction on their main road represents a particularly meaningful development — the beginning of a transformation that many in the community have hoped to see for years.

Coalitions, Not Personalities: Lessons from The Gambia for Senegal’s Political Moment

By Yaya Dampha NPP Diaspora Coordinator Sweden 

Alagi Yorro Jallow is right to warn Senegal about the dangerous rise of political revisionism and personality-driven narratives. His reflection about the mandate of Bassirou Diomaye Faye and the decisive role of the Diomaye Coalition should not be dismissed as partisan rhetoric. It is a factual reminder that modern democratic victories are rarely the triumph of a single individual. They are almost always the product of coalitions, compromise, and collective sacrifice.

Those of us who observed and participated in the democratic struggle in The Gambia understand this reality very well.

In 2016, after the imprisonment of Ousainou Darboe and several executives of the United Democratic Party (UDP), the opposition faced a historic crossroads. In a moment of necessity, the UDP leadership endorsed a relatively unknown businessman, Adama Barrow, as its presidential candidate. But Barrow did not become the symbol of change because of the UDP alone. He emerged through negotiations among a broad coalition of opposition parties and civil society actors who agreed that unity, not ego, was the only path to defeat dictatorship.

Barrow went through coalition consultations, won the coalition primary, became the unified opposition candidate, and ultimately defeated the long-standing ruler Yahya Jammeh. That victory was not the achievement of one party. It was the collective triumph of Gambians who rallied behind a coalition for democratic change.

However, history took a troubling turn after Darboe’s release from prison. He was appointed Foreign Minister and later Vice President. Yet instead of consolidating the spirit of coalition politics, unilateral decisions and confrontational rhetoric began to dominate the political atmosphere. Some supporters within the UDP started belittling President Barrow as an “accidental president,” claiming he owed his victory solely to Darboe and the UDP.

Such arguments ignore the central truth of coalition politics: no coalition victory belongs to one individual or one party.

Ironically, since distancing itself from the coalition framework, the UDP and Darboe forgot the fact that they have suffered four consecutive electoral defeats in the hands of Yahya Jammeh. The 2021 election results proved them wrong when Adama Barrow defeated Ousainou Darboe outrightly. This is not merely a political coincidence; it is a reminder that popularity within a party base or on the streets does not always translate into electoral victory.

The same lesson may be unfolding today in Senegal.

Ousmane Sonko, like Darboe in The Gambia, commands undeniable street popularity. His supporters are passionate, vocal, and emotionally invested in his political persona. But politics is not measured by street enthusiasm alone. Electoral success requires broad national alliances, institutional respect, and the humility to recognize the contributions of others.

This is precisely the point that Jallow makes about the Diomaye Coalition. When the political party structure collapsed and legal barriers threatened the candidacy of Diomaye, it was the coalition that carried the legal, financial, and organizational burden. The coalition mobilized voters across Senegal’s diverse political spectrum, ultimately securing the 54 percent mandate that brought Faye to power.

To attempt to erase that coalition and rewrite the story as a single-hero narrative is not only historically inaccurate; it is politically dangerous.

Even more troubling is the contradiction emerging in recent events. The same youth movements that once mobilized passionately in support of Sonko and the broader opposition struggle now find themselves confronting state security forces during protests at universities. Reports of police repression against young demonstrators raise difficult questions about whether revolutionary rhetoric has now given way to the harsh realities of governing.

Democratic politics cannot survive on antagonism, revenge, or emotional mobilization alone. Successful leadership requires restraint, maturity, and the ability to transform movements into institutions.

That is why President Faye’s metaphor about circumcision, as Jallow explains, should be understood not as a casual remark but as a cultural symbol of political maturity and responsibility. Leadership in Africa has always carried this deeper meaning: initiation into the burden of governing with discipline and restraint.

In this sense, Senegal now stands at a crossroads familiar to many African democracies.

Will its politics evolve toward coalition governance, institutional respect, and national unity?

Or will it descend into the same destructive cycle of personality cults, historical revisionism, and factional revenge that has destabilized many political movements after victory?

The Gambian experience offers a clear lesson: when pride replaces pragmatism, and when individuals attempt to rewrite collective victories as personal triumphs, political movements inevitably fracture.

Coalitions win elections.

Ego divides them.

Senegal would do well to remember this truth.

"From Banjul to Dakar: The Dangerous Illusion of Political “Alpha and Omega”

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator – Sweden

Alagi Yorro Jallow’s reflection comes at a moment when Senegal must carefully navigate the delicate balance between constitutional order and political personality. His central message is both clear and timeless: in a republic, no individual can claim to be the sole guardian of a political movement or the exclusive owner of a national mandate.

West African political history offers many lessons, and The Gambia provides a revealing example. For decades, lawyer Ousainou Darboe was widely regarded as the central figure of opposition politics and leader of the . Despite his prominence and persistence, the opposition under his leadership was unable to defeat the long-time ruler in four successive presidential elections.

During those years, numerous attempts were made to build a united opposition front in The Gambia. However, many of these coalition efforts struggled to gain traction. Political disagreements—particularly over who should serve as the coalition’s flagbearer—often stalled negotiations and prevented the opposition from presenting a single unified electoral strategy.

Ironically, circumstances eventually altered the political landscape. When Darboe was imprisoned in 2016 during protests against the Jammeh government, opposition parties intensified negotiations that ultimately produced a unified coalition. That coalition went on to defeat Jammeh in the historic *elections*, bringing *change* to the presidency and ending more than two decades of authoritarian rule.

Many Gambians interpret those events through different lenses—some politically, others spiritually—arguing that Darboe’s absence from the political arena at that critical moment created the conditions for unity among opposition parties determined to end Jammeh’s rule. Others, however, see the victory primarily as the product of growing public frustration, civil society mobilization, and an unprecedented willingness among opposition parties to compromise for the national interest.

A similar dynamic can be observed in Senegal. The legal challenges faced by opposition figure prevented him from contesting the presidency and dramatically reshaped the political contest. In his absence, his political ally emerged as the candidate who unified supporters and ultimately secured victory in the *presidential election*.

These developments highlight an important democratic lesson. Political movements often revolve around charismatic personalities, but electoral victories are rarely the product of one individual alone. They emerge from broader social movements, political alliances, and the collective will of citizens seeking change.

The experiences of both The Gambia and Senegal illustrate the dangers of elevating any political figure to the status of an “alpha and omega” of national politics. When leaders begin to view themselves as indispensable, they risk confusing popularity with ownership of a political movement—or even the state itself.

Democratic systems, however, are designed to function beyond individual personalities. Institutions, laws, and constitutional frameworks must ultimately remain stronger than any single leader, no matter how influential.

The Gambian experience demonstrates a simple but enduring truth: alliances evolve, movements mature, and institutions must outlast personalities. Senegal, like The Gambia before it, now faces the continuing challenge of strengthening democratic institutions while managing the powerful influence of political movements and personalities.

In the end, the stability of a republic depends not on heroic myths but on constitutional discipline, institutional strength, and the collective will of its citizens. The true guardian of any democratic state is not an individual leader, but the constitution that binds the nation together.