By Alagi Yorro Jallow
Fatoumatta: As the government appoints a British Special Prosecutor for Jammeh‑era crimes, the nation confronts a deeper question: is foreign expertise a necessity—or a confession of institutional weakness?
The Gambia turns to a British barrister to lead Jammeh‑era prosecutions, reopening the debate on sovereignty, capacity, and the unfinished work of transitional justice. Alagi Yorro Jallow examines the tension between Gambianization and the urgent need to win cases that history cannot afford to lose.
The dilemma of outsourcing justice lies between embracing Gambianization and ensuring the capacity to win cases. It’s the capacity paradox: while Gambian talent is abundant, the confidence to fully harness it remains elusive. Nations do not merely prosecute crimes; they perform justice. Every decision about who leads a prosecution becomes a statement about sovereignty, confidence, and national memory. The Government’s appointment of British barrister Martin Hackett as Special Prosecutor for Jammeh‑era crimes is therefore not a routine administrative act. It is a defining moment in our transitional justice journey—one that forces us to confront the tension between outsourcing expertise and Gambianizing justice.
In January 2026, I argued in “Outsourcing Justice—Why The Gambia Must Trust Its Own to Prosecute Jammeh‑Era Crimes” that a nation emerging from dictatorship must reclaim its own justice. Now, the central dilemma is clear: can The Gambia secure justice for Jammeh-era crimes when prosecutions are led by a foreigner rather than its own citizens? The issue is no longer theoretical—it defines the current architecture of our justice system.
Fatoumatta: The Gambia is not short of legal brilliance. Our record speaks for itself. Gambians have prosecuted at the Rwanda Tribunal. A Gambian served as Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court. Gambian judges sit on international tribunals. The TRRC’s Lead Counsel—himself a Gambian—demonstrated world‑class prosecutorial skill before a global audience. These are not patriotic exaggerations; they are verifiable achievements.
Yet the government’s decision suggests a deeper anxiety: Gambian expertise is celebrated abroad but doubted at home. The collapse of the Ousainou Bojang prosecution exposed the fragility of our institutions—undertrained investigators, weak prosecutorial preparation, procedural missteps, and a justice system unprepared for high‑stakes litigation. The lesson was stark: the issue is not Gambian intellect; it is Gambian institutional capacity.
Fatoumatta: The Barrow administration now stands at a crossroads where two imperatives collide. On one hand lies the principle of Gambianization—national ownership, sovereignty, and the moral symbolism of Gambians prosecuting their own history. On the other hand lies the performance imperative—the need to win cases that carry global scrutiny and historical weight.
Jammeh‑era prosecutions involve cross‑border investigations, complex chains of command, crimes against humanity, extradition negotiations, witness protection, and forensic evidence. These are not ordinary cases. They demand a prosecutorial machinery that The Gambia has not fully built. Thus, the appointment of a foreign Special Prosecutor becomes a form of insurance—an attempt to avoid the national humiliation of failed prosecutions. But insurance has a cost.
Outsourcing justice carries profound risks. It weakens national ownership of the transitional justice process, which is not a consultancy project but a national ritual. Victims want Gambians leading the reckoning, not observing it from the sidelines. It also reinforces the colonial reflex—the old belief that legitimacy comes from abroad. And it weakens public trust: if the state does not trust Gambian prosecutors, why should citizens trust the state? These risks are not symbolic; they shape the legitimacy of the entire TRRC process. Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done by the nation that suffered.
Fatoumatta: To be fair, the government’s reasoning is not without merit. The stakes are enormous: the credibility of the TRRC, the expectations of victims, the international community’s scrutiny, and the historical weight of prosecuting a former head of state. A failed prosecution would be catastrophic. A foreign prosecutor, therefore, becomes a stabilizing force—an attempt to guarantee competence where institutions remain fragile. But even necessity must be managed with wisdom.
The question is not whether foreign expertise is useful. It is how it is deployed. A sustainable model requires Gambian leadership at the top, supported by foreign technical advisers embedded within teams. Joint prosecution units, skill transfer, and a clear succession plan to hand over leadership to Gambians must be central to the architecture. This is how Rwanda rebuilt its judiciary, how Sierra Leone managed its hybrid court, and how Liberia handled its war‑crimes investigations. Foreign expertise should be scaffolding—not a replacement.
The Ousainou Bojang case revealed that justice collapses long before it reaches the courtroom. If The Gambia wants to successfully prosecute Jammeh‑era crimes, it must strengthen its investigative capacity, professionalize the police, invest in forensic science, empower the DPP’s office, insulate prosecutors from political interference, and reform the prosecutorial arm of the Gambia Police Force. Without these reforms, even the best foreign prosecutor will be building on sand.
Fatoumatta: Justice must return home. The appointment of Martin Hackett is a moment of truth. It exposes our institutional weaknesses, our political anxieties, and our unresolved debate about national competence. But it also offers an opportunity. If handled wisely, this will be the last time The Gambia outsources its justice. If mishandled, it will deepen the dependency we have spent decades trying to escape. A nation that survived 22 years of repression must reclaim its justice with its own hands. Foreign expertise may strengthen the process, but the soul of justice must remain Gambian. The victims deserve nothing less. History demands nothing less. And the future will judge us by whether we trusted ourselves enough to lead our own reckoning.
No comments:
Post a Comment