Jammeh’s Dangerous Conspiracy

Jammeh’s Dangerous Conspiracy: The Threat of Misinformation in West African Diplomacy. The Legacy of Deception. Rejecting Falsehoods & Embracing Transparency. Alagi Yorro Jallow Fatoumatta: Yahya Jammeh, Gambia’s exiled former dictator, has once again resurfaced in the political discourse—this time through a leaked audio filled with conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated claims of oil theft. His accusations against Senegalese leaders, past and present, are not only reckless but pose a real risk of diplomatic instability between two nations whose futures are deeply intertwined. Jammeh’s statement, alleging that former Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade envied Gambia’s oil discovery and that current Senegalese Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko failed to stop its supposed theft, is a calculated attempt to stir tensions. His vow to “reclaim Gambia’s oil” upon his return is not just delusional but dangerous, as it exploits nationalist sentiments for personal political gain. Fatoumatta: Jammeh ruled Gambia with an iron grip for over two decades, systematically silencing opponents, suppressing dissent, and building a regime based on fear. He was notorious for fabricating narratives—from bizarre medicinal claims to fantastical economic promises—while siphoning state resources for personal enrichment. His sudden reemergence, now weaponizing conspiracy theories, is not surprising, but it demands a firm rebuke from Gambian authorities and the media. Misinformation is not harmless—it erodes trust, destabilizes relationships, and fuels unnecessary conflicts. If such baseless accusations gain traction, they could damage regional cooperation and economic progress that Gambia and Senegal have painstakingly built over the years.

As Gambia moves beyond Jammeh’s dark legacy, the nation must reject his divisive tactics. The government and civil society must counter misinformation with truth, ensuring that citizens do not fall prey to unfounded narratives. Regional diplomacy must be rooted in fact-based discussions, not conspiracy theories designed to manipulate public opinion. Fatoumatta: Jammeh may believe he can still shape political discourse from afar, but Gambia has moved forward. His era of deception is over—truth and accountability must now define the future.

Lawyer Melville Robertson Resigns From UDP

"THE DEAFENING SILENCE OF LEADERSHIP: MY FORMAL RESIGNATION FROM THE UNITED DEMOCRATIC PARTY"

In a move that echoes the urgent call for accountability, I, Melville Robertson Roberts, hereby announce my resignation from the United Democratic Party (UDP), a decision that weighs heavily on my heart yet is resolute in its necessity. For years, I have dedicated myself to the UDP, inspired by its commitments to transparency, accountability, and the rule of law—values that once ignited my hope for a better Gambia. However, I now see that hope without action equates to hypocrisy, and that is a path I cannot walk. The party’s insistence on standing by Ba Tambadou, despite alarming and unresolved allegations regarding the disposal of Jammeh’s assets, is not merely disappointing—it is disgraceful. The silence surrounding this matter is deafening, particularly in light of the demands from dedicated members who seek accountability and justice. Where is the UDP’s proud voice of reason and reform now? Are these values only to be upheld for the ordinary citizen while the powerful remain sheltered from scrutiny? My previous open letter to the party leadership was birthed from my faith that the UDP could elevate itself and truly lead by example. In a time when the current government turns a blind eye, it is imperative for the UDP to illuminate the path of ethical governance rather than remain shackled by silence. But silence in this context speaks volumes, revealing a troubling truth: accountability seems to be a privilege reserved for the powerless, while the influential escape unscathed. Until the UDP summons its courage and reclaims its voice, I find it impossible to continue under its banner in good conscience. The Gambia demands leadership that not only advocates for justice but embodies it. I will always honor the esteemed leader Ousainou Darboe and my fellow members with respect and regard. However, my admiration for the UDP will not compel me to compromise my principles. We all deserve more. The Gambia deserves leadership that acts with integrity and conviction. Melville Robertson Roberts Legal Practitioner, Social Commentator, and Advocate for Justice

Rebuttal: Defending President Adama Barrow's Administration

By Yaya Dampha Coordinator NPP DIASPORA GROUP

The article by Ensa A.B. Ceesay presents a skewed and overly negative portrayal of President Adama Barrow’s administration, inaccurately branding him a dictator without considering the significant strides made toward democracy and human rights in The Gambia since his leadership began.

First, let’s address the claim of human rights violations. The reality is, under Barrow’s administration, Gambians have witnessed an unprecedented level of freedom. For the first time in decades, citizens can express their opinions openly, participate in peaceful protests, and engage in political discourse without the constant fear of repression. This openness starkly contrasts with the era of Yahya Jammeh, where dissent was met with imprisonment, violence, or worse. If President Barrow were truly a dictator, it would be unjustifiable for him to allow such freedoms to flourish. The very idea of a dictatorship is antithetical to the environment of free expression that currently exists.

It's also crucial to highlight that there are no political prisoners in Gambia today, and journalists and human rights activists operate with a level of safety and freedom that did not exist prior to Barrow’s presidency. The actions against journalists accused of defamation or other crimes have often resulted in leniency, reflecting a commitment to uphold freedom of speech rather than silence dissent. Indeed, the Barrow administration has taken several steps to reform and protect press freedoms, showcasing an effort to correct past injustices rather than perpetuate them. Assertions about corruption, tribalism, and respect for the rule of law are important issues, but they do not paint the full picture. Yes, challenges remain, just as they do in any emerging democracy. However, these challenges do not warrant a blanket dismissal of the progress made under Barrow’s leadership. The establishment of more inclusive governance systems, engagement with international human rights bodies, and the incorporation of various political perspectives into the governance process are indicators of an administration striving for positive change. Furthermore, labeling Barrow as a dictator reflects a deeper misunderstanding or deliberate misinterpretation of Gambia’s political landscape. It ignores the fact that Barrow came to power through a coalition of diverse opposition voices that demonstrated a collective desire for change and reform. The same coalition, which now calls for accountability and democratic principles, is a testament to the political pluralism that Barrow has encouraged. Critics such as those represented in Ceesay's article often surge with the disappointment of their personal failures, failing to acknowledge the significant progress made. Their narratives may originate from a place of discontent but misconstrue the broader context of Gambian governance under Barrow. The motivations and character of those dissenting should not overshadow the real achievements made in the country. In conclusion, accusing President Adama Barrow of dictatorial tendencies is not only misguided but perilously overlooks the genuine strides made toward democratic governance and human rights in The Gambia. For the first time in a long while, we are witnessing a society where discourse thrives, human rights are being respected, and the aspiration for progress is palpable. It is important to recognize and uphold these aspects rather than yield to the cynicism that so easily takes root in political discourse. As we move forward as a nation, it is paramount to support continued engagement, constructive criticism, and the celebration of the freedoms we now enjoy.

Courtroom Is Not Where Truth Will Find Us Gambia

By Lawyer Melville Roberts The Courtroom Is Not Where Truth Will Find Us Gambia

t.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY5DZliFRQv41VgwHElhLq_xMR5eTADFRT9TOsbab5OUSQcgIOyAo045D8pAGK-1dyhyphenhyphentT4dK_Yj1XJxu6O9Dt1UiC_vGFqAWYVkZRzmN4fp_X5sYnuQZb5PzjUsech0E4y9q4UOIoiJKNp-qOMeMfup4AeVqAjBZs9-k8ZvcEnrD7EzZHTA0CoQ7xY4k/s960/IMG_1214.JPG" style="display: block; padding: 1em 0; text-align: center; ">

. After watching tonight's episode of the Bantaba on Kerr Fatou, I was nearly moved to tears for a nation so consumed by a quest for truth, that finding it at whatever means, suddenly breeds a misconception of the very ideals of truth and fact finding. In the quiet desperation of a nation still grappling with its past, a belief is spreading like wild fire that if Alhagie Kurang and Amie Bensouda end up in court, the truth about the Janneh Commission and Jammeh’s looted assets will finally come to light.

It is a compelling idea. But it is also deeply misguided and misleading. Courtrooms do not exist to reveal the whole truth. They exist to test specific claims. What was said, what was done, and whether it violated the law. If Bensouda sues Kurang, or vice versa, what will be examined is that dispute and not the integrity of the entire Janneh Commission, not the fate of Jammeh’s assets, and most certainly not the unanswered questions the nation still carries.

This legal clash, if it comes, will not give us a national reckoning. It will not answer why there has been no full public audit of recovered assets, or why recommendations still gather dust. The courtroom cannot shoulder what our institutions have refused to carry. To place our hopes for truth in a trial between two individuals is to ask a scalpel to serve as a mirror. It will cut precisely, but only where directed. The broader truth, that of complicity, silence, and evasion solidly remains outside its reach. If we are to make sense of the Janneh Commission, its purpose, its limits, its legacy, we must go beyond personalities and legal filings. We must demand accountability from those who hold the reins of state power today. We must insist on transparency, not just in court, but in cabinet meetings, National Assembly sessions, and public reports. We must elevate our national conversation beyond rumors and rivalries. Because if we continue to place the weight of our truth-seeking on the shoulders of individual conflict, we will always be disappointed. The courtroom will close, the ruling will come, and we will find, once again, that the real questions remain unanswered.

The truth we seek is not in a defamation case or a public spat. It is in our refusal to forget. It is in our insistence that national memory be respected. It is in our courage to say that commissions are not enough, and that justice delayed, distorted, or diluted is justice denied.

If we want answers, we must demand them not from a court case, but from our government, our parliament, our civic spaces. We must understand that justice does not live in legal drama,it lives in public accountability. Until then, we risk mistaking sparks for sunlight, conflict for clarity and the truth we so desperately seek will remain just out of reach. M R R.

Rtd.Lt. Colonel Samsudeen Sarr’s Selective Outrage and Intellectual Dishonesty.

A Response to Lt. Colonel Samsudeen Sarr: Selective Outrage and Intellectual Dishonesty. Alagi Yorro Jallow

Fatoumatta: Lt. Colonel Samsudeen Sarr’s latest attempt to vilify my defense of President Adama Barrow’s ceremonial attire lacks both historical grounding and intellectual honesty. His exaggerated critique—a blend of misplaced mockery and selective outrage—deliberately distorts the role of the Commander-in-Chief while conveniently ignoring well-established traditions. It is neither unprecedented nor unusual for civilian heads of state to don military attire in ceremonial settings. Leaders across Africa and beyond—including Tanzania’s Samia Suluhu Hassan, Senegal’s Macky Sall, and Ghana’s Jerry Rawlings—have all worn military regalia in official capacities without sparking misplaced controversy. Such attire symbolizes the authority vested in the head of state, reinforcing their position as the symbolic leader of the national defense forces. Sarr’s reaction, however, is not rooted in a genuine concern for military professionalism but in personal animosity and political opportunism. His history of contradiction—from his book Coup d’État in The Gambia, which he later retracted under pressure, to his erratic use of pseudonyms like "Ebou Kolley" and "Arac Pacobi"—reflects a pattern of intellectual dishonesty. His attempted transformation from Jammeh enabler to self-styled commentator is riddled with inconsistencies that undermine his credibility.

Moreover, his exaggerated framing of President Barrow’s appearance as "cosplay" exposes not only a failure to engage in substantive discussion but a deliberate effort to trivialize established governance norms. Presidents do not wear military regalia to “play soldier.” They do so in recognition of their constitutional authority, a practice embedded in traditions across multiple political systems. Fatoumatta: Rather than offering a thoughtful critique, Sarr’s response devolves into theatrical disdain, laced with personal attacks that have no bearing on the actual issue at hand. If he were genuinely interested in governance, he would acknowledge that presidential symbolism extends beyond uniforms and is rooted in historical precedence. But such an acknowledgment would require intellectual consistency—something he has demonstrated time and again to be beyond his reach.

As for his accusations, it is ironic that a man whose credibility was so tarnished he was denied the opportunity to testify at the Truth Commission would attempt to lecture others on integrity. His selective outrage, aimed more at personal grievances than objective discourse, is not only misplaced but a reflection of his longstanding struggle to reconcile his contradictions. A meaningful discussion on governance requires depth, historical awareness, and logical coherence. If Lt. Colonel Sarr is truly interested in engaging in such discourse, he must first reckon with his own conflicted record before attempting to lecture others on political symbolism. Lt. Colonel Samsudeen Sarr’s erratic criticisms and selective outrage epitomize a pattern of intellectual inconsistency that has long defined his public posture. His history of contradiction—of fabricating, retracting, and maneuvering to regain favor—stands as testament to a credibility crisis that no amount of theatrical prose can conceal. Real discourse demands integrity, historical awareness, and intellectual honesty. It is not shaped by resentment nor sustained by petty attacks. When someone like Sarr, whose own credibility was deemed too compromised to testify before the Truth Commission, attempts to lecture others on governance, one is reminded that opportunism often masquerades as wisdom. Fatoumatta: The presidency is not a spectacle, nor is national symbolism a trivial pursuit for political theatrics. It is grounded in tradition, reinforced by constitutional authority, and wielded as a representation of leadership. Sarr’s dismissal of this reality—driven more by personal vendetta than genuine critique, reflects the desperation of a man who has long lost the intellectual weight to engage in serious debate. History will not remember the loudest voices, but the most principled ones. And in this discourse, the contrast is clear.

Opinion: Letter To Lawyer Melville Roberts On Bensouda Kurang Law Suit

Upholding Integrity in our Discourse Dear Mr. Melville Robertson Roberts and others the sentiments you expressed are commendable, but it is essential to acknowledge that, as observers, we found your words to be flattering. I would like to respectfully remind you that, not so long ago, you were involved in a Facebook Live broadcast where you lost your composure and hurled insults at someone who had allegedly defamed and spoken disparagingly about your child. As a legal professional, your reaction was quite temperamental, and you resorted to using profanity. While freedom of speech and dissenting views are fundamental principles, it is crucial to recognize that they can be challenging to uphold in practice. The primary distinction in this instance was that you were not holding public office, but several hundreds of thousands of people including individuals including myself look up to you, much like you admire Lawyer Amie Bensouda. Many people had to urge you to reconsider your actions, and you even intended to block those who advised you to disregard the individual who had spoken ill of you and your daughter. You could have taken the higher ground and refrained from resorting to personal attacks, which included disparaging remarks about the individual’s mother. Lawyer Amie Bensouda chose to pursue legal action, which was the honorable course of action, and it highlights the importance of respecting the laws of our country The ongoing discussions surrounding the alleged illegal sale of looted assets belonging to Yahya Jammeh have raised significant concerns about how we address unsubstantiated claims within our society. It is imperative that those with allegations present solid evidence to the relevant authorities, allowing the judicial process to take its course. If proven guilty, individuals responsible for any wrongdoing must be held accountable.

As a member of the legal community, I recognize the serious implications of libel, defamation, and character assassination. The recent decision by Lawyer Amie Bensouda to use Facebook Live to confront unfounded claims made by Mr. Mamadi Kurang raises questions. Should such an important discourse devolve into a contentious “he said, she said” scenario? I believe it should not. Instead, we would have benefited from Lawyer Bensouda directly addressing the Gambian people, clarifying how the Janneh Commission managed the sales of the assets in question. That said, I commend her for taking legal action against Mr. Kurang, providing him an opportunity to either present evidence for his claims or face the consequences of a lawsuit. This was not a threat; it was a chance for him to substantiate his assertions. Lawyer Amie Bensouda is a respected member of our community—a loving mother, wife, and fellow Gambian who deserves protection from baseless allegations. Unfounded claims against her, or anyone for that matter, must not go unchecked. It is not just Lawyer Bensouda who has taken a stand; we have seen others, like Abubacarr Jawara, pursue legal redress in the face of defamation. It is crucial that we foster a culture of truthfulness and integrity in our discourse. When confronted with contentious issues, we must either speak truthfully or choose silence. This isn't about stifling dissent; it’s about combating the arrogance and misinformation that undermine our society.

I extend my sympathies to those aligning with Mr. Kurang, yet I must point out that his posture appears rooted in a troubling arrogance, which hinders our nation’s progress. Lawyer Bensouda’s courageous actions serve to promote our democracy and establish a precedent: that conveniently disregarding the truth will not be tolerated. Let us strive toward a more respectful and fact-based dialogue, while ensuring that individuals like Lawyer Bensouda are protected from unsubstantiated attacks. Sincerely, Ensa Ceesay for police Cadet

Gambia Emphasizes Integrated Border Management for Enhanced Trade Facilitation

In a significant stride towards improving trade processes, Hon. Yankuba Darboe, the Commissioner General of the Gambia Revenue Authority (GRA), underscored the Gambian government's commitment to integrated border management during a recent workshop on coordinated border management. This five-day event, gathering representatives from various sectors including Customs, the Gambia Police Force, and the Immigration Department, aims to consolidate efforts to craft a comprehensive framework for border management. During his keynote address at the workshop hosted at the Senegambia hotel, Darboe articulated the government's recognition of Coordinated Border Management (CBM) as paramount for enhancing trade facilitation. He stated, “Our goal is to improve border efficiency, streamline our trade processes, and foster robust inter-agency collaboration.” Central to these discussions is a Draft Strategy for 2025-2029 developed by the GRA, aimed at modernizing border management and facilitating smoother trade operations. This strategy is part of a broader initiative to bolster The Gambia’s trade ecosystem. Since 2021, The Gambia has collaborated with the World Customs Organization (WCO) through the Accelerate Trade Facilitation Programme, which focuses on implementing the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). Darboe highlighted the areas identified for improvement, such as ongoing border delays and procedural complexities that hinder efficient trade.

Currently, border operations in The Gambia involve 6 to 10 government agencies, which presents significant challenges. Darboe emphasized the importance of CBM reforms in addressing these issues, stating that better coordination would lead to reduced trade costs and stimulate economic growth. Despite the ongoing initiatives, Darboe acknowledged gaps in practical knowledge regarding CBM implementation. He outlined the GRA's requirements for capacity-building, which include standardizing operating procedures across border agencies, harmonizing data for effective exchange, and devising comprehensive risk management strategies. The workshop also featured insights into a draft inter-agency standard operations framework on CBM, developed by a working group representing various border agencies. This framework was crafted through virtual sessions with WCO experts, highlighting the collaborative approach needed to establish a robust border management system. Key elements of the draft framework encompass legal provisions, operational guidelines for border agencies, and protocols for the efficient physical movement of goods through ports. Additionally, it addresses expedited clearance systems for various goods categories, enhancing the overall efficiency of border operations.

In closing, Darboe pointed out that the implementation of capacity-building initiatives within the GRA would lay the foundation for standardized operating procedures at all points of entry in The Gambia. He further reinforced the importance of collaborative efforts among border agencies to facilitate effective trade flow while ensuring proper revenue collection. Echoing this sentiment, Mr. Jim Clarke from the WCO reiterated the critical need for information-sharing between border agencies to ensure seamless trade operations while safeguarding The Gambia’s revenue interests. Their collective efforts signify a proactive approach to developing a modern and integrated border management framework.

Lawyer Melville Roberts Open Letter To Amie Bensouda

Dear Mrs. Amie Bensouda, I pen this letter with a heavy heart, burdened by sorrow yet driven by a profound sense of love and disappointment. It is not easy to address you, a woman I have long admired and respected, whose legacy transcends common admiration. However, the truth compels me to speak, even when it is difficult.

The recent cease and desist letter directed at Kurang has shaken me—not for its legal implications, as you are undoubtedly one of the finest legal minds of our time, but for the emotional weight it carries. It signifies a rift, a silence, an unwillingness to engage in open discourse. Instead of fostering dialogue, it conveys a sense of threat and deterrence.

You have dedicated your life to fighting against injustice, illuminating dark corridors of truth, and giving voice to the voiceless. This course of action—this legal silence cloaked in warnings—wounds deeply. Many, including myself and Kurang, have raised questions regarding the actions of the Commission. These inquiries are not attacks; they are a quest for clarity and understanding, born out of a sincere desire for truth. My love for you remains steadfast. I believe in the greatness that resides within you—a greatness rooted not in the exercise of power but in the pursuit of justice. I implore you not to allow this moment to cast a shadow on your legacy. Do not let the public, who have cherished your name, perceive you as someone who would silence uncomfortable truths. I do not believe you personally sold Jammeh’s assets. As a lawyer, I understand the structure, limitations, and responsibilities involved. While you served as lead counsel, the final decisions rested with a broader collective. However, leadership also encompasses how one responds to challenges. The nation deserves clarity and a robust rebuttal to the concerns raised. Unfortunately, the threat of legal action only stirs suspicion and obscures the transparency you have always championed. We can disagree while still holding each other in mutual respect. I can challenge certain actions yet honor your name. However, I cannot support a narrative that stifles legitimate dissent through intimidation. That is not who you are. You have stood before Lady Justice with grace and dignity, inspiring generations to see justice as a calling rather than merely a profession. As someone who cares deeply for you, I want you to know that you are cherished. After Kurang publicly insulted me for defending you, I stood tall, advocating for him when he faced arrest and detention. I chose to rise above personal attacks. I refuse to be diminished by baseless claims; I remain steadfast in my truth. I will not stand idle as your name is tarnished, nor will I support an environment where dissent is quashed by the threat of lawsuits. Please, rise above this situation, not out of obligation to Kurang or to me, but in honor of the values you have so ardently defended throughout your life. Demonstrate to the world that your voice confronts truth, embraces it, and responds with clarity and courage. With unwavering respect and affection, Melville Robertson Roberts, Esq. Derbyshire, England

Lawyer Files D144 Million Defamation Claim Against Kurang

Gambian Legal Firm Issues Cease and Desist Regarding D144 Million Defamation Claim Antouman A.B. Gaye & Co., a distinguished legal firm in The Gambia, has formally issued a cease and desist letter on behalf of their client, Mrs. Amie N.D. Bensouda, targeting Alagi Mamadi Kurang, the former Secretary of the Janneh Commission, over allegations of defamation. The legal notice, dated May 16, 2025, demands that Kurang immediately cease making damaging assertions regarding Bensouda's purported involvement in the sale or acquisition of assets seized from former President Yahya Jammeh.

The correspondence states that Kurang has undertaken a seven-year campaign characterized by defamatory posts on social media and in media interviews, employing derogatory language and false claims intended to undermine Bensouda’s reputation. The letter calls for Kurang to retract all defamatory statements and provide a full and public apology. Should Kurang fail to comply within seven days, the legal firm will pursue further action, including a lawsuit seeking D144 million (approximately $2 million) in damages.

Lawyer Melville Roberts Open Letter To President Barrow

By Lawyer Melville Roberts

A Plea for Integrity: Why The Gambia Should Withdraw Its Endorsement of Ba Tambadou for the ICJ Dear Mr. President, esteemed Gambians, In the life of a nation, there are pivotal moments when silence can amount to complicity, and the act of speaking out, even at the risk of misunderstanding, becomes essential for the integrity of our nation, our conscience, and our historical narrative. Today is one of those critical moments.

I write to you not out of animosity, nor with any political agenda, but from a place of profound sorrow and unwavering conviction, fueled by my deep love for this country. I understand all too well the weight of justice when it is manipulated, misrepresented, or neglected because I have experienced it firsthand. The Gambian government’s decision to endorse Mr. Abubacarr Tambadou for a position as judge at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) resonates deeply with our national journey. While it may appear admirable to see one of our own elevated within the ranks of global justice, we must confront a troubling reality that calls for serious reflection. We must not be deceived by titles or accolades. True character is revealed not by the allure of global platforms but by the positive impact made at home. In the past, Ba Tambadou ignited hope. As the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, he stood as a symbol of renewal for a nation emerging from two decades of dictatorship, holding the aspirations of victims in his hands. He was positioned to honor our shared pain with fairness, truth, and humility. Yet, Mr. President, those hopes have been dashed.

To many, Ba Tambadou will not be remembered as a champion for justice but as a gatekeeper, determining who received justice, when, and under what circumstances. His tenure was marred by selective prosecutions and inconsistencies in upholding the spirit of the Truth, Reconciliation, and Reparations Commission (TRRC), revealing a disheartening trend of protecting the powerful while relegating victims to the shadows. I urge you to consider the families still searching for justice, the survivors who witnessed perpetrators evade accountability, and the countless individuals who have endured suffering only to be told that some lives are worth more than others when it comes to justice. Beyond the courtroom and commissions, a more profound issue remains: the management of former President Yahya Jammeh’s assets. Under Ba Tambadou’s watch, the sale and disposal of these properties—ill-gotten gains from a suffering nation—have raised serious concerns regarding transparency and ethical conduct. Accusations of selective auctions, undervalued asset sales, and a lack of clear revenue channels cannot be ignored. Properties that belonged to the people of The Gambia have been sold off, but to whom and at what price? Why has there not been a clear public account of the recovered wealth, and whether it was truly returned? Additionally, troubling reports concerning the accuracy of translated legal documents persist. Allegations of misrepresentation or selective interpretation have clouded proceedings that should have been unassailable. Such issues do not represent minor grievances; they strike at the very foundation of justice, suggesting manipulation rather than fairness. How can we expect an individual characterized by such controversies, however eloquent, to adjudicate matters involving genocide, war crimes, and global accountability? The ICJ is not merely a trophy to reward political affiliation or global praise; it stands as the last resort for the world’s gravest injustices. It demands unwavering integrity, independence, and a transparent history that can endure global scrutiny. Mr. President, this decision transcends politics. It defines who we are as a people. It will determine whether the victims of Jammeh’s regime perceive justice as a hollow performance or a genuine truth. It will signal whether The Gambia, the smallest country on the African mainland, can continue to be a beacon of moral courage—not just in words but in deeds.

Endorsing Ba Tambadou is not a neutral act; it implicitly suggests that his actions in The Gambia were acceptable. It tells the victims of Yahya Jammeh’s regime that the individual who oversaw their initial quest for justice, despite falling short, is now fit to pass judgment on global atrocities. That message is deeply flawed and profoundly damaging...See More

Editorial: They All Failed The President in their Duties

As we reflect upon the complex legal landscape of our nation, it is crucial to confront uncomfortable truths about our past. The emergence of youth groGambians Against Loathed Assets (GALA) raises important questions regarding their true motives and agendas. It has become evident that GALA has deviated from its original mission for accountability, accepting the role of seeking political favor for its financiers. Their recent actions, which include organizing unlawful protests, threaten to destabilize our country rather than promote the well-being of the Gambian people.

The role of former Attorney General Baa Tambidu in this unfolding saga deserves particular scrutiny. Rather than facing challenges, Tambidu misused his office to mislead the public and mismanage the situation surrounding the seized assets. It has become apparent that he engaged in the wrongful sale of these assets at giveaway prices, raising serious concerns about corruption and malpractice during his tenure. The commission tasked with investigating the financial dealings of former President Yahya Jammeh operated under Section 200 of the Gambian Constitution, with the explicit mandate to investigate and report on illicit financial activities without the authority to dispose of assets. However, the misuse of power by individuals like Tambidu undermined this mandate and jeopardized the integrity of the commission's work. Attempts to unfreeze these assets for sale, driven by misguided motives, were ultimately rejected by the courts, reinforcing the notion that such actions exceeded legal authority.

The involvement of key individuals within this framework raises further concerns about governance, transparency, and accountability within our legal institutions. Notable among these figures is Justice Jaiteh, whose intervention in the matter fell outside of his jurisdiction and raises questions about the independence of the judiciary. Moreover, the role of the Minister of Justice, as a political appointee and principal legal advisor to the President, is critical. Justice Dawda Jallow’s failure to address these irregularities and his apparent complicity in these transactions undermine the integrity of his office and call for his honorable resignation due to incompetence. President Adama Barrow is currently awaiting the findings of the National Assembly Select Committee investigating the alleged sales of properties belonging to Yahya Jammeh. The President has committed to ensuring that anyone found culpable will face accountability. It is imperative for every Gambian to access the report when it is released, demonstrating our collective expectation that the President will act decisively based on the findings. We recognize President Barrow as a democratic leader, steadfast in his commitment to due process and accountability, and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

In addition, we must address the misguided calls from figures such as Neneh Freda Gomez and her fellow immature attention seekers who urge our youth to launch a nationwide protest akin to the Arab Spring with the aim of removing President Barrow from power. These aspirations are disconnected from the current realities of our governance and stand to undermine the essential work the governmentis doing towards democratic reform.

The hypocrisy in these calls is glaring. Neneh Freda Gomez and her allies failed to oppose the tyrannical regime of Yahya Jammeh while it brutally suppressed dissent, imprisoned citizens, and forced many into exile. In fact Neneh and her family were supporting Yahya Jammeh. Their past alliances with a despot starkly contrast with their current positions of opposition. Neneh, in particular, should reflect on her prior actions and cease her duplicity. In conclusion, we must acknowledge that the failures of the commissioners, the Attorney General, and the Minister of Justice extend beyond individual missteps; they jeopardize the stability and integrity of our country. Accountability must be pursued; those responsible should be held answerable for their actions. It is time for The Gambia to embrace transparency and uphold the rule of law for the benefit of all citizens.

Darboe’s Opposition to the Parliamentary Inquiry Is Challenge To Transparency ?

By Alagi Yorro Jallow

Darboe’s Opposition to the Parliamentary Inquiry: A Challenge to Transparency? Is This About Partisan Interests or Governance Integrity. Transparency Must Prevail Over Political Calculations In a stunning turn of events, UDP Leader Ousainou Darboe has publicly urged President Barrow to block the parliamentary inquiry into the sale of Yahya Jammeh’s assets, citing partisan interests. His statement, delivered in Mandinka and now circulating widely, raises serious concerns about the future of accountability in The Gambia. For years, Gambians have demanded full transparency regarding the disposal of Jammeh’s confiscated wealth, suspecting irregularities, insider dealings, and financial mismanagement.

The establishment of a Parliamentary Select Committee was seen as a critical step toward uncovering the truth. Yet, Darboe’s opposition to this investigation raises fundamental questions—is this about protecting political allies, or does he genuinely believe the inquiry is flawed? Blocking an investigation into potential financial misconduct risks undermining public trust and setting a dangerous precedent. If transparency is negotiable based on political convenience, then what does that mean for future accountability efforts? If Darboe is indeed opposing the inquiry, it raises critical questions about his motivations. Is his concern genuinely about partisan interests, or does he believe the inquiry lacks fairness and transparency? Given the historical significance of Jammeh’s asset disposals, blocking an investigation could The sale and disposal of former President Yahya Jammeh’s assets have long been shrouded in controversy, raising serious concerns about transparency, accountability, and potential insider dealings. The establishment of a Parliamentary Select Committee to investigate these transactions was widely seen as a necessary step toward financial justice. Yet, reports suggest that UDP Leader Ousainou Darboe has urged President Barrow to block the inquiry, citing partisan interests. If true, this stance demands scrutiny—why would a leader of one of The Gambia’s largest opposition parties seek to halt an investigation into potential financial mismanagement? Is this about partisan interests or governance integrity? Darboe’s opposition raises two possible interpretations? A strategic political move—If UDP believes the inquiry is politically motivated, Darboe may view it as an attempt to target specific individuals or factions rather than pursue genuine accountability. Concerns over procedural fairness—If the inquiry lacks clear oversight mechanisms, Darboe may fear it will be used selectively rather than conducted with full transparency. However, blocking an inquiry entirely rather than advocating for fairer investigative processes risks undermining public trust. Gambians deserve full disclosure, and any attempt to halt scrutiny could be perceived as shielding potential wrongdoing. Fatoumatta: If Darboe actively discourages the inquiry, he risks alienating voters who demand accountability. The Gambian people have consistently called for transparency, particularly regarding Jammeh’s financial dealings. Any leader who stands in the way of such investigations may face public backlash, as citizens increasingly demand clean governance and institutional integrity.

Furthermore, blocking an inquiry could set a dangerous precedent, signaling that financial investigations can be obstructed based on political convenience. This would weaken The Gambia’s democratic institutions, making future accountability efforts more difficult to enforce. Fatoumatta: Regardless of political affiliations, accountability should never be negotiable. If Darboe has concerns about the inquiry’s fairness, he should advocate for stronger oversight and procedural integrity, rather than calling for its outright dismissal. The Gambian people deserve answers—not political maneuvering. If the inquiry is conducted with full transparency, it will serve as a crucial step toward restoring public trust in governance. Any attempt to block or weaken this process must be met with firm resistance from civil society and the electorate. Fatoumatta: The Gambian people deserve unfiltered truth, not political maneuvering. The parliamentary inquiry into the sale of Yahya Jammeh’s assets is not about partisan interests—it is about accountability, integrity, and restoring public trust in governance. If political leaders begin cherry-picking which investigations should proceed based on political convenience, The Gambia risks slipping into a dangerous precedent where transparency is conditional, rather than fundamental. Darboe’s opposition to the inquiry may raise strategic concerns, but blocking investigations into financial mismanagement only weakens democratic institutions. Leaders must advocate for fairness, not prevent scrutiny altogether. If transparency is indeed a priority, then allowing the inquiry to proceed without obstruction is the only path forward. Fatoumatta: In governance, accountability is non-negotiable. Gambians must reject attempts to silence investigations, ensuring that truth is never compromised for political expediency. https://www.facebook.com/reel/706452825098317

Legal Expert Melvile Robertson Sends Stern Warnings To GALA

Prominent Gambian lawyer Melvile Robertson has delivered a proactive message to the Gambia Association for Legal Accountability (GALA), emphasizing the importance of maintaining public trust as the organization pursues its advocacy efforts. In a public statement, Lawyer Robertson cautioned GALA against overreaching in its initiatives, stating, “GALA must exercise caution to avoid becoming overly dominant and risking the support and solidarity of the public. Without the backing of the majority of citizens, GALA risks becoming irrelevant. It is crucial to operate within the boundaries of the law; not even the executive branch can dictate the composition of the National Assembly Select Committee.” He continued, stressing the importance of engagement and impact: “We stand behind you, but ensure that your visibility does not detract from your core essence. Avoid excessive press releases and statements. Maintain focus and vigilance so that when you do issue a statement or hold a press conference, it resonates powerfully and evokes significant national attention.”

Lawyer Robertson further advised GALA to remain vigilant against political exploitation: “Do not permit anyone to use your efforts for political gain. I urge GALA to carefully select its members and advisers. If the public perceives you as having personal or political ambitions that diverge from your foundational mission, you risk losing the significant support of the masses. Without this backing, your influence will wane.” He concluded with a note of encouragement, expressing his continued support: “In the meantime, I am cheering for all of you—stay focused.” Robertson's message has garnered widespread attention within civil society, reflecting a growing consensus among legal and civic leaders about the need for strategic discipline, public accountability, and non-partisanship in advocacy efforts.