Editorial: Where Was The Outrage Before No

By Alagi Yorro Jallow

The Great Gambian Blindspot: Where Was the Outrage Before Now? Selective Outrage: Why Are Protesters Ignoring the 2011 Tax Evasion Inquiry Commission? Accountability Must Be Universal, Not Selective. Alagi Yorro Jallow Fatoumatta: Activism thrives on accountability, justice, and transparency—but what happens when activists themselves engage in selective outrage? As Gambians rally in protest demanding government disclosure of Yahya Jammeh’s asset buyers, one glaring contradiction remains: Where was this same energy when the 2011 Tax Evasion Inquiry Commission uncovered powerful elites dodging their fiscal responsibilities? Where were the protests when Justice Mama Fatima Singhateh’s commission exposed a web of financial misconduct among lawyers, corporate giants, and state figures? Instead of mass mobilization, there was silence. Instead of calls for justice, there was indifference. And now, suddenly, the streets are filled with voices claiming to fight for transparency—but transparency for whom? If activists and their supporters truly stand for accountability, then why have they ignored systemic corruption beyond Jammeh’s regime? This movement must confront uncomfortable truths, because justice is not real if it is selective. Fatoumatta: As Gambians rally for accountability and transparency, demanding answers about Yahya Jammeh’s looted assets, one glaring question remains unanswered: Why is there no outrage over the damning findings of the 2011 Tax Evasion Inquiry Commission? This commission, chaired by Justice Mama Fatima Singhateh, exposed powerful and influential lawyers, business elites, and professionals who failed to pay their taxes—a direct betrayal of the nation’s economic integrity. Some even challenged their tax liabilities in the Supreme Court, attempting to evade responsibility through legal maneuvering rather than compliance.

Yet, where are today’s protesters, who claim to be fighting for justice and transparency? Their silence on this issue reveals a troubling inconsistency—one that suggests political opportunism rather than genuine activism. If transparency is truly the goal, then activists must confront all forms of corruption—not just the ones that fit political narratives. The 2011 Tax Evasion Inquiry Commission uncovered widespread financial misconduct, yet no sustained movement emerged to demand consequences for those implicated. Instead, many of the same voices now calling for protests against Jammeh’s asset sales were silent when elite professionals dodged taxes, depriving the state of critical revenue. This selective outrage raises serious questions: Why was there no mass mobilization when the commission exposed tax evasion among powerful figures? Why do activists ignore systemic corruption beyond Jammeh’s regime? Are protests truly about justice, or are they being shaped by political convenience? True accountability must be consistent—not cherry-picked based on political expediency. Fatoumatta: Activism should never be reduced to a tool for political maneuvering. Yet, many protesters today risk becoming pawns, blindly following narratives shaped by political elites rather than engaging in independent, critical advocacy. The silence on the 2011 Tax Evasion Inquiry Commission suggests that some activists are willing to overlook corruption when it does not serve their immediate agenda. But justice is not selective—it must be pursued wherever wrongdoing exists, whether it involves former presidents, business elites, or influential lawyers. If Gambians truly want transparency, they must demand accountability across all sectors, not just where it is politically convenient. The fight for justice and transparency must be rooted in principle, not political calculation. If protesters ignore past corruption while selectively targeting certain figures, they risk undermining the credibility of their movement.

The 2011 Tax Evasion Inquiry Commission was a critical moment in The Gambia’s history, exposing deep-rooted financial misconduct. Yet, it was met with silence. If activists truly stand for accountability, they must demand justice for all forms of corruption—not just the ones that fit political narratives. The question remains: Will Gambians fight for real transparency, or will they continue to be pawns in a selective battle?

Statement Condemning Intimidation of Investigative Journalist Mustapha K. Darboe

By Alagi Yorro Jallow

The blatant attempt by leaders of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and the Media Council of The Gambia (MCG) to pressure The Republic newspaper into exonerating former Justice Minister Abubacarr Tambadou is an unacceptable assault on press freedom and investigative journalism.

Journalists do not exist to sanitize reputations or shield public figures from scrutiny—they exist to expose truth, hold power accountable, and inform the public. The April 30 investigative report, “The Assets of Gambia’s Former Dictator Go for a Song,” raised serious concerns about corruption and lack of transparency in the sale of Yahya Jammeh’s assets. Instead of addressing these concerns through lawful and transparent means, NHRC Chair Emmanuel Daniel Joof, MCG Executive Secretary Bai Emil Touray, and MCG Governing Council Chair Baboucarr Cham resorted to intimidation tactics, summoning Editor-in-Chief Mustapha K. Darboe to demand a joint statement clearing Tambadou of wrongdoing. This brazen attempt to manipulate the narrative is not only a violation of journalistic ethics but also a dangerous precedent for press suppression. The insinuation that Darboe was paid to conduct the investigation is a baseless and defamatory attack on his credibility, designed to discredit legitimate reporting and silence independent voices. We unequivocally condemn this intimidation and demand the following: 1. An immediate end to all forms of pressure and coercion against The Republic newspaper and its journalists. 2. A public apology from NHRC and MCG leaders for their attempt to interfere with independent journalism. 3. A reaffirmation of press freedom by all institutions tasked with upholding democratic values. The Gambia Press Union (GPU) has rightly called out this unethical interference, warning that journalistic integrity must never be compromised to serve political interests. The proposal to “tweak the facts” is a direct attack on truth and public trust—and must be rejected outright. Journalists must be free to investigate, report, and expose wrongdoing without fear of retaliation. The Gambian people deserve transparency, accountability, and an unwavering commitment to press freedom. We stand in solidarity with Mustapha K. Darboe and all journalists who refuse to be silenced. Alagi Yorro Jallow Former Executive Member of the Gambia and Emeritus Journalist.

Editorial: GALA Misguided in Their Approach

The newly established activist group, Gambians Against Loathed Assets (GALA), appears to be misinformed about the legal framework governing protests in The Gambia. Rather than effectively advocating for change, their tactics of public demonstrations echo sentiments from a time when free expression was met with harsh repression. Just a few years ago, many Gambians lived in fear of dissent under a dictatorship where any attempt to protest could lead to dire consequences, including imprisonment or, in some cases, even death. Today, however, Gambians can apply for permits to hold public demonstrations without fear of government retaliation. This shift illustrates a significant move towards freedom and democracy in our country. Despite this progress, it is essential to recognize that the right to protest is governed by the Public Order Act, which mandates obtaining police clearance to hold public gatherings. This law has undergone scrutiny and has been upheld by various courts, including the Gambia Court of Appeal and the ECOWAS Court, as evidenced by notable cases involving the United Democratic Party leaders.

Regrettably, some so-called human rights activists, journalists, and political figures—who once cowered under the regime of Yahya Jammeh—are now misleading our youth. They risk jeopardizing the future of these young people by encouraging protest actions that could lead to legal troubles. The recent actions of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) serve as a stark reminder of this environment. In a disturbing turn of events, the NHRC leadership pressured the publisher of a critical investigative report to publicly vouch for former Justice Minister Abubacarr Tambadou. This move raises significant questions about the integrity and independence of our institutions. The Gambia Press Union (GPU) has condemned such pressure tactics, which undermine journalistic freedom and professionalism. The allegations against investigative reporting should be met with transparency and accountability, not coercion or intimidation. The GPU strongly asserts that the rights of journalists to provide accurate and balanced information must be preserved without external interference. As citizens of The Gambia, it is imperative to discern the motivations behind such advocacy and to engage in a manner that respects our evolving democratic framework. TRUE progress lies in fostering dialogue and understanding within the bounds of our laws, rather than descending into chaos that endangers our hard-won freedoms. Let us not be swayed by misguided leaders but rather advocate for our rights in constructive and lawful ways.

The Public Order Act Is Still Law

By Alagi Yorro Jallow

The Public Order Act: A Law of Controversy, But Still the Law. The Danger of Misinformation in Legal Discourse. The Case of Ousainou Darboe: A Legal Precedent. Alagi Yorro Jallow Few laws in The Gambia’s legal framework spark as much debate and contention as the Public Order Act. While critics argue that it is anti-democratic, the reality remains: it is a legitimate and enforceable law. Those who invoke constitutional principles must do so with accuracy and integrity, avoiding misinformation or political distortion. The Public Order Act has been tested in court, challenged at the highest judicial levels, and remains legally binding. It is not a relic of dictatorship, nor is it an arbitrary tool of suppression—it is a law that has survived judicial scrutiny, including cases brought by prominent political figures.

The Case of Ousainou Darboe: A Legal Precedent One of the most high-profile challenges to the Public Order Act came from Lawyer Ousainou Darboe, leader of the United Democratic Party (UDP). In 2016, Darboe and the UDP executive were arrested, tried, and convicted under this law for participating in unauthorized protests. Seeking justice, Darboe appealed his conviction at multiple levels: • The Appeal Courts • The Supreme Court • The ECOWAS Court Yet, each appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the legal validity of the Public Order Act. The courts upheld the government’s authority to regulate public demonstrations, confirming that while protest is a constitutional right, it must adhere to legal procedures. This ruling sets a precedent—one that activists and legal commentators must acknowledge when discussing the law. In an era where social media amplifies narratives, it is imperative that discussions surrounding legal matters remain fact-based and intellectually honest. The Public Order Act is often misrepresented, with commentators twisting its provisions to fit political agendas. Conduct thorough legal research—understanding court rulings and precedents. Avoid political distortion—ensuring legal arguments remain objective. Uphold integrity in discussions—promoting fact-based activism rather than misleading rhetoric.

The Public Order Act remains a valid law, upheld by The Gambia’s highest courts. While its democratic implications can be debated, its legal standing is indisputable. Those who invoke constitutional principles must do so with accuracy, ensuring that public discourse remains informed, responsible, and free from manipulation. Justice is not served through misinformation—it is upheld through fact-based legal challenges. If activists wish to contest the Public Order Act, they must do so through judicial processes, not through distorted narratives.The law is not perfect, but it is the law—and until it is successfully challenged, it remains binding.

GAF Warns Essa Faal And Samsudeen Sarr ToCease Misleading Statements

The Gambia Armed Forces (GAF) has issued a press release cautioning former Army Commander Samsudeen Sarr and aspiring presidential candidate Essa Mbaye Faal against making misleading public statements that misuse the name of the Armed Forces for political gain. GAF expressed serious concern about a trend of unfounded commentary surrounding its operations within the democratic framework of The Gambia. The military institution highlighted specific remarks from Sarr, who referenced an isolated incident involving the Senegalese Gendarmerie and questioned the presence of GAF soldiers at key security installations. Such narratives, according to GAF, misrepresent the professionalism and non-partisan nature of the military.

Faal, in a recent interview, alleged government neglect of the GAF, claims that GAF describes as unfounded and potentially harmful. Such assertions politicize the Armed Forces, eroding public confidence in an institution committed to reform and accountable under democratic civilian authority. The GAF High Command condemned these unethical comments, which they believe detract from national cohesion and could compromise security. They reiterated their commitment to professional standards and operational integrity in alignment with the Security Sector Reform agenda.

In its statement, GAF called on Sarr and other public figures to refrain from disparaging the military. The Armed Forces also urged political parties and media outlets, including West Coast Radio, to uphold professional ethics and avoid involving the military in political discourse. GAF reaffirmed its dedication to maintaining peace and security in The Gambia and contributing to the nation’s socio-economic development. They encouraged all Gambians to support the Armed Forces in its mission to transform into a professional and democratically accountable institution. Signed, Colonel Lamin K. Sanyang Director of Press and Public Relations Gambia Armed Forces 6 May 2025

In Defence of Lawyer Mai Ahmad Fatty

By Yaya Dampha

Mai Ahmad Fatty’s bravery and dedication to the cause of democracy in The Gambia cannot be overstated. His willingness to confront the oppressive regime of Yahya Jammeh, even in the face of life-threatening dangers, exemplifies true courage. The assassination attempt where a truck was deliberately driven into his car serves as a stark reminder of the lengths to which dictators will go to silence dissent.

Despite these harrowing experiences, Fatty’s resilience shone through as he not only survived but also became a pivotal figure in the fight for democratic governance in The Gambia. By founding his own political party and rallying support from the Gambian diaspora, he has played an instrumental role in advocating for democracy and human rights. Mai Ahmad Fatty deserves respect and recognition for his contributions to the struggle for freedom in The Gambia. His story is a testament to the power of perseverance and the importance of standing up against tyranny. It is vital that we remember and honor his sacrifices, ensuring that they are woven into the fabric of our nation's history as we continue to strive for a brighter future.Mai Ahmad Fatty’s advocacy and political engagement reflect a commitment to the progress and development of The Gambia a commitment underscored by the tangible advancements achieved under President Adama Barrow’s leadership. In a nation that has long suffered from neglect and mismanagement, it is vital to recognize the critical developments that have unfolded in recent years.

Under President Barrow, The Gambia has witnessed a transformation in infrastructure, with road networks expanding to connect communities that have long been isolated. Access to electricity has reached the most remote areas, illuminating lives that were previously shrouded in darkness and deprivation. Healthcare services have improved significantly, making essential medical care accessible to the marginalized populations that had been overlooked for decades. Education services have also seen reinvigoration, providing opportunities for the youth and fostering a brighter future for our nation

Mai Ahmad Fatty’s acknowledgment of these achievements is not merely political maneuvering; it is a testament to his dedication to the well-being of Gambians. Recognizing the progress made under the current administration is crucial in fostering a constructive dialogue focused on the future. While the struggle for democracy and human rights continues, it is equally important to celebrate the milestones that have been reached and to encourage more development-oriented initiatives for the benefit of all citizens. As we reflect on the journey towards a democratic and prosperous Gambia, let us embrace a spirit of collaboration and constructive criticism. Mai Ahmad Fatty’s endorsement of developmental progress is an invitation to all political actors to prioritize the needs of the Gambian people above partisan squabbling. It is a call to work together in a shared commitment to create a society where every individual can thrive, benefiting from the liberties won through decades of struggle.

In recognizing the positive strides made, we bolster our collective spirit and empower ourselves to continue the fight for a better Gambia—one that honors both our past and our aspirations for the future. Let us support leaders like Mai Ahmad Fatty, who advocate not only for justice and accountability but who also appreciate the importance of development in building a stronger, more united nation. If someone sacrificed a minute for you try to respect them for a second.