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