Singapore’s Special Envoy Visits The Gambia High Commission in London

The Gambia High Commission in London recently welcomed Mr. Yap Ong Heng, the Special Envoy of the Minister for Transport of the Republic of Singapore, for a courtesy visit with Chargé d’Affaires a.i., Mr. Sulayman Suntou Touray. This meeting highlighted the strengthening partnership between The Gambia and Singapore, focusing on opportunities for greater collaboration in transport, maritime, aviation, and environmental sustainability. Key Topics Discussed: - Capacity Building and Skills Transfer: Strategies to enhance technical expertise in aviation, maritime, and land transport sectors. - IMO Compliance and Best Practices: Sharing knowledge on the implementation of International Maritime Organization (IMO) conventions. - Climate Sustainability Collaboration: Support for The Gambia’s National Action Plan for greenhouse gas reduction, aligned with the IMO GHG Strategy. - Education and Training: Expanding fellowships and professional development in governance and public sector reform. - Multilateral Cooperation: A commitment to mutual support in international platforms such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the IMO. Notably, 118 Gambian professionals have benefited from training at Singapore’s Aviation Academy, alongside maritime training facilitated by the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore.

The discussion also noted Singapore’s Climate Decarbonisation Blueprint for 2050, which serves as a model for advancing climate-resilient infrastructure efforts. Both nations expressed optimism about future engagements, with plans for further coordination through national channels and upcoming initiatives. The meeting culminated in a reaffirmation of the long-standing diplomatic friendship between Singapore and The Gambia. Attendees Included: From Singapore: Mr. Yap Ong Heng, Special Envoy; Ms. Lau Bee Juan, Senior Assistant Director. From The Gambia High Commission: Mr. Sulayman Suntou Touray, Chargé d’Affaires a.i.; Mrs. Sainey Barrow, Counsellor; and interns Ms. Abi Barry and Mr. Zindi Anthony Levi.

Ambassador Conteh's Open Letter To H.E Dr. Mamadou Tangara

Dear Dr. Tangara, I am compelled to address you in light of the remarks made during your recent town hall discussion on the "Mansa Kunda" program on May 16, 2025. While the session illuminated various aspects of your ministry’s policies and challenges, it became abundantly clear that your comments on the cadre of diplomats you referred to as "political appointees" lacked not only clarity but also fairness.

Your description of these individuals as merely beneficiaries of political favoritism, rather than competent professionals, reflects a profound misunderstanding of their qualifications and contributions. By oversimplifying their appointments to a matter of political allegiance, you undermine the reality that many of these diplomats possess exemplary credentials, extensive professional experience, and a commitment to serving our nation's interests on the global stage. It is striking that you singled out the foreign service for alleged incompetence while neglecting to acknowledge that political appointments also span other vital roles within the government. The cabinet ministers, ambassadors, and senior civil servants, filled by politically motivated selections, are not all disgraced individuals. Are we to assume that the diplomatic corps alone is unworthy of respect? This narrative is not only misleading but also dangerously divisive. You have accused this group of diplomats of being the source of numerous issues within our missions, branding them as untrainable and unfit for their roles. Such statements not only rip the fabric of essential diplomatic engagement but also convey a damaging stereotype that dismisses the complex realities of our foreign service. Instances of misconduct, such as those you cited in Rabat and Havana, while regrettable, should not serve as a blanket indictment of all politically appointed diplomats. Accountability lies not solely with them, but also with your ministry’s apparent failure to address challenges as they arise. A proactive approach could have mitigated many conflicts before they escalated. Moreover, your silence on incidents involving the diplomatic community, including the alarming actions leading to certain diplomats being declared "persona non grata" by the U.S. State Department, raises further questions about accountability within your own ranks. Ironically, as you cast aspersions on political appointees, you overlook that many may not have been privy to the same shortcomings you ascribe to others.

It is essential to remember that these purported "misfits" have often sacrificed their well-being to oppose tyranny, enduring persecution and suffering while fighting for the democracy that we enjoy today. They, more than anyone, understand the principles of our nation and the obligations that come with representing The Gambia abroad. Instead of vilification, they deserve recognition and support as vital contributors to our diplomatic efforts. Furthermore, your lack of engagement with the valuable perspectives of Gambians abroad is alarming. Their cries for active participation in national elections, representation in the National Assembly, and inclusion in cabinet appointments must not fall on deaf ears. To ignore the potential and plight of the Gambian diaspora is a disservice to our nation's collective progress. The future of our foreign service cannot be shackled by outdated regulations or a lack of strategic engagement from your office. As we venture further into 2025, reform and modernization are not merely aspirations; they are imperatives. It is time to elevate the conversation around our foreign policy and diplomatic engagement, focusing on collaboration and inclusivity rather than division. I urge you to reconsider your stance, not only towards the diplomatic representatives whom we have entrusted with our nation's image abroad but towards the vast potential that lies within the Gambian diaspora. Our collective future depends on forging unity, fostering respect, and embracing the diverse talents and experiences that every Gambian brings to the table. Yours sincerely, Alkali Fanka Conteh

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.