Why President Barrow Was Right to Remove Auditor-General Modou Ceesay

By Retired Lt. Colonel Samsudeen Sarr

       

The recent uproar over the removal of Auditor-General Modou Ceesay has been dramatized by critics as a constitutional crisis. In reality, it is not the Constitution that is under assault, but professionalism and decorum. What the nation witnessed was not a breakdown of democratic order, but a textbook case of insubordination cloaked in the language of political martyrdom.

     

At the center of the issue is not Section 158 of the 1997 Constitution—itself unambiguous in giving the President authority to appoint and, when necessary, dismiss the Auditor-General for “inability,” “incompetence,” or “misbehavior.” Rather, the issue is Mr. Ceesay’s reckless decision to abandon discretion, defy professional norms, and drift into opposition politics.

When he publicly accused the President of fabricating a story about his supposed acceptance of the Trade Ministry, Mr. Ceesay crossed a red line. Internal consultations of that nature should have been handled privately, not paraded in the press as a public challenge to the Head of State. Once an Auditor-General brands the President of the Republic a liar in the public arena, the relationship of trust is irreparably broken.

           

The Auditor-General’s Office is not just another government department. It is the guardian of public finance, an institution that depends on integrity, restraint, and mutual trust with the executive. Without that trust, the credibility of the office collapses.

Instead of seeking constructive dialogue, Mr. Ceesay chose confrontation. Worse, he sought refuge in the arms of opposition lawyers and activists, turning himself from a neutral financial watchdog into a partisan combatant in an election season. His decision to retain senior lawyer Lamin J. Darbo—himself a recent aspirant for the UDP presidential candidacy—was hardly a coincidence. It was a political statement, one that transformed the matter from a constitutional query into a partisan campaign.

This raises the uncomfortable but necessary question: was Mr. Ceesay ever functioning as an impartial Auditor-General, or had he long been aligned with the opposition while masquerading as an independent civil servant? His actions suggest the latter.

President Barrow has both the duty to lead and the obligation to defend the integrity of state institutions. The National Audit Office must remain above politics, not dragged into the mud of party rivalries. Allowing its head to openly undermine the presidency, humiliate the Head of State, and politicize the institution would have been a dereliction of that duty.

Critics who shout “constitutional violation” conveniently ignore that misbehavior is a recognized and legitimate ground for dismissal. What greater misbehavior exists than to turn a constitutionally independent office into a weapon for opposition politics while publicly ridiculing the President?

From Abu Denton and M.I. Secka to Karamba Touray under Yahya Jammeh, Gambian Auditor-Generals have discharged their duties with professionalism, tact, and respect for state institutions. None ever dragged the presidency into a public credibility contest. Mr. Ceesay’s conduct is unprecedented—and unacceptable.

This is not about stifling independence; it is about safeguarding the dignity of public office. Mr. Ceesay’s refusal to vacate his post, his public accusations against the President, and his overt embrace of opposition allies all constitute clear grounds of misbehavior under the Constitution.

By removing him, President Barrow did not weaken the Audit Office. He preserved it from descending into partisan warfare. Leadership is not always about doing what is popular. It is about doing what is necessary to protect the state and its institutions.

For that reason, President Barrow was right—firmly and unambiguously right—to act.

Anti-Corruption Law and the Pursuit of Good Governance in The Gambia_

By: Saidou DM Camara 

Good governance has become one of the most important benchmarks of democratic consolidation in Africa, and The Gambia is no exception. As a political and legal ideal, good governance emphasizes transparency, accountability, participation, and the supremacy of the rule of law. Yet, in The Gambia, as in many countries with fragile democracies, corruption continues to undermine these aspirations. The abuse of public office for private gain not only erodes public trust but also deprives the state of resources necessary for development, perpetuating cycles of poverty and inequality.

In the Gambian context, the legacy of authoritarianism under former President Yahya Jammeh left behind entrenched practices of graft, weak institutions, and a culture of impunity. Since the democratic transition of 2017, the Barrow administration has faced increasing pressure from citizens and the international community to confront corruption through both political and legal reforms. The drafting of the Anti-Corruption Commission Bill, alongside other measures such as the Access to Information Act (2021), reflects attempts to align domestic law with global anti-corruption standards. However, challenges of enforcement, institutional weakness, and political interference remain significant obstacles.

This essay critically examines the role of anti-corruption law in promoting good governance in The Gambia. It argues that while legal reforms provide an essential foundation, their effectiveness depends on strong institutions, political will, and citizen participation. The essay begins by defining corruption as a threat to governance, before analyzing the legal and institutional frameworks in The Gambia. It then considers the judiciary’s role, implementation challenges, and the reforms required to move towards a governance system that is transparent, accountable, and just.

Corruption as a Threat to Good Governance

Corruption is often defined in legal terms as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Politically, it is a distortion of governance systems, undermining equality, efficiency, and legitimacy. The African Union has declared corruption as one of the greatest obstacles to development, recognizing its impact on weakening democratic institutions and diverting resources from essential services.

In The Gambia, corruption manifests in several ways: bribery within public administration, misappropriation of state funds, nepotism in appointments, and manipulation of procurement processes. The Jammeh era was marked by an unprecedented personalization of state resources, where state coffers were routinely plundered for private enrichment. The Janneh Commission Report (2019) revealed staggering levels of mismanagement and theft, estimating that over US$300 million was diverted from public accounts under Jammeh’s rule. Such corruption not only deprived Gambians of development but also entrenched authoritarianism by concentrating wealth and power in the executive.

The link between corruption and poor governance is clear. Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) consistently shows a correlation between high levels of corruption and low levels of governance quality. In the Gambian context, corruption has eroded trust in institutions such as the judiciary, the legislature, and public administration.

Good governance requires accountability, but corruption corrodes the very institutions that provide oversight. Instead of acting as guardians of the rule of law, compromised institutions perpetuate impunity. This dynamic explains why combating corruption is not merely a matter of legality but a cornerstone of governance reform (Johnston, 2014).

Legal and Institutional Frameworks Against Corruption in The Gambia

Existing Frameworks

The Gambia has taken important steps to develop anti-corruption frameworks. The Access to Information Act (2021) marked a significant milestone by granting citizens the right to demand transparency from public institutions (Amnesty International, 2021). The government has also tabled the Anti-Corruption Commission Bill, designed to establish an independent commission mandated to investigate and prosecute corruption.

Other institutions, such as the Office of the Auditor General, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), and the National Audit Office, play oversight roles. Additionally, The Gambia is a signatory to international and regional instruments such as the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption (AUCPCC).

Strengths and Weaknesses

These frameworks demonstrate a commitment to reform, but challenges persist. The Access to Information Act provides transparency but requires strong enforcement mechanisms to be effective. The Anti-Corruption Commission Bill remains under discussion and has not yet delivered tangible results. Institutions such as the PAC are constrained by inadequate resources, lack of technical expertise, and occasional political interference.

The Gambia’s experience highlights a broader African challenge: anti-corruption laws often exist in theory but remain weak in practice (Mbaku, 2020). Without strong institutional independence and adequate funding, legal reforms risk becoming symbolic gestures rather than tools for transformation.

The Role of Law in Promoting Good Governance

The rule of law is central to good governance. When enforced impartially, anti-corruption laws create accountability structures that restrain abuse of power. In The Gambia, this means empowering courts, oversight bodies, and the public to demand compliance from leaders.

For example, legal measures against illicit enrichment or asset declaration can deter corrupt practices. Judicial independence is also vital: a judiciary compromised by political influence cannot impartially adjudicate corruption cases (Fombad, 2017). In The Gambia, the judiciary has made strides in asserting its independence, but its capacity to handle complex financial crimes remains limited.

Comparative experiences provide useful insights. Ghana’s Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) offers a model of an independent anti-corruption body with broad investigatory powers. Rwanda’s success in reducing petty corruption through institutional reforms and strict enforcement also demonstrates the importance of political will. Botswana’s Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC) is often cited as a benchmark for African anti-corruption institutions. These cases suggest that The Gambia must strengthen institutional capacity while ensuring political insulation.

Challenges in Implementation

Political Interference

One of the greatest challenges is political interference. Corruption thrives where political elites manipulate institutions for personal or partisan gain. In The Gambia, concerns have been raised that anti-corruption efforts may be selective, targeting political opponents while sparing allies (Transparency International, 2022).

Weak Institutional Capacity

Institutions charged with oversight often lack adequate funding, technical expertise, or autonomy. For example, the Auditor General’s reports are frequently delayed, limiting their effectiveness. Similarly, the National Audit Office faces logistical constraints that undermine its independence.

Cultural and Systemic Factors

Corruption is not only institutional but also cultural. Decades of authoritarian rule normalized patronage and bribery. In such contexts, corruption can become embedded in social and political life, making legal reforms difficult to enforce.

Public Apathy

Citizens often view anti-corruption measures with skepticism, perceiving them as symbolic rather than substantive. Without visible prosecutions or recovery of stolen assets, public confidence in anti-corruption initiatives declines.

Towards Strengthening Anti-Corruption and Good Governance

Institutional Independence

Independent anti-corruption institutions are critical. The proposed Anti-Corruption Commission must be shielded from political influence and granted prosecutorial powers. Adequate funding and capacity-building are essential.

Whistleblower Protections and Civic Education

Laws protecting whistleblowers and investigative journalists must be enacted and enforced. Civic education can also shift cultural attitudes by emphasizing the social costs of corruption.

Digital Reforms

E-governance and open data systems can reduce opportunities for corruption by automating processes and improving transparency. For example, digital procurement systems limit human discretion in public contracts.

International and Regional Cooperation

As corruption often involves cross-border financial flows, regional cooperation is vital. The Gambia can leverage platforms such as ECOWAS to strengthen asset recovery and financial intelligence mechanisms.

Conclusion

Anti-corruption law is not merely a legal tool but a governance imperative. In The Gambia, combating corruption is central to democratic consolidation, sustainable development, and public trust. While progress has been made through legislation such as the Access to Information Act and the proposed Anti-Corruption Commission, success will depend on political will, independent institutions, and citizen engagement.

The Gambian case illustrates a broader truth: laws alone cannot defeat corruption. They must be transformed into living instruments of accountability, backed by institutions that are independent, transparent, and trusted by citizens. In this sense, anti-corruption law is both a test and a measure of good governance. If The Gambia succeeds, it will not only strengthen its democracy but also serve as a model for other nations seeking to overcome the corrosive effects of corruption.

References:

Amnesty International. (2021). The Gambia: Access to Information Act a step forward for transparency. Amnesty International.

Fombad, C. M. (2017). Separation of Powers and Constitutionalism in Africa: The Case of Botswana. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 35(2), 183–203.

Johnston, M. (2014). Corruption, Contention and Reform: The Power of Deep Democratization. Cambridge University Press.

Mbaku, J. M. (2020). Corruption in Africa: Causes, Consequences, and Cleanups. Lexington Books.

Rose-Ackerman, S. (2016). Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform. Cambridge University Press.

Transparency International. (2022). Corruption Perceptions Index 2022: The Gambia.5 Transparency International.

Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC). (2021). Final Report of the TRRC, The Gambia. Banjul.

Stop Misleading the Youth: Courts, Not Streets, Are the Path to Justice

In every democracy, rules, laws, and institutions form the backbone of governance. The Gambia is no different. When a new Auditor General, Mr. Cherno Amadou Sowe, was duly appointed to head the National Audit Office, every public servant within the institution had a duty to respect and comply with his leadership. Disobedience of lawful instructions from the legitimate head of the NAO is not only a dereliction of duty but also a direct assault on the very democracy some claim to defend.

Let us be clear: if anyone—whether staff of the NAO or ordinary citizens—believes the removal of Mr. Modou Ceesay was unconstitutional, the courts are the right and only avenue to challenge such a decision. That is how democracy functions. Disputes are settled through legal and constitutional mechanisms, not through inciting civil servants to rebellion or misleading the youth onto the streets.

Those now encouraging staff resistance and mobilizing the youth to defy lawful authority are not defenders of democracy. They are its enemies. For democracy does not mean doing as one pleases; it means abiding by the rule of law even when we disagree with decisions. To insist otherwise is to flirt with anarchy and to recklessly endanger the lives and futures of young Gambians who may be lured into confrontations that will only end in prison cells.

The National Audit Office was established as an independent body to safeguard accountability and transparency, not to become a political battlefield. By refusing to carry out their duties under the new Auditor General, some staff are betraying their professional oaths, undermining the credibility of the institution, and painting The Gambia as a lawless state where authority is mocked rather than respected.

Those agitating for confrontation must answer difficult questions:

Is refusing lawful instructions from a recognized office holder not itself a violation of the Constitution?

Can an institution retain its independence and credibility if its staff place personal allegiances above legal obligations?

Who benefits when Gambian youths are misled into the streets instead of being guided to lawful avenues of redress?

If indeed one believes in democracy, then let us practice what we preach. The courts are open, the Constitution is clear, and the law provides remedies. Resorting to intimidation, insubordination, or street lawlessness is not the way forward—it is the surest path to chaos.

The Gambia deserves disciplined institutions, not divided ones. The NAO must realign itself with its lawful leadership, perform its constitutional role with integrity, and allow those who disagree with government decisions to pursue their grievances through the courts. That is the democratic way. That is the Gambian way.

Enough with the theatrics. Enough with misleading the youth. Let us stand for democracy by standing for law, order, and constitutionalism.

Police, Justice Ministry Hold Consultative Meeting on Security and Justice Delivery

Banjul, September 17, 2025 — The Gambia Police Force (GPF) on Wednesday hosted a high-level consultative meeting with a visiting delegation from the Ministry of Justice’s Special Prosecution Office. The talks, held at Police Headquarters, focused on strengthening collaboration in security and justice delivery.

The meeting brought together members of the GPF Senior Management Team and officers from the Legal and Prosecution Unit. Chairing the session, Assistant Inspector General of Police (Operations) Pateh Jallow reaffirmed the Force’s commitment to building strategic partnerships that reinforce national security, the rule of law, and effective justice systems.

Dr. Samuel Akorima, Security Lead of the Special Prosecution Advanced Team, delivered the main presentation, highlighting three thematic areas for cooperation. He stressed the importance of closer coordination to combat crime, enhance prosecutions, and safeguard justice.

Officials say the engagement will deepen institutional synergy, strengthen internal security mechanisms, and foster stronger collaboration between the two institutions. The initiative is described as an important step toward consolidating peace, stability, and justice in The Gambia.

DLEAG Registers Landmark Seizure of Over 400,000 Ecstasy Pills

By Jarranewstv Staff Writer

The Drug Law Enforcement Agency, The Gambia (DLEAG), has recorded a major breakthrough in its fight against narcotics, seizing more than 401,000 pills of suspected ecstasy in what authorities describe as a landmark operation.

The month-long sting, which culminated on September 16, 2025, led to the arrest of two Gambian nationals and the confiscation of drugs with an estimated street value of D40 million at wholesale.

According to DLEAG, the first arrest was made at London Corner in Serrekunda, where Fallou Cham was taken into custody with 1,767 pills of ecstasy in his possession. Investigators say Cham’s arrest led to the discovery of a bunker residence in Sukuta, where officers uncovered 11 suitcases containing 80 packets of ecstasy. Each packet was filled with 5,000 pills, bringing the total haul to hundreds of thousands of tablets.

In addition to the drugs, operatives seized significant sums of cash suspected to be proceeds of the illicit trade, including D967,700, 176,000 CFA, and €50,100.

Further investigations prompted the arrest of Mariama Jawara at her residence in Brufut. Preliminary findings suggest the narcotics were shipped from Holland, with Jawara allegedly playing a central role in coordinating the operations. Officials say her husband, believed to be residing in Holland, is connected to the shipments.

Both suspects remain in custody

“Africa at the Crossroads: Navigating China’s Rise, Russia’s Return, and the Quest for Reparative Sovereignty

By Lang Fafa Dampha

From Parade to Power Play: China's Military Assertion, Russia's Resurgence, and Africa's Struggle for Reparative Sovereignty

 

The recent military parade in Beijing was more than a demonstration of growing technological sophistication. It marked a strategic signal of China's ambition to reshape the global order. For African nations, this is not a remote or abstract development. Rather, it offers a convergence of new opportunities and deep challenges. These shifts must be analysed against the background of Africa’s enduring historical trauma : slavery, colonialism, apartheid, and economic marginalisation by the West. In this evolving landscape, China and Russia present alternative paradigms that simultaneously disrupt and replicate aspects of Western engagement. Understanding this complex geopolitical recalibration requires a sober examination of Africa’s past, present, and its pursuit of future autonomy.

Africa’s relationship with the West has been defined by systemic exploitation. The transatlantic slave trade decimated populations and disrupted indigenous societies, inaugurating centuries of forced labour and dispossession. This was followed by colonial partition during the so-called Scramble for Africa, when European powers drew arbitrary borders that disregarded ethnic and cultural realities. The colonial imperative was not development, but extraction. Africa’s raw materials were funneled into the engines of industrialisation in Europe and North America, while indigenous economies were stunted to ensure dependency.

Post-independence did not bring true liberation. Instead, a new form of neocolonial control emerged through financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Structural adjustment programmes undermined public services, prioritising debt repayment over social investment. Western alliances with autocratic regimes, justified by Cold War geopolitics or access to strategic resources, further destabilised democratic development. Even the global struggle against apartheid, which took decades of advocacy, exposed how Western governments often prioritised ideological alliances over fundamental human rights.

China’s emergence as a central actor in African development presents an alternative approach. Through mechanisms such as the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation and the Belt and Road Initiative, China frames its engagement around mutual benefit, infrastructure development, and a policy of non-interference in domestic governance.

This pragmatic approach appeals to many African leaders. Unlike Western donors who attach political and ideological conditions to loans and aid, China often provides infrastructure investments in the form of roads, railways, ports, energy systems, without public demands for governance reform. This model directly addresses the continent’s critical infrastructure deficits and is seen as less intrusive than traditional Western prescriptions.

However, the relationship is not without complications. Critics have raised concerns about the risk of debt dependency and the possible forfeiture of strategic assets, as evidenced by Sri Lanka’s experience with the Hambantota Port. There is also a risk of perpetuating extractive dynamics where raw materials leave the continent in exchange for imported manufactured goods, thereby suppressing African industrialisation.

 Furthermore, China's non-interference doctrine can embolden repressive regimes by shielding them from international scrutiny.

The growing influence of China, and to a lesser extent Russia, has prompted a defensive reaction from the West. The United States has launched new initiatives such as Prosper Africa and the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which emphasise market-driven development and private sector growth. The European Union has responded with its Global Gateway initiative, intended as a counterweight to China's infrastructure investments.

However, these efforts are often undermined by historical baggage. Many African observers remain skeptical of Western rhetoric about democracy and transparency, particularly when it comes from former colonial powers with a long record of backing authoritarian regimes. Moreover, Western media portrayals of African leaders' engagements with China or Russia often carry an implicitly condescending tone. Such moralising fails to acknowledge the historical role of the West in undermining African sovereignty and is increasingly dismissed by African audiences as an effort to preserve declining influence.

Alongside China, Russia has reasserted its presence in Africa, primarily through military cooperation, energy deals, and political alignment. Moscow’s appeal lies partly in its vocal critique of Western imperialism and its support for alternative power structures. Russia’s engagement, often focused on security training and arms sales, has been particularly significant in countries grappling with insurgencies or internal instability.

While the ideological appeal of Russia is limited, its symbolic value as a counterweight to Western dominance resonates with some African governments. The deepening of ties between Africa and Russia was visibly reinforced in forums like the Russia-Africa Summit and the broader Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), where the language of multipolarity and sovereign equality takes precedence over conditional diplomacy.

Amid this global power competition, Africa should no longer be a passive recipient of foreign interests. The African Union’s Agenda 2063 sets out an ambitious vision for integration, prosperity, and peace. The African Continental Free Trade Area aims to redefine the continent’s economic architecture and reduce dependency on external powers.

African governments are increasingly adept at playing global powers against each other to extract more favorable terms.

This emerging multipolar order offers African nations unprecedented leverage. For the first time in modern history, African countries can reject unfavorable terms and seek partnerships that align more closely with their national priorities.

The symbolism of China’s military parade should be interpreted not only as a declaration of Beijing’s geopolitical ambitions but also as an indication of broader transformations in the global order. The era of unchallenged Western hegemony appears to be drawing to a close. For Africa, this moment presents the potential to dismantle the historically coercive structures that have impeded its development and autonomy, provided that African states cultivate strategic coherence, institutional discipline, and long-term self-reliance. 

The challenge now lies in avoiding a replacement of one set of dependencies with another. True sovereignty will require African states to develop robust institutions, foster intra-African trade, and prioritise long-term capacity building over short-term gains. The goal is not merely independence but reparative sovereignty, a geopolitical and economic condition in which historical injustices are acknowledged and addressed, and where Africa is empowered to define its future on its own terms.