Gambia High Commission Champions Economic Diplomacy with Zenya World Partnership

JarraNewsTV – Staff Reporter

London, United Kingdom 

The Gambia High Commission in London has taken another bold step in advancing the government’s drive for economic diplomacy, holding a fruitful meeting this week with Miss Fatou Sanyang, representative of Zenya World Limited, a UK-based fintech company founded by a Gambian entrepreneur.

The meeting, led by Mr. Sulayman Suntou Touray, Deputy Head of Mission, and attended by Mr. Zindi Anthony Levi, Diplomatic Intern, reflected the High Commission’s growing efforts to connect Gambian businesses with international partners and promote trade and investment opportunities abroad.

According to officials, discussions focused on Zenya World’s proposal to collaborate with the High Commission on a new initiative aimed at strengthening trade and business ties between The Gambia and the United Kingdom. The proposed partnership seeks to create a strategic platform to boost bilateral cooperation, encourage trade and investment, and increase the visibility of Gambian enterprises within the UK market.

Zenya World Limited’s fintech background and entrepreneurial roots offer a unique advantage in this collaboration. The company’s commitment to innovation and sustainable economic growth resonates strongly with the Gambian government’s vision under President Adama Barrow, which places private sector development and international partnerships at the heart of national progress.

Mr. Touray described the meeting as “a positive step toward deepening The Gambia’s economic footprint in the United Kingdom,” noting that such partnerships are vital to the country’s long-term trade and investment goals.

The High Commission welcomed Zenya’s initiative as timely and forward-thinking, especially as preparations intensify for the UK–Gambia Business and Investment Forum 2026 — a key event expected to draw investors, entrepreneurs, and policymakers from both countries.

With this collaboration, the Gambia High Commission continues to affirm its commitment to promoting the country’s economic interests abroad and positioning The Gambia as a dynamic and open destination for trade, technology, and investment.

—END 

The Era of Impunity Is Over — Jammeh’s Return Must Come Through the Law, Not WhatsApp!

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator

Former President Yahya Jammeh and his self-styled supporters have once again displayed an astonishing level of arrogance and disregard for the rule of law and the intelligence of the Gambian people. After years of boasting and grandstanding on social media, the same individuals now seek “statutory guarantees” for a peaceful return—while simultaneously rejecting the legality of the very commissions that exposed the crimes, corruption, and human rights abuses of his 22-year dictatorship.

Let it be made abundantly clear: no amount of revisionist rhetoric or WhatsApp declarations can erase the facts or nullify the findings of the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) and the Janneh Commission. Both commissions were lawfully established under Acts of the National Assembly, pursuant to the 1997 Constitution. Their mandates were firmly rooted in national law and recognized by international institutions including ECOWAS, the African Union, and the United Nations.

Is Yahya Jammeh and his supporters conveniently becoming passively amnesic that Jammeh himself created the Algali Commission to investigate officials of the Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara government—a commission established not under the Constitution, but by a mere military decree? He not only recognized the legality of that commission but went ahead to implement its findings without hesitation, leading to the unlawful confiscation of properties and persecution of innocent citizens. Yet today, the same Jammeh has the audacity to question the legality of commissions established under a constitutional and democratic government. This level of hypocrisy is staggering.

Mr. Jammeh’s attempt to dismiss the TRRC and the Janneh Commission as “unconstitutional” is not only legally untenable but intellectually dishonest. Under Section 200 of the 1997 Constitution, the President, acting in consultation with the National Assembly, is empowered to establish commissions of inquiry into matters of public concern. Both the TRRC and Janneh Commission were established in accordance with that constitutional provision. Their findings and recommendations are binding within the framework of national and international law governing truth, justice, and reparations.

If Yahya Jammeh truly believes in his innocence, he is free to return home—but he must be ready to face the law. His return cannot and will not be orchestrated through social media theatrics, half-baked legal arguments, or emotional appeals for sympathy. It must be formally handled through official diplomatic and governmental channels, in coordination between his host country, the Government of The Gambia, and competent legal and security institutions.

The Gambia is no longer Yahya Jammeh’s personal property. The era of impunity, intimidation, and manipulation is over. The Gambian people have moved on—guided by the principles of justice, accountability, and the rule of law.

The TRRC and Janneh Commission were never instruments of revenge; they were institutions of truth and national healing. The appropriate response for anyone found wanting by these bodies is not arrogance or denial, but humility and a sincere apology to the Gambian people.

Instead, Mr. Jammeh and his followers continue to insult the intelligence of the nation, attempting to rewrite history and undermine lawful institutions. Their latest letter, wrapped in pseudo-legal jargon, is nothing more than an effort to evade justice and destabilize a peaceful country.

Let it be clearly understood: Yahya Jammeh can return, but he must return to face justice. The Gambian people will not allow history to repeat itself. The rule of law is not negotiable, and accountability is not optional.

The Gambia deserves closure, not chaos; justice, not justification; and truth, not tyranny.

The rule of law shall prevail—now and always.

No One Above the Law: Setting the Record Straight on Jammeh’s Return

     

By Yaya Dampha, NPP Diaspora Coordinator – Sweden

After reading the recent opinion by lawyer Malick H.B. Jallow, “Legal Implications of President Jammeh’s Anticipated Return,” has stirred public debate.  This article have serious legal and constitutional lapses that cannot be allowed to slide.  Therefore I must point out that  yes  Mr. Jallow is a respected human rights lawyer, but several of his arguments about former President Yahya Jammeh’s rights and privileges in his article are legally weak and misleading.

It is therefore important to clarify what the law actually says—because justice and truth cannot coexist with distortion.

The Right to Return Is Not Absolute

Every Gambian, including Yahya Jammeh, has the right to return home. That right, however, is not unlimited. The 1997 Constitution, under Section 25, allows freedom of movement to be restricted “in the interest of public order, morality, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

If the return of a former leader accused of serious crimes threatens national security or public peace, the state has the legal authority to manage or delay that process. Suggesting that Jammeh can walk back into the country and reclaim full privileges as if nothing happened is a misreading of both law and logic.

Privileges Are Conditional, Not Automatic

Mr. Jallow claims Jammeh “is well within his rights to be afforded the full privileges of a former leader.” The Privileges of Former Presidents Act (2006) tells a different story. It allows those benefits to be withdrawn or suspended if the former president acts “in a manner unbecoming of the office” or is convicted of a criminal offence.

Moreover, Jammeh’s departure in 2017 was not a normal, lawful transfer of power. He refused to accept election results and left the country only after ECOWAS intervention. It is therefore debatable whether he qualifies, in the legal sense, as a former president who “vacated office lawfully.”

Privileges of state are earned by honourable conduct—not by holding the nation hostage.

Prosecution Is a Legal Duty, Not Political Theatre

Mr. Jallow suggests that threats to arrest Jammeh arise only for political reasons. That is not true. The Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) found credible evidence linking Jammeh and his associates to extrajudicial killings, torture, sexual violence, and enforced disappearances.

Under the TRRC Act 2017, the government is legally bound to act on those findings. The Attorney General has a statutory duty—not a political choice—to pursue prosecution where the evidence warrants it. Ignoring such findings would be a betrayal of justice and a violation of the state’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Pursuing accountability is not political persecution—it is legal responsibility.

The TRRC Was Not a Court and Did Not Violate Fair Hearing

Mr. Jallow argues that the TRRC process violated Jammeh’s right to a fair hearing because he was not invited to respond to allegations. That argument fails on two grounds.

First, the TRRC was a truth-seeking body, not a court of law. It could not convict or sentence anyone. Its purpose was to uncover facts and recommend reforms, not to determine guilt. Second, Jammeh and his supporters were publicly invited multiple times to testify or send written responses. They refused.

One cannot refuse to participate in a national truth process and then claim to have been denied a hearing. When formal prosecution begins, Jammeh will have every right to defend himself before a competent court.

Immunity Does Not Cover Crimes Against Humanity

It is true that Section 69 of the Constitution provides some immunity to former presidents—but only for acts performed in official capacity. Torture, unlawful killings, and enforced disappearances are not official duties of a head of state; they are crimes.

International law, from the Pinochet ruling in the UK to the Charles Taylor trial in Sierra Leone, has consistently held that no former head of state can claim immunity for crimes against humanity. The same principle applies to The Gambia under customary international law.

Therefore, any attempt to shield Jammeh under the pretext of constitutional immunity is both legally and morally untenable.

Accountability and Dignity Can Coexist

On one point, I agree with Mr. Jallow: Jammeh’s dignity as a human being must be respected. Every accused person deserves fair treatment and due process. But dignity does not mean impunity.

Justice must protect both the accused and the victims. The TRRC gave voice to those who were silenced for decades. Their right to truth and justice cannot be sacrificed for political convenience or misplaced loyalty.

No One Above the Law

Yahya Jammeh, like any Gambian, is entitled to his rights—but not to privileges that shield him from accountability. The government’s responsibility is to uphold the law without fear or favour.  

We cannot build a new Gambia on selective justice. The TRRC process was a vital step toward healing and reform. Implementing its recommendations is not a vendetta—it is an act of national integrity.

The time has come for Gambians to stand firmly for justice, not personality cults. As a nation, we must ensure that the law serves the people, not the powerful. 

Thanks  in The  Services of The Gambia 

Yaya Dampha

 NPP Diaspora Coordinator, Sweden

Born in Jarra Jappineh, Lower River Region, The Gambia, Yaya Dampha is a journalist, human rights and political activist based in Sweden.

From Jammeh’s Courtroom to the TRRC: Why Essa Faal Owes Gambians an Apology

Dr. Binneh Minteh argues that the former state prosecutor turned TRRC lead counsel and now presidential aspirant must confront his own role in The Gambia’s history of injustice.

Professor of Criminal Justice, Former Second Lieutenant, The Gambia National Army

Former Second Lieutenant Binneh Minteh, himself once among the alleged November 11, 1994 coup plotters, has again raised serious concerns about the credibility and integrity of former TRRC Lead Counsel, Essa Mbye Faal.

According to Minteh, Mr. Faal’s controversial past as a state prosecutor under the regime of former President Yahya Jammeh continues to cast a long shadow over his public service and political ambitions. Minteh recalls that Faal served as part of the prosecution team that tried and convicted several officers accused in the November 11, 1994 coup attempt, sentencing them to nine years in prison.

Minteh alleges that those convicted were severely tortured before their court appearances, and that their statements were obtained under duress. When the defendants appealed for their statements to be withdrawn or rewritten, Faal—then a State Counsel—and Justice Akamba reportedly rejected the motion, claiming that the statements were given voluntarily.

Among those prosecuted by Mr. Faal were. Staff Sergeant Abu Trawally. Couple Seedy Manjang, Couple  Kariba Camara, Sergeant Malick Nyan Kabareh, Couple  Omar Njie, and Private Lamin Babai Manneh. Minteh asserts that Faal’s subsequent role as Lead Counsel of the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) was both ironic and inappropriate, given his prior involvement in cases linked to alleged human rights abuses.

He further claims that Faal deliberately prevented the November 11 victims from testifying before the TRRC in person, allegedly to conceal his own role and that of others involved in the prosecutions. Instead, their testimonies were accepted only in written form—a decision Minteh views as discriminatory and ethically questionable.

“When we carefully examine the foundation of the TRRC,” Minteh argues, “it becomes evident that the post-2016 revolution, which ended two decades of dictatorship, was hijacked by controversial and corrupt legal actors like Essa Faal, operating under the watch of former Justice Minister Abubacarr Ba Tambadou.”

Minteh questions how Faal, who once presided over cases marked by alleged human rights violations and procedural irregularities, could later be appointed to lead a commission tasked with uncovering the truth about state abuses during that same dictatorship.

“With such a record,” Minteh continues, “Mr. Faal lacks the moral authority and ethical competence to serve as Lead Counsel of a fact-finding body meant to expose the very injustices he once helped to perpetuate.”

Minteh concludes that Faal’s recent presidential ambitions further highlight what he calls “the contradictions of a man who served a criminal state that destroyed lives and subjected Gambians to inhumane conditions.”

He calls on Essa Faal to publicly apologize to Gambians and to reconsider his political aspirations, stating, “No wonder the TRRC report remains in limbo. It may raise more questions about truth, trust, and reliability than it provides answers.”

Yahya Jammeh’s Empty Promises and the Myth of His Return to The Gambia

 Every few months, we hear the same old voice note — Yahya Jammeh promising to “return home soon,” vowing to bring back his so-called “glory days.” But let’s be clear today, and let’s say it loudly for the world to hear: Yahya Jammeh’s return to The Gambia as a free man is practically impossible.

This is not about politics. It is about justice, accountability, and truth.

Yahya Jammeh ruled The Gambia for 22 years — 22 long, dark, and painful years — filled with fear, killings, disappearances, and corruption. He was not a president; he was a ruler who believed he owned the nation, its people, and even their souls.

Under Jammeh’s dictatorship:

Journalists like Deyda Hydara were assassinated for speaking truth.

Soldiers and civilians were executed without trial.

Entire families disappeared overnight — never to be seen again.

Women were violated and silenced.

Billions of dalasis of state funds were siphoned into his personal accounts while ordinary Gambians struggled to eat.

The Truth, Reconciliation, and Reparations Commission (TRRC) has already made it crystal clear — Yahya Jammeh is culpable for economic crimes, murders, enforced disappearances, and crimes against humanity. These are not allegations anymore; they are well-documented facts supported by testimonies and evidence.

Now, some of his loyalists claim that Jammeh can come back just like Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara did after exile. But let’s not distort history.

 Sir Dawda Jawara was a democrat. He left office peacefully and never killed, tortured, or stole from the Gambian people. His return was welcomed because it was based on reconciliation — not fear, not blood, not crime.

 Yahya Jammeh’s case is entirely different. His hands are stained, not with ink, but with the blood of innocent Gambians.

If Jammeh dares to return — which, truthfully, is 99 percent impossible — he will not walk freely in Kanilai or Banjul. He will be arrested, detained, and possibly extradited to face international justice, just as Charles Taylor was transferred from Liberia to The Hague to face trial for his atrocities.

Let me be honest: Jammeh’s voice messages are not a sign of strength. They are a sign of desperation — a man trapped in exile, surrounded by delusion, trying to remain relevant through audio propaganda.

 His so-called supporters who still believe he can return and “rule again” are trapped in a myopic fantasy. They forget that The Gambia has moved on — that this is a new era of democracy, freedom, and accountability.

Now, to those who are saying that Yahya Jammeh committed no crime and asking, “What is he wanted for?” — here is your answer:

 He is wanted for murder, torture, theft, and the destruction of innocent lives.

 He is wanted because mothers are still crying for sons who vanished without a trace.

 He is wanted because The Gambia deserves closure, justice, and peace after two decades of suffering.

And to the Fonnie parliamentarians who say that arresting Yahya Jammeh could destabilize the country — you have failed your people.

 The truth is, Yahya Jammeh killed more people from Fonnie than any other part of The Gambia.

 We still remember Macie Jammeh, Harouna Jammeh, Bubai Sanyang, Chief Momodou Lamin Nyassi, Dawda Nyassi, Jesaja Kujabi, and all the young promising sons and daughters who were massacred under his brutal rule.

 Their blood cries out for justice — not for political protection.

So let no one deceive you. Yahya Jammeh’s return will not bring peace; it will reopen wounds. It will not bring unity; it will divide our nation.

 True peace only comes through justice — and justice means holding Yahya Jammeh accountable for every crime committed under his watch.

Gambians are no longer afraid. We will not go back to those days of midnight knocks and secret detentions.

 We will not allow any man — no matter how powerful he once was — to rewrite our history or escape justice.

The truth is simple: Yahya Jammeh will only return to The Gambia in handcuffs — not as a hero, but as an accused criminal facing justice.

 That is not hatred. That is justice for the victims, peace for their families, and closure for an entire nation still healing from his cruelty.

To his supporters, I say this with respect: It is time to open your eyes. Defending Jammeh today is defending tyranny, not patriotism. The Gambia belongs to all of us — not to one man’s ego or ambition.

The future of our country will be built on justice, truth, and unity — never again on fear and oppression.

Thank you.

 Long live The Gambia.

 Yaya Dampha 

NPP DIASPORA Coordinator

State Files Defence in Former Auditor General’s Lawsuit

By Jarranewstv Staff Reporter 

Government Denies Wrongful Dismissal Allegations

The State Law Office has submitted its statement of defence at the Supreme Court in response to a suit filed by former Auditor General Modou Ceesay against the Attorney General and the Inspector General of Police.

The case, initiated by Mr. Ceesay, challenges the legality and circumstances under which he ceased to hold office as Auditor General.

According to the defence filed on 20 October 2025, the State maintains that Mr. Ceesay was not unlawfully removed but rather relinquished his position voluntarily after accepting a ministerial appointment.

The defence is supported by an affidavit sworn by Mod K. Ceesay, Chief of Staff and Minister of Presidential Affairs, who stated that he was authorised by the defendants to depose to the affidavit. He affirmed that the facts contained in the statement are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.

State’s Position

The State argues that the former Auditor General accepted an appointment as Minister of Trade, Industry, Regional Integration and Employment on 10 September 2025, and as a result, automatically ceased to hold his previous office.

According to the defence, Mr. Ceesay expressed appreciation for the new appointment during discussions with the President, who commended his performance and considered him well-suited for the ministerial role due to his financial expertise and understanding of the public sector.

The State further contends that Mr. Ceesay never formally declined the appointment. Consequently, Cherno Amadou Sowe was appointed as the new Auditor General on the same day. However, the defence claims that Mr. Ceesay continued to occupy the office, preventing the new appointee from assuming his duties.

Denial of Political Interference

The defendants strongly deny allegations that the President interfered with the functions of the National Audit Office. They maintain that there has been a consistent policy of non-interference with independent constitutional office-holders.

Audit Access Disputes

Responding to Mr. Ceesay’s claims regarding restricted access to audit data, the defence attributes the dispute involving the National Food Security, Processing and Marketing Corporation to issues of banking confidentiality.

It states that a senior official of the corporation lodged a complaint alleging that the former Auditor General attempted to access personal bank records without authorisation, in violation of the Banking Act.

On the question of access to the Gambia Revenue Authority’s database, the State denies any obstruction, arguing that the Auditor General’s demand for the entire taxpayer database posed a security risk and was lawfully resisted under the Income and Value Added Tax Act.

Forcible Removal Allegation

The defence also denies claims that the President or the Inspector General of Police ordered the forceful removal or eviction of the plaintiff from his office, insisting that no such directive was ever issued.

Legal Questions Before the Court

In their Memorandum of Issues, the defendants ask the Supreme Court to determine the following:

1. Whether the President ever removed Mr. Modou Ceesay from his position as Auditor General; and

2. Whether, following his appointment and acceptance as Minister, he could lawfully continue to hold the position of Auditor General.

The State indicates that it will rely on several legal instruments to support its case, including Sections 158, 159, 160 and 169 of the 1987 Constitution, the National Audit Act (2015), the Banking Act, and the Income and Value Added Tax Act.

Among the documents listed as evidence are the letters of appointment and acceptance, an official State House media release, and a social media publication by What’s On – Gambia.