Editorial:Will UDP Ever Win Presidential Elections?

   

The United Democratic Party (UDP), once considered the largest opposition force in The Gambia, has spent the past few years cultivating a political culture that does more harm than good to its image and chances at national leadership. From 2018 to date, the UDP’s approach—both on the ground and online—has been marked not by persuasion, policy, or principles, but by insults, intimidation, and name-calling.

Those who dare to disagree with UDP positions are not seen as fellow citizens exercising democratic rights but are instead branded as traitors, sellouts, or “less Gambian.” Critics are smeared with the most unimaginable accusations, their ethnicity weaponized, their loyalty questioned. The idea that belonging to a party automatically makes one a “true Mandinka” or a “real Gambian” has poisoned discourse and alienated large swathes of the electorate.

Instead of focusing on educating the people, mobilizing on the basis of the party’s manifesto, or proposing credible solutions to the country’s challenges, the UDP has wasted valuable time on personality attacks and empty rhetoric. Party defectors are insulted as “slaves” or accused of “eating vomit” simply for making political choices. This attitude ignores one fundamental reality of democracy: political support is fluid. No party can expect loyalty without accountability, and no party can grow by insulting those who leave.

This toxic politics has consequences. In 2021, the UDP suffered a humiliating defeat, despite boasting of being the strongest opposition. The reason is simple—politics is about winning hearts, not breaking spirits. It is about building coalitions, not burning bridges. It is about offering hope, not threats. And until the UDP recognizes that, it will continue to lose.

  

The old saying is true: there are no permanent friends in politics, only permanent interests. The electorate is not obliged to stand by anyone’s words just to prove loyalty. People support parties and leaders who reflect their aspirations, who show respect, and who can deliver progress. If the UDP fails to shift from divisive rhetoric to constructive politics, the question is not whether it can win, but whether it can even remain relevant in the years ahead.

Bombshell In UDP As Dr. Lamin J. Darbo Resigns from UDP, Citing “Principled Departure

By Jarranews Staff Reporter

Prominent legal scholar and political advocate Dr. Lamin J. Darbo has formally resigned from the United Democratic Party (UDP), citing what he described as a “principled departure” motivated by his commitment to democratic renewal and civic transformation in The Gambia.

In a letter addressed to the party’s Senior Administrative Secretary, Hon. Alhagie S. Darboe, Dr. Darbo outlined his reasons for stepping down, stressing that his political journey was never about personal ambition but about helping build a republic rooted in fairness, accountability, and good governance.

“The UDP’s role in resisting tyranny is well established, and I was honored to lend my voice and intellect to that struggle,” he wrote, recalling his involvement in strategy meetings with party leader Ousainu Darboe and his participation in legal defenses during the high-profile Solo Sandeng electoral reform trials.

However, Dr. Darbo said the party’s internal culture had become increasingly incompatible with his values. He criticized what he saw as a leadership style that “values loyalty over competence, silence over scrutiny, and expediency over principle.”

He also pointed to opaque internal processes, citing the 2021 flagbearer selection in which he was denied even an interview. “A party that cannot govern itself transparently cannot credibly promise and manage national transformation,” he declared.

Dr. Darbo emphasized that his resignation should not be seen as retreat but as a reaffirmation of his “higher civic mission.” He outlined a vision for The Gambia that includes transparent governance, zero tolerance for corruption, equitable access to education and healthcare, greater youth empowerment, and stronger engagement with the Gambian diaspora.

Addressing his colleagues and supporters within the UDP, Dr. Darbo expressed respect and solidarity, while urging the party to return to its founding values. “The UDP has immense potential to remain a vehicle of democratic renewal—but only if it returns to fairness and transparency,” he stated.

To the wider Gambian public, he reaffirmed his unwavering commitment to justice and national progress, concluding with an appeal for unity and dignity:

“May future generations inherit a worthy republic enshrined in the values of fairness and dignity—with malice toward none, with charity for all.”

REBUTTAL TO DISGRACED TOMBONG SAIDY

Here’s a sharp and uncompromising rebuttal to Tombong Saidy’s 

Tombong Saidy, before you parade yourself as a voice of moral authority, remind Gambians why you were disgracefully expelled from the United States — not for diplomacy, not for statesmanship, but for domestic violence. You carry the shame of a former Yahya Jammeh enabler who defended tyranny and fed off a dictatorship that brutalized Gambians for over two decades. You, of all people, are the least qualified to lecture anyone about leadership, responsibility, or morality.

Let’s dismantle your cheap propaganda point by point:

1. On UNGA Attendance

Is it compulsory for a Head of State to attend the UNGA every year? The answer is NO. Many times, Vice Presidents, Foreign Ministers, or other senior officials represent their countries. Did you conveniently forget that under Yahya Jammeh — the dictator you loyally served — Isatou Njie-Saidy, as Vice President, represented The Gambia at the UNGA on multiple occasions? Did you cry “failure of leadership” then? Or were you too busy polishing Jammeh’s boots and covering his crimes?

Even powerful nations such as China, Russia, and India have frequently sent Foreign Ministers or Vice Presidents to represent them. Presence at the UNGA is important, yes, but it is not a litmus test of leadership. The work of diplomacy extends far beyond one stage in New York.

2. On Palestine and Global Responsibility

Your hypocrisy is deafening. You pretend to care about Palestine today, yet you were a senior diplomat of Yahya Jammeh when he weaponized the Palestinian cause for cheap political clout while repressing Gambians at home. Spare us the crocodile tears. President Barrow’s government has already demonstrated concrete leadership on justice and human rights at the ICJ — something your Jammeh regime never dared because it was busy committing crimes against humanity.

3. On Leadership Legacy

You shamelessly invoke Sir Dawda Jawara’s legacy of statesmanship, but you forget that you betrayed everything Jawara stood for by serving a regime that overthrew him. You were part of the machinery that destroyed The Gambia’s global reputation, turned our embassies into dens of corruption, and reduced our passports to tools for drug traffickers and mercenaries. If you had any respect for Jawara’s diplomacy, you would start by apologizing to Gambians for being an accomplice to Jammeh’s 22-year reign of terror.

4. On Domestic Issues

You dare lecture President Barrow about the economy and leadership while ignoring the rot you and your fellow disgraced Jammeh loyalists left behind. You talk about “economic uncertainty” but forget the empty state coffers Jammeh fled with in 2017. You forget the institutional decay, the collapsed infrastructure, and the culture of fear your government entrenched. Barrow is rebuilding step by step, while you — disgraced and rejected — cling to cheap propaganda in hopes of relevance.

---

Tombong, here is the truth:

Your arguments are misleading, misguided, and tainted with hypocrisy. President Barrow’s absence from one UNGA does not erase The Gambia’s voice on global justice, nor does it diminish his government’s ongoing commitment to international diplomacy. What it does expose, however, is your desperation to remain relevant after being discarded in disgrace.

Instead of spewing lies against President Barrow, you should focus on cleaning up the mess you left behind — and maybe, just maybe, finally atone for the shameful chapter you wrote in Gambian diplomacy.

The Gambian people have not forgotten who you are. And no amount of empty rhetoric will wash away your disgrace.

Finally. You better go and solve the mess you and your fellow vultures put Talib Ahmed Bensouda . How about the contracts Talib Ahmed Bensouda gave to you and others without delivering. Shame on You Old Boy.

By Yaya Dampha Coordinator NPP DIASPORA 

-

EU Backs Fresh Drive to Boost “Made in Gambia” Brand

By Madi S. Njie

Banjul, September 19, 2025 – The European Union, through its Youth Empowerment Project (YEP), is stepping up efforts to put Gambian-made products on the global map, with a renewed focus on strengthening homegrown industries and widening export opportunities.

The initiative, managed by the International Trade Centre (ITC) under its Trade and Investment Policy Unit, is sharpening its priorities to make Gambian businesses more competitive, inclusive, and environmentally sustainable.

Over the past week, stakeholders gathered in Banjul for a series of workshops (September 16–19), where experts and policymakers examined reforms on regulations, intellectual property rights, and eco-friendly procurement. Follow-up sessions on investment facilitation are slated for September 22–23.

Five New Priority Areas

EU Trade Consultant Dev Chamroo, who co-facilitated the sessions, unveiled five focus areas:

1. Strengthening legal and regulatory frameworks.

2. Creating a more business-friendly environment.

3. Expanding access to domestic and international markets.

4. Rolling out nationwide advocacy campaigns.

5. Integrating ICT across industries.

He emphasized that with collaboration and the right policies, the Made in Gambia label could become a catalyst for job creation, stronger exports, and a renewed sense of national pride.

Target Sectors

The plan gives prominence to agro-processing (such as cereals, spices, and beverages), creative industries (including fashion, handicrafts, film, textiles, and music), and service sectors like tourism, fintech, and e-commerce. Women- and youth-led enterprises will remain central to the initiative.

Implementation will be spearheaded by the Ministry of Trade, Industry, Regional Integration and Employment (MoTIE), with the Gambia Investment and Export Promotion Agency (GIEPA) serving as the lead executing body.

Stakeholders’ Voices

At the gathering, Hassoum Ceesay, Director General of the National Centre for Arts and Culture (NCAC), underscored the importance of building capacity and ensuring existing laws are effectively enforced.

Meanwhile, procurement specialist Dr. Kamala Dawar urged the government to adopt Green Public Procurement (GPP) as a tool for both sustainable development and SME empowerment. She noted that in many developing countries, public procurement accounts for as much as 40 percent of GDP—making it a powerful lever to support climate action and inclusive growth.

Although The Gambia’s Public Procurement Act 2022 already embeds sustainability provisions, Dr. Dawar stressed that implementation must be reinforced through transparent systems, monitoring mechanisms, training, and targeted support for small businesses.

“Government spending has the power to reshape the economy and society,” she said. “The challenge is to ensure green procurement is binding, transparent, and inclusive.”

A Call for Donor fatigue Patriotism or Personal Vendetta?

       

A recent article titled “Gambia on the Brink: Donor Partners Must Act Before Democracy Collapses” is not an objective assessment of governance in The Gambia. Rather, it is a bitter vendetta from an individual whose personal ambitions were not fulfilled. This critic once sought appointment into high office within the national broadcaster, and upon being denied such a position, turned to foreign platforms to peddle misinformation about the government.

This rebuttal will address the claims point by point, using the principles of law, governance, and truth.

1. On the Question of Presidential Mandate and Tenure

The critic argues that President Barrow “abandoned his transitional mandate” and is maneuvering for a third term. This is misleading.

The 1997 Gambian Constitution—the supreme law of the land—does not impose term limits on the presidency. President Barrow, like any citizen, has the right to contest elections in accordance with the constitution.

The claim that he personally blocked the 2020 draft constitution is false. The draft was rejected by the National Assembly, not the president. In a democracy, it is the legislature—not one man—that has the authority to pass or reject laws.

Seeking reelection under the current constitution is not illegal, nor is it undemocratic. It is the exercise of constitutional rights, which should be respected.

2. On Corruption Allegations

The sweeping accusations of corruption lack both evidence and context.

The government has established multiple Commissions of Inquiry—including the Janneh Commission, the Local Government Commission, and others—which have exposed corruption and recommended corrective measures. These were not set up by “dictators,” but by President Barrow himself, showing his commitment to transparency.

All recommendations from the commissions and audit reports are being democratically handled. Some cases are under prosecution, others are awaiting final approval from the Attorney General’s office, while in the case of the TRRC, reparations for victims have already begun. Victims are currently being informed of a planned rollout of final compensation. This is proof that the government is implementing reforms through lawful channels, not ignoring them.

COVID-19 funds: The Auditor General’s report identified administrative lapses, but no credible evidence links the president or his family to misappropriation. Where irregularities were found, the government has taken steps to strengthen financial controls.

Allegations of “$40 million projects awarded without due process” are unsubstantiated. All major public procurement processes pass through the GPPA (Gambia Public Procurement Authority), an independent statutory body.

The critic conveniently ignores the progress made in the digitalization of government procurement systems and the strengthening of the National Audit Office—clear markers of institutional growth under Barrow’s leadership.

3. On Institutional Independence

The article claims that Barrow is “dismantling institutions.” The facts show otherwise:

The Auditor General was not “illegally dismissed.” Public officers can be reassigned in accordance with the Constitution and Public Service Commission regulations. His appointment as minister is neither unconstitutional nor evidence of “suppression.”

The Central Bank, National Audit Office, and the Judiciary remain independent bodies established by law. Their reports are published publicly and debated openly in the National Assembly.

Under Barrow, the media space has flourished: dozens of private radio stations, TV outlets, and online platforms—including those used by the critic—operate freely, something unthinkable under Jammeh’s dictatorship.

4. On Human Rights and Protest

The Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and assembly, but it also allows the state to regulate public gatherings for security and public order. This is standard in all democracies.

Where protesters were arrested, it was based on violations of the Public Order Act, not political vendetta. Gambian courts remain open for redress, and no citizen is above the law.

Unlike during the Jammeh era, no journalist has been killed, disappeared, or permanently silenced under Barrow’s government. This is a historic shift.

5. On Donor Relations and “Fatigue”

Perhaps the most reckless claim is the call for “donor fatigue” against The Gambia.

No patriotic Gambian who loves their country will advocate for donors to withdraw support from vital projects in health, education, and infrastructure that benefit ordinary citizens.

President Barrow’s government continues to enjoy strong partnerships with the EU, World Bank, IMF, and bilateral partners, who have praised The Gambia’s democratic reforms and economic recovery strategies.

To call for donor sanctions is not advocacy for democracy—it is sabotage against the Gambian people.

6. On the Role of Civil Society and Opposition

The critic pretends to champion civil society and opposition but fails to recognize that:

Civil society organizations freely operate, hold press conferences, and release reports without intimidation.

Opposition parties, including UDP, PDOIS, GDC, and others, are active, hold rallies across the country, and contest elections without hindrance.

The National Assembly is more assertive than ever, summoning ministers and debating critical issues. That is the essence of checks and balances.

Conclusion: Truth over Vendetta

This article is not about democracy—it is about personal frustration. Bitterness over unfulfilled personal ambition cannot justify a campaign of lies against a sitting president who was freely and fairly elected by the Gambian people.

The NPP government under President Barrow stands on the principles of democracy, rule of law, and good governance. Gambians have not forgotten the dictatorship they emerged from in 2016, and they will never allow individuals with grudges to distort reality for selfish ends.

Patriotism means building, not destroying; correcting, not sabotaging. Calling for “donor fatigue” is a betrayal of The Gambia’s progress and an insult to the ordinary people who rely on international partnerships for development.

The Gambian people deserve better than propaganda disguised as journalism.

Yaya Dampha 

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.