|
Momodou
Denmark
11700 Posts |
 Posted - 12 May 2025 : 17:13:52
|
Voices of Conscience
EF Small Centre will now publish articles from conscientious individuals who use their knowledge, expertise and experience to advance justice, human rights, and good governance.
We start with this article written by Imran Darboe. Imran is a trained lawyer, a transitional justice expert and a human rights defender. He is an intellectual who has dedicated himself and his knowledge to stand for people and society.
We commend him for speaking out and telling truth to power. We urge our intellectuals to abandon focusing on their own comfort zones and only benefiting from society while the people suffer. Our intellectuals have a moral duty to promote good governance, protect human rights and defend society.
Emulate Imran Darboe.
……………………………………….
Why Arresting Protesters Reflects Fragile Power, Not Strength or Security
By: Imran Darboe
Introduction – Suppression can only protect mischievous behavior for so long
Even the most brutal systems of oppression have failed to suppress the human will for freedom of expression in its various forms. From the transatlantic slave trade to apartheid in South Africa, from colonial rule across Africa to the Arab Spring, every era or form of control and oppression gave rise to rebellious resistance. The Haitian Revolution of 1791, the fall of Apartheid, the end of colonialism all led to the crumbling of the status quo because people will not accept domination. Even the worst brutal repression cannot suppress the demand for freedom, for justice (because these are characteristic of the inherent dignity of human beings).
Yet as the saying goes, those who don’t learn from history are doom to repeat it. Despite the abundant lessons, our governments in Africa persist in using suppression and force as the primary tools of governance. Whether stemming from authoritarian delusions that they alone know best, or from a parasitic greed for power and looting, the result is a cycle of instability that continues to hurt and haunt the continent.
Disdain of public opinion and heavy-handed control won’t rebuild trust
In The Gambia, emerging from the shadow of Yahya Jammeh’s dictatorship, transitional justice was chosen as a path to national healing. Fundamentally, in such a post-authoritarian context, Transitional Justice is about restoring trust between the state and its people by acknowledging past abuses, committing to reform, and ensuring non-repetition. The responsibility lies primarily with the state and trust cannot be rebuilt without transparency.
Thus, when the state began managing the assets looted by the former president, staying true to the goal of rebuilding trust demanded absolute transparency every step of the way. I see no justifiable reason why the details of transactions involving public assets (forfeited to the state, and thus to the people) should remain shrouded in secrecy, especially amid consistent public and parliamentary demands for answers. A government serious about rebuilding trust would, at the very least, publish a report detailing how that process was handled.
Instead, those in charge appear to confuse governance with ownership of the state, exercising unchecked discretion over public resources, often buying semi-luxurious livelihoods at public expense while begging for basic necessities on behalf of the Gambian people. So, when journalist Mustapha Darboe published his investigative report detailing alleged discrepancies in the state’s handling of former President Jammeh’s seized assets, serious issues of corrupt and questionable practices by some public officials emerged. To me, beyond journalism, the report felt like Mustapha’s personal expression of outrage, as a citizen denied clarity and accountability by a government that claims to serve him. The state’s response, as usual, seemed to be: “How dare these subjects question us?” and then came the defensive cry! “everything was done legally.” To me, for the government to hide behind claims of legality is many times, disingenuous. Law, stripped of good governance and the rule of law, can serve tyranny just as easily as it serves justice. It can be used to do the bare minimum while facilitating mischief by public officials.
As Lord Bingham reminds us, about the rule of law, –
“public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them in good faith, fairly, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred, without exceeding the limits of such powers and not unreasonably”
Thus, legality alone is not enough of a defense by government. Even after that, faced with public confusion and outrage, the government should have welcomed Mustapha’s report as contribution to an accountability in a democracy, and address the allegations raised. Instead, it responded as if what Mustapha did was a villainous act of national sabotage, rather than raising issues that require answers – a fulfilment of his duty to serve the people in his journalistic role. Of course, it got worse when poor Gambian youths came out to demand answers.
When the Gambian Youths Against the Looting of Assets (GALA) sought to protest peacefully, they were denied a permit, predictable, given the colonial-era Public Order Act and a tradition of IGPs more responsive to serving the president whims than protecting the public (forget about the rhetoric about “public safety”). As usual, civil disobedience followed, and the protesters were swiftly arrested, mostly by fellow young people in uniform. Ironically, their programing to see any protesters are “threat to national security or public order” is so deeply ingrained that many officers fail to see that the fight is also their own.
Sadder still is how rule of law collapsed once again during the arrests of the youth. The arrests and detention weren’t exercised “in good faith, fairly, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred, without exceeding the limits of such powers and not unreasonably”. The state, through the police, failed every one of these standards. Families of detainees were misled as their loved ones were shuttled between stations, their whereabouts hidden, legal access denied, and even basic decency, like food, medication for those with conditions, or updates withheld.
This is not an isolated incident, but the disturbing pattern of state handling protests, one that makes it increasingly difficult to describe our current system as a democracy. Democracy must be based on the proper foundation, and that is government must act on behalf and in service of the needs of the people. It our case this is a gross misrepresentation proclaimed in S1(2) our 1997 constitution, that “Sovereignty of The Gambia resides in the people of The Gambia from whom all organs of government derive their authority and, in whose name, and for whose welfare and prosperity the powers of government are to be exercised in accordance with this Constitution.” This is a fiction. The relationship between the Gambian state and its people today, is the same as our colonial past between the Queen and her subjects. The claim to be democratic has not been able to flourish because its mere mimicry. A democratic government must listen to its people without being vain, act in their best interest, and respect their right to dissent and express dissatisfaction. Telling citizens to be quiet while leaders do as they please is not democracy. It is domination.
Democratic governance requires responsive, not prescriptive leadership
In the context of rebuilding trust, whether the findings of Mustapha’s report are true is secondary to how the government responded to the allegations from a journalist and managed the public concern that followed. Allegations of corruption will inevitably spark calls for accountability, this is not a threat to national security, but the very heartbeat of democracy. The state’s response should be open, dialogical, and truth-driven; not defensive, dismissive, or focused on shielding institutional or personal reputations.
When young people seek to express dissatisfaction peacefully, there is no conceivable harm in allowing them to protest in an organized and orderly manner. Denying them a permit, and then arresting them for exercising their constitutional right to protest, reveals the deep-rooted authoritarian impulse of the government. Worse still, the manner in which they were detained, with little regard for legal procedure, decorum, or transparency, casts a shadow over the government’s stated commitment to democratic reform.
What makes this more tragic is the irony of it all. This government came to power on the wings of popular will. Its very legitimacy was born from the people’s cry for change, for justice, for freedom from oppression. Yet, it seems to be mirroring more and more, the very regime Gambians fought to remove. Its antagonism toward dissenting citizens, especially youth, does not reflect leadership, but entitlement and a need to control rather than serve. This shortsightedness is extremely naive. In a digital age where information, people and things flow fluidly and quickly, repression is no longer sustainable. It only invites instability, especially in a country where basic livelihood is increasing constantly.
Furthermore, the demographic makeup of our country makes suppression of free expression an even riskier path. Youth form the majority, facing rising unemployment, poor education, and a government that flaunts privilege while offering little hope to them. Denying them even the right to demand better fuels a ticking time bomb. The turnout of more youth on the day after the 27 were arrested, is an indication that force will not subdue them. The more the state suppresses youth, the more it will agitate them and force them to look to each other for backup. Youthful energy can be reckless, (I disagreed with some of the approaches even as I was engaged with some of those trying to assist their detained comrades, but they need dialogue and advise not suppression), their energy cannot be subdued or repressed. It must be channeled constructively or risk becoming destructive.
What unfolded in the past few days bore the ugly hallmarks of a return to the Jammeh ways. I witnessed it personally, particularly at Sanyang Police Station. Even if one accepts the controversial rationale behind arresting the protesters, nothing justifies the lack of due process and the blatant disrespect for their rights. When we arrived at the Sanyang station, the idea was to engage diplomatically and enquire about the detainees there, their conditions and provide them food. We were met with outright hostility. Particularly, one PIU officer (some of his colleagues referred to him as Pierre…) must have been under the influence of some intoxicant, while in uniform, (if he was just himself, that prospect is even more worrying), refusing to even greet us back, but rather extremely aggressive and insulting. His behavior was so unprofessional and unruly that even his colleagues failed in their efforts to calm him down. It is an indictment on the institution that someone in such a state is allowed to wear a uniform and represent the Gambia Police Force. And to citizens like us it was heartbreaking to think this is the best we can have in our Police Force.
There are lessons we must learn
When institutions tolerate such conduct, they damage not only their image but the very trust that transitional justice aimed to rebuild. Perception matters, and negative perceptions of Government are born from lived experiences of citizens. If a citizen’s only experience of law enforcement is intimidation, disrespect, and lack of accountability, what possible respect or cooperation can be expected in return? So, to the members of our security forces, I ask – Is this what you signed up for? To stifle your own people for demanding dignity, justice, and accountability? Even if you are ordered to arrest, must you do so with the kind of animosity and excessive force we often see? Professionalism, restraint, and respect for human rights would accomplish far more.
As a country, the path we choose will determine whether our transitional justice process means anything eventually. It was supposed to be a national undertaking to rebuild ourselves as a nation, not an ongoing government project while government undermines its spirit and purpose. The process was meant to restore faith in state institutions, to show that The Gambia had turned a page and embraced a new era of dignity and democratic values. But actions speak louder than words. And playing with the people’s psyche, whether through force or deceit, will eventually crumble the system.
If the government continues these types of engagement, with antagonistic responses to public concerns, refusing accountability, and treating dissent as a threat rather than a democratic reality, then the future will be bleak. Not just for the youth who dare to speak up, but for those at the helm themselves and the country. It is time to wake up to the reality that power must be exercised with humility and the principles of rule of law mentioned above. Government should realize governing is about service, not prescription, that citizens are not subjects to be subdued, but sovereigns to be served. The Gambia deserves better. Its people demand better.
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
Voices of Conscience
