spot_img
spot_img
23.2 C
City of Banjul
Wednesday, November 20, 2024
spot_img
spot_img

‘Budget debacle can only be resolved in court’

- Advertisement -
image 74

By Omar Bah

Senior lawyer and former president of the Gambia Bar Association, Salieu Taal, has said the debacle surrounding the ‘illegal’ tabling of the 2025 budget can only be resolved in the courts.

On Friday, the minister of finance Seedy Keita was forced to apologise to the National Assembly for violating the Constitution in tabling the 2025 budget much later than provided for.

- Advertisement -

In 2023, the National Assembly amended the Constitution, extending the timeline for tabling the estimates 30 to 60 days before the end of the financial year.

This amendment was intended to allow more time for the Assembly to scrutinize the budget.

But according to Taal, the blatant disregard of an explicit constitutional provision by both the Executive and the National Assembly is deeply concerning for “our nascent democracy”.

- Advertisement -

“This provision is mandatory and places an unequivocal obligation on the President, through the Minister of Finance, to table the budget within the stipulated timeframe.

The Speaker of the National Assembly has neither the authority nor the discretion to override such a mandatory constitutional requirement. Doing so constitutes a clear violation of the Speaker’s oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution of the Republic. Ultimately, this matter can only be resolved by the courts, which remain the final arbiters of constitutional disputes.”

He said the Speaker lacks the authority to make rulings on constitutional matters, and his purported decision allowing the Executive to present the budget in contravention of the Constitution constitutes a breach of his oath of office to uphold and protect the Constitution.

“Under Section 5 of the Constitution, any citizen has the right to bring an action before a court of competent jurisdiction, seeking a declaration that the National Assembly’s decision is inconsistent with the Constitution and, therefore, unconstitutional,” he said.

Join The Conversation
- Advertisment -spot_img
- Advertisment -spot_img