By Melville Robertson Roberts Esq
There has been an unnecessary storm over Hon Yahya Menteng Sanyang’s simple declaration that he wishes to see Talib lead the UDP in 2026. Some have cast stones, others have gone as far as vilifying him. But pause for a moment, what exactly did he do wrong?
In the lifeblood of democracy, choice is sacred. The very idea of party flagbearership assumes that men and women will rally behind different candidates. Some will say Ousainu Darboe, others will say Yanks Darboe, and others, like Hon Yahya, will say Talib. Is that not the very beauty of political competition? If all voices echoed the same name, then we would not be a democratic family but a choir singing a single note.
To punish someone for openly expressing a preference is to suffocate democracy itself. What Sanyang did is not betrayal, it is not insubordination, it is participation. The worst danger to any party is not diversity of choice, but the silencing of it.
The UDP, like every serious political movement, must embrace internal plurality. Only then can the eventual flagbearer carry the true weight of legitimacy. What weakens a party is not debate, it is fear of debate. What erodes credibility is not choice, it is enforced silence.
Let us therefore defend the right of every militant to declare their preference, so long as it is done with civility and respect. For democracy without freedom of expression is nothing but an empty shell, and a flagbearer chosen without genuine competition is a leader already weakened.
The reason the UDP is asking for selection of flag bearership itself shows that it is a democratic process where it is envisaged that people will have a choice of who they want to be their flag-bearer. This is quite healthy and very normal.
If we truly believe in democracy, then we must allow it to breathe, even when it breathes a name we did not call.
