The recent land dispute in Jabang which was marked by protests, tyre‐burning, mass arrests, alleged police brutality, and tensions between communities must be seen by everyone as a warning signal to all levels of government, law enforcement, and civil society. If we are to avoid recurrences, the response must be honest, structural, and rooted in the rule of law.
The government should institute a transparent land audit and regularisation process which must be inclusive and widely consultative. The government needs to conduct a comprehensive audit of land ownership, allocation, titling, and evictions in disputed zones like Jabang, Sukuta and other places. When ownership records are murky, or overlap, disputes are inevitable. Public maps, clear plans, and documented titles are essential.
The national and local authorities must ensure that land‐use planning is participatory. This means engaging affected communities in decisions on zoning, evictions, development, and compensations long before any action is taken. Land policy must also be coherent, accessible, and well publicised so that ordinary people understand their rights.
It is also necessary to create or strengthen neutral arbitration or mediation bodies at community or local government levels, which can do fact finding and propose solutions before matters escalate. Fast‐track legal recourse for land disputes so they don’t ferment into protests.
For any of these actions to be of any benefit, there must be accountability. Where evictions are necessary for public goods, government must ensure they are done according to law: notice given, compensation where required, with oversight – either judicial or parliamentary – so that excesses are avoided.
Another important point is civic education and law reform. The government should simplify legal processes around land, reduce bureaucratic corruption, and run public education campaigns about land rights, the process for registration, claiming rights etc, especially in peri‐urban and rural communities.
Citizens need to know their land rights – how to register, what documents protect them; also to understand when a claim is legitimate. This helps them to demand transparency and resist unfair disposals.
Protests are a legitimate form of expression, but they become dangerous when they escalate. Organised, lawful, non-violent means (petitions, mediation, use of courts) are more sustainable. Community leaders and civil society can facilitate these.
Participation in planning meetings, local council sessions, public hearings, and land allocation committees. Insisting on being part of the process avoids surprise decisions or top‐down impositions.
If there’s a local grievance, private or civil society actors should document what is happening: eg displacement, abuse, or irregularities with land registration. This information can feed into oversight or the media, which pressures accountability.
Police must be the protectors, not the provocateurs. If all three act responsibly, we can avoid a recurrence of violent land‐conflicts, heal trust, and build a more just framework for land rights in The Gambia.
