By Alagie Saidy-Barrow
In this colonial space, whenever one of these spineless and unprincipled politicians’ abandons one political patron for another, the standard defence they, their friends, and family members employ is that every individual has the right to associate with whomever they choose. I heard Mamma Kandeh use this argument, and I have seen many others use it as a shield. Legally, your right to associate or join any party of your choice is indisputable. Heck, for what it’s worth, you can even choose to join Satan and worship him/her. It is your legal right! The issue is not about some abstract right of association; instead, it is about your political opportunism, inconsistency, and licking your vomit. Trying to recast legitimate scrutiny of your spinelessness as an attack on personal freedom is a bankrupt straw man argument. What Mamma Kandeh and his type try to do is substitute a grievance that was never raised for the substantive accusation of spinelessness that must be answered. But Mamma Kandeh and his supporters are not alone in employing this tactic.
I have also seen some supporters and defenders of the Minister of Basic and Secondary Education try to bamboozle us with this tactic, too. Reading some of their arguments, you would think that critics were attempting to silence Dr Drammeh or deny her the right to participate in politics. Yet the issue is not whether she possesses the legal right to express a political opinion. The issue is whether a minister presiding over a failing and corrupt ministry in a chronically corrupt government should prioritise partisan attacks over her ministry’s urgent responsibilities. Appeals portraying her as a victim whose “right to make a political statement” is somehow under assault merely construct a straw man to shield her from legitimate public scrutiny. Dr Drammeh’s rights to political speech do not magically abolish questions about the failures in her ministry. She may possess the freedom to make partisan statements, but citizens also retain an equal right, and indeed a duty, to question whether those statements reflect sound judgment, proper priorities, and fidelity to creating a better education pipeline for our children. As things stand, our children continue to fail while her power-hungry boss, Adama Barrow, prioritises tightening his chokehold around our necks. Does that bother Dr.Drammeh at all? I asked because it seems her concern is with the speck in Talib Bensouda’s eye and not the plank in her ministry!
I recognize that this is an election season, and I have long argued that Ministerdom is too often where conscience goes to die. I get it. Dr Drammeh must demonstrate loyalty to President Adama Barrow if she wishes to remain in her position, just as other ministers must continually prove their usefulness to him. Some of us have seen this pattern often enough to recognize it: once appointed, many ministers forget the person they once portrayed themselves as. Ours is a system in which ministers must prove their indispensability to their political patrons. I get it. Heck, even Dr Gomez, who once cultivated an ostensibly apolitical public posture, is eventually drawn into overt partisan activity. It is a survival tactic. Their contribution to the president’s political survival is far more important than anything else they can do for him. And that is the sad part. When loyalty to Adama Barrow becomes the principal measure of public service, ministerial responsibility is displaced by patronage, and self-preservation takes precedence over serving those they swore to serve. But I hope they and their supporters also understand that entering the partisan arena also means surrendering any claim to immunity from political scrutiny. No public official or their friends and family can willingly enter the political cesspool and then dictate who is permitted to swim beside them. Kon mu yormba torrop!
Lemme say this again: Be a politician if you must. Jump from one political master to another if shame is not an obstacle. Lick all that you once vomited if your senses allow. Heck, adopt Satan and worship him/her if you so choose. It is your right, and that is not in question. But remember that NOT every exercise of your right is ethically defensible or compatible with the obligations of public office. To respond to criticism of opportunism or misplaced priorities by merely asserting personal freedom is therefore to avoid the argument rather than defeat it. This confused democracy we lay claim to protects the right to choose one’s political allegiances, but it equally protects the public’s right to interrogate the motives, contradictions, and consequences underlying those choices. Wottoh, Ayyeh diyyah.