By Alhagie Demba (pen name)
How to fix PURA’s misstep and build a digital economy that works for all
The past few weeks have exposed a deep fracture in The Gambia’s relationship with its digital future. A debate over the cost of data exploded into a national crisis, encompassing protests, arrests, and an alarming display of state force.
The images of peaceful protesters like Killer Ace and Flex Dan being remanded to Mile II – even as prosecutors didn’t object to bail – for the “crime” of demanding affordable internet sent a chilling message. I overheard someone retort, “not even Jammeh went that low”. This is no longer about pricing; it’s a symptom of a broader governance malaise.
At the centre is PURA. Its decision to impose a price floor has been fiercely opposed by the very companies it regulates. Currently, PURA often feels like riding a donkey cart on our amazing OIC highway instead of speeding in a Mercedes. The government’s new “high-level committee” is a start, but its all-government composition looks more like an attempt to control the narrative than solve the problem.
A fundamental reset, not a temporary fix
This moment demands more than a temporary political compromise as is common in Jollof these days. It requires a fundamental reset in governing this critical sector. We need a clear pathway to address the triple challenges of high cost, poor quality, and questionable regulatory oversight. Affordable and reliable internet is the engine of innovation, education, and economic productivity. Stifling it with flawed policies sabotages our national potential.
A three-pillar strategy for a digital Gambia
The way forward requires a bold, evidence-based strategy:
1. Immediate reversal and a truly independent review: PURA must immediately suspend the price floor directive to de-escalate tensions. Then, the President’s committee must be urgently reconstituted to include independent experts, academics, and civil society representatives. This new, credible body’s first mandate must be a public, forensic review of PURA’s mandate. Does it even have the legal authority to set price floors? The findings must be public.
2. Focus on the real levers: Infrastructure and Competition. Trying to foster competition by setting a minimum price is like trying to win a race by tying everyone’s feet together. Instead of manipulating prices, we should focus on the root causes:
Enforce Quality of Service (QoS): PURA’s Directorate of Consumer Affairs must implement strict, publicly reported benchmarks for uptime and speed. Consistently failing operators should face fines, reinvested into digital infrastructure (the Universal Service Fund, anyone?).
Promote infrastructure sharing: Imagine if everyone in your family compound had to dig their own well and generate their own electricity. It’s wasteful and expensive. Telecom towers are the digital equivalent. Sharing them isn’t a radical idea; it’s just common sense. The government must incentivise operators to share towers. This reduces their costs, and those savings must be passed on to consumers.
Unlock the ACE cable: We must expedite access for more operators to the ACE submarine cable. Increased supply drives down wholesale costs, leading to lower retail prices. And while we’re at it, let’s have a sane conversation about the potential of StarLink. The concerns raised so far are not trivial, but they are not an excuse for inaction on the core issues of cost and competition.
3. Embrace radical transparency: PURA must reform its engagement model. Host regular public forums, leverage technology for interaction, and publish decision-making data. Regulation must be a transparent process, not a black box that produces damaging decrees. PURA’s consumer parliament was a good start, but it can’t be a once-a-year event like Tobaski. Engagement needs to be a daily habit, not a periodic ceremony.
This isn’t theory, it’s a blueprint that works
The current crisis – the public outrage, the economic arguments from operators, and the detention of protesters – is all the proof needed that the current direction is untenable and potentially harmful.
Countries like Kenya and Rwanda (which has RURA) have successfully reduced data costs and they did so by focusing on increasing supply (through multiple submarine cable access), enforcing infrastructure sharing, and promoting fierce competition among operators. They did not succeed by imposing artificial price floors that risk creating a cartel.
The Competition Act already exists to safeguard consumer welfare and prevent anti-competitive practices. PURA’s role should be complementary: focus on technical regulation and enforcing service standards, not on overriding market dynamics to the detriment of the very consumers it is meant to protect.
The telecoms sector is the central nervous system of a modern economy and The Gambia is no exception. The Barrow administration’s handling of this crisis will either unlock a wave of innovation and productivity or condemn us to a future of digital isolation and economic stagnation. The choice is clear. We must choose the path of transparency, competition, and inclusive governance. Our collective future depends on it.
The author, Alhagie Demba (pen name) is a media professional who has researched The Gambia’s telecoms sector for more than a decade.
