Since 2017, Gambians and the press continue to enjoy the highest degree of freedom than at any period in our entire history.
Those of us who experienced the 1st Republic as active student unionists and young activists, repeatedly arrested, detained, tortured and were also forced into exile during part of the brutal years of the Jammeh era, are better placed to make practical comparison.
It is absolute incontrovertible fact that throughout Gambia’s entire political history, President Barrow is the most politically tolerant Head of State and under him The Gambia has become a leading democracy in terms of human rights in Africa.
I will further assert and support President Barrow’s UN Speech that since 2017, no politician, activist or journalist was jailed by the Barrow administration. Admittedly, a number of politicians, activists and few media persons were arrested and detained but none were convicted and sent to prison or jail.
In legal parlance, “jail” and “prison” are interchangeable, depending on the jurisdiction. I failed to appreciate the redundant hullabaloo about this “jail’ noise. Yes, it is a fact that no journalist has been jailed, which is another word for prison, under this government. President Barrow is therefore correct to have asserted at the UN General Assembly, that The Gambia is perhaps the only country in Africa, and one of few countries in the whole world without any political prisoners. As a Gambian, I feel extremely proud of this unprecedented achievement, and in my view, every Gambian and African should be equally proud of such remarkable record.
That the President intends to sue certain journalists for defamation is in itself historic in terms of its democratic relevance. Having felt aggrieved by the publication, the President exercised his clear democratic citizenship discretion, decision and right by seeking to resort to the judiciary, and not use brute force as is customary in most African countries and elsewhere in Western Europe and the United States.
How many times did Mr Donald Trump as President of the most powerful democracy on earth PERSECUTED journalists and media houses he deemed unfriendly? France has gone beyond persecution and is currently PROSECUTING the founder of multimillion Dollar international social media communication platform ‘Telegraph’ for not censoring free communications on the platform? Few days ago, international social media communication giant now known as “X”, formerly Twitter, was fined and paid millions of Dollars to the Mexican government for breach of free speech.
As I speak, the United States government in Congress is working extremely hard to severely restrict the free speech capabilities of TikTok, under the false guise of social protection. Countries like Germany and others promulgated laws to stifle free expression such as it relates to the holocaust and other issues deemed “sensitive”. No Western nation enjoys better freedom of expression than The Gambia of today.
The media is considered the 4th Estate. It should advocate for more responsible journalism and not impunity for malicious false reporting, defamation or sedition. Why should anyone, including the media, be protected against the laws of defamation, sedition or malicious false reporting? These destructive variables in themselves offend the noble principles of journalism, distort the notion of democracy or free speech and are outside the perimeters of legal protection.
Furthermore, arrest, investigation and prosecution of crimes are the domain of the Police. This is why terms such as ‘suspect’, ‘detainee’ or ‘accused’ exist. Every person accused of a crime has the constitutional protection to presumption of innocence. The two journalists are beneficiaries of this constitutional dividend and the fact that they are free to have their day in court and not remanded under prison custody, is clear testament to The Gambia’s solid democratic credential. It is for the courts to decide if the Police would have proven the allegations beyond reasonable doubts against them.
It is about time political leaders condemn trial by the public instead of by the courts. All those who consider themselves democrats should monitor, encourage and strengthen the on-going transparent legal process, and stop undermining the judicial process through improper public comments amounting to sub judice.
Over the past eight years, Gambian judiciary has abundantly demonstrated its independence through series of high-profile judgements against the government, Executive actions and decisions. Political leaders should commend and support this new phenomena crystalised under President Barrow and stop selective amnesia.
Lastly, being President did not suspend President Barrow’s citizenship rights and obligations. Adama Barrow is first and foremost a Gambian citizen who is equally entitled to enjoy all of the rights granted under the Constitution and all other laws. The individuality and separate personality of Adama Barrow is not legally subsumed into the sacred office of the Presidency. Gambian law recognises the individuality of Adama the Gambian citizen, and also Adama Barrow, President of the Republic. Presidency does not and cannot change that fact. He may enjoy constitutional immunity as President but clearly subject to personal liabilities under civil laws as a private citizen, and even for penal laws disconnected to his lawful functions as Chief Executive.
President Barrow is also entitled to invoke those laws in his aid whenever he feels the need to do so, such as in this instance. Like all Gambians, he is entitled to exercise his right to sue as an aggrieved political leader. Indeed, he was sued in that same capacity following the aftermath of 2021 elections. Being President does not disentitled President Barrow from suing any journalists who in his opinion defamed him or made intentional false reporting which in itself is unethical. The fact that Adama Barrow is President or a public figure does not grant anyone the license to intentionally fabricate malicious lies against him or any public figure. That is against Gambian law, and he too is entitled to that same legal protection.
There is no law in The Gambia that discriminates, prevents or restricts President Barrow’s invocation of his citizenship democratic rights. These include the legal right to demand retraction or apology for perceived defamation by journalists or anybody. Being President of a country or a public figure isn’t a justification for the media or anyone to engage in calumny against President Barrow or anyone.
President Barrow should be commended for choosing the rule of law over the rule of might in the media saga. So far, none of the critics have accused President Barrow of violating any law in connection with his intention to sue for defamation. Equally, so far no one has cited any law that prevents The Gambia Police Force from filing charges or prosecuting for false reporting. It means so far, no existing laws of The Gambia have been violated by either President Barrow or by the Gambia Police Force. Therefore, again I failed to see this preposterous attempt to kill a mosquito with a hammer. It is what it is: raising the futile dust of sheer political mischief and desperate scheme of overheating the polity.
I am for freedom of expression with a vibrant liberal media but not an unrestrained, reckless and irresponsible gutter press, which serves no one’s interest but anarchy. Finally, I would like to recognize and support the continuing efforts of the Gambia Press Union in enthroning responsible, ethical journalism in The Gambia. A close partnership between the GPU and the government is necessary to consolidate dialogue and working relationship in empowering the media and media practitioners. The good news is: just three days ago, The Gambia was overwhelmingly elected into the UN Human Rights Council for a second consecutive year. This global recognition of our sovereign integrity is certainly a milestone to celebrate. I congratulate the Barrow Administration for this significant multilateral peer recognition.
