By Abdoulie Mam Njie
There is a way in which fairness erodes in a society without a courtroom, without a charge sheet, and without a right of reply. It begins when disagreement ceases to be constructive and becomes corrosive, when accusation replaces inquiry, conclusions are drawn before facts are examined, and judgment is delivered without the discipline of listening. At that point, it is not merely an action that is on trial, but fairness itself.
In every society, moments arise when the difficulties of others become public spectacle and doubt becomes currency. Falsehood, once released, is rarely intended to clarify. More often, it unsettles, distracts, or diminishes. What makes this tendency particularly damaging is not only the claim itself, but the silence imposed on those affected, as though responding were a privilege rather than a right.
Narratives then begin to harden, not because they have been tested, but because repetition creates the illusion of truth. A small number of voices assume outsized authority, acting at once as accuser, interpreter, and judge. When the same hands frame the charge, weigh what is presented as evidence, and pronounce the outcome, justice leaves the room unnoticed.
This erosion of fairness is subtle but enduring. No formal process is invoked, yet reputations suffer and trust weakens. Over time, restraint is mistaken for weakness, caution for complicity, and conclusions reached in advance become normalised. What begins as commentary quietly settles into certainty.
Those most affected are often individuals or groups whose actions are visible, whose responsibilities are public, or whose initiatives attract attention. Visibility invites projection, and progress unsettles those comfortable with inertia. What should invite evaluation instead provokes suspicion, and what should encourage dialogue is reduced to pronouncement.
We see this pattern when promising initiatives are first applauded and then quickly questioned, not through evidence, but through assumption, not through inquiry, but through commentary. The issue is not disagreement itself. It is the speed with which judgment replaces understanding, and the ease with which those affected are denied the space to be heard.
The wider cost is significant. When accusation carries no obligation of proof and response is treated as indulgence rather than right, initiative retreats. Service becomes guarded. Leadership grows hesitant. Capable individuals learn that discretion is safer than contribution, and a young person who might have stepped forward learns instead to step back.
For young people, the lesson is especially damaging. When effort is met with controversy rather than encouragement, civic pride gives way to cynicism and participation becomes conditional. A society that speaks of empowering its youth must be attentive to what it teaches them through example.
Justice, as moral and civic traditions remind us, is not only about outcomes. It is also about process. Truth is not established by volume, nor responsibility by assertion. To condemn without hearing is to abandon humility, and to find satisfaction in another’s difficulty is to dull one’s own conscience.
None of this requires silence or uniformity. Disagreement is necessary for growth, and scrutiny is essential for accountability. But scrutiny without fairness becomes persecution, and disagreement without restraint becomes cruelty. A healthy society must distinguish between holding to account and taking pleasure in the setback of others.
These dynamics are not abstract. They play out repeatedly in contemporary public life, shaping how effort is received and how initiative is treated. It is against this broader backdrop that I congratulate and encourage The Builders for their initiative and their positive engagement in national development. Their meeting with the president reflects the value of youthful energy, creativity, and civic responsibility. Such efforts deserve thoughtful engagement and encouragement, not suspicion or premature conclusion.
By creating space for young people and constructive initiatives to engage openly, we affirm that effort, innovation, and participation are recognised and valued. When society chooses fairness over noise and encouragement over cynicism, success ceases to be a trial and becomes an opportunity for shared progress.
In the end, the measure of a society is not how quickly it judges, but how carefully it listens. When fairness is preserved, truth has room to breathe. When it is not, success itself becomes a trial, and justice its first casualty.
