Defend HUMAN Rights

Hon. Badjie, we appreciate your efforts but please don't take this personally. Freedom of expression is a fundamental human rights. With only a few months remaining before the elections in The Gambia. Don't you think ECOWAS authorities have put their house in order. Will it make sense for ECOWAS to choose or elect a president whose term is due to expire in five months. The reality is not about a busy schedule or financial constraints. " ECOWAS Levy" financially supports the chairpersons office. Such a decision would only make sense if President Barrow is reelected or has more remaining years in office. And the selection does often follow the alphabetical order in some cases. At this point however your explanation appears to be interesting but not unavailing the reason behind.

For the past years, the following countries held the position.
2020–2021 Ghana
2021–2022 Ghana (extended)
2022–2023 Guinea-Bissau
2023–2025 Nigeria (extended)
2025–2026 Sierra Leone
2026–2027 Senegal

ECOWAS Chairmanship Is Not a Medal, nor a Validation – It's a responsibility, with cost attached

Following the election of Senegal's President as Chairman of ECOWAS, some Gambians have rushed to social media asking why H.E President Adama Barrow has never held the position, despite serving for close to 10 years. Predictably, some have even gone as far as suggesting that he lacks influence in the sub-region or is not trusted by his fellow Heads of State.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The ECOWAS Chairmanship is not a medal awarded to the most popular President, nor is it a validation of who is more influential. It is a position that comes with enormous responsibilities, and it is assumed through consensus among Member States. A country that is prepared to shoulder not just the title but the commitments and responsibilities can put itself forward and will get endorsement by fellow Presidents, if not that year but a subsequent year. Therefore, the fact that The Gambia chose not pursued the Chairmanship should not be twisted into a narrative of rejection or lack of regional respect.

What many critics ignore or even not aware of is the financial burden that accompanies the office. An ECOWAS Chairman becomes the face of the regional bloc, attending countless continental and international summits, mediating regional disputes, and responding to emergencies across West Africa. These responsibilities require frequent international travel and extensive diplomatic engagements, with significant costs that are largely borne by the country holding the Chairmanship.

For a small economy like The Gambia, every dalasi matters. It is therefore entirely reasonable for President Barrow to prioritize national development and fiscal prudence over a prestigious regional title. That is a sign of responsible leadership that puts the country's interests first.

The irony in this debate is that the very people and platforms that are questioning why President Barrow is not ECOWAS Chairman would almost certainly be the first to complain about his "frequent travels" if he accepted the role. We have seen this before. In early 2022 when President Barrow travelled extensively across the region to mobilize support for Dr. Omar Touray's candidacy for the presidency of the ECOWAS Commission – a more strategic position that The Gambia secured – many of these same voices criticized him “for travelling too much”. Even today, with less travel by the President and government officials, some people call it a “waste of taxpayer money”. Now, those same critics want Gambia to occupy a position that would require even more travels.

Which is it? You cannot demand regional leadership while condemning the diplomatic engagements that regional leadership demands. One of the unfortunate realities of our public discourse is the fact that some people speak with absolute confidence on subjects they have never taken the time to understand. Governance issues are reduced to social media slogans, and speculation is presented as fact. Having an opinion is every citizen's right, but presenting misinformation as expertise is a disservice to the national conversation.

President Barrow's influence in the region should not be judged by whether he has held the rotating ECOWAS Chairmanship. It should be judged by The Gambia's constructive engagement within ECOWAS, its commitment to regional peace and integration, and the respect it continues to enjoy among its neighbors.

Leadership is not about collecting titles. It is about making decisions that advance the national interest. If and when The Gambia decides that assuming the ECOWAS Chairmanship aligns with its priorities and economic capacities, it will pursue that responsibility with the support of its regional partners. Until then, it is time we stop manufacturing controversies where none exist and start discussing national and regional affairs based on facts rather than assumptions. A title may bring prestige, but responsible leadership requires wisdom of knowing when to, and when not to seek a title.

Many Gambians have expressed concern about the recent court decision to compensate Ceesay. We need to understand that, his rights were violated at a time when all his hope depends on what he was doing for the state and force (injustice ) removed him. His dignity and safety were violated. He was subjected to humiliation while carrying out his public duties.
Therefore, compensation is for redressing. And it is one aspect of accountability. We need to understand that.

As the court recommended financial compensation. Many believe the justice system should have upheld the fundamental right that protects workers by recommending Ceesay's reinstatement (true). In addition, the court citing reasons for not recommending reinstatement falls short of fully protecting workers' rights in The Gambia.

Therefore, the justice system has the responsibility to guarantee non repetition of such.

Commissioner's leveing, the National Human Rights Commission, The Gambia . Commissioner Leigh, Drammeh and team Thank you for your services. Your efforts are sincerely appreciated. We wish you continued success in your work.

The Gambia Immigration Department excessive force against the opposition leader Kebba Madi Bojang raised a serious human rights concern in The Gambia after 22 years of dictatorship. The humiliation and excessive force raise questions about respect for human dignity and respect for the fundamental human rights in The Gambia. We condemn the Immigration authorities actions against Kebba.

No individual should be subjected to degrading inhumane treatment of such, manifested by The Gambia immigration department is
disrespectful. This was not the reason why Yaya Jammeh was denied the votes in 2016.

Respect for human rights is a must and it is not a privilege. It should be upheld for every person.

We condemn the action against Kebba Madi Bojang by the Gambia Immigration Department, opposition leader of the National Democratic Party (NDP). The use of force by state authorities that exceeds what is necessary constitutes a violation of fundamental human rights. The action of the immigration department 'boys' violates Madi's rights to personal security, dignity and freedom from torture or cruel inhuman or degrading treatment. This should be avoided by security personnel.

Lawful arrests require a limited degree of physical control. Excessive force is never acceptable and undermines the rule of law and the state's obligation to protect the rights of all persons. The Gambia has ratified many conventions to protect its citizens, therefore such action is failure of duty and responsibility to uphold such

We call on the National Human Rights Commission, The Gambia to publicly and unequivocally condemn the actions of the authorities against Kebba Madi Bojang and to promptly conduct an independent investigation. The commission silence will not be acceptable and it represents a failure to uphold its mandate to protect citizens and to hold public authorities accountable for human rights violation. The Commission must demonstrate its commitment to justice and the protection of human rights without fear or favor.

Madi defending the "Protest".

MADI JOBARTEH DEBATES ABDOU BAH ON PROTEST IS MEANINGLESS IF THE SYSTEM REMAINS… Madi Jobarteh and Abdou Bah debated on Protests vs system change on...

Silencing the protest doesn't also fix the system. The protest guides the system. Wake leaders up. And force the system to change. We are ready to volunteer against the motion. The Protest must be protected.The flyer itself is an act of protest.

West Radio be reminded, this debate itself is part of the protest (Wise: as protest comes in many forms). If Madi is occupied, we will step forward and volunteer.

The protest cannot be silent, weakened, ignored or stopped simply because selfish leaders refuse to listen. Be reminded 'Protests' always exists for a purpose at any point in time. In any form protest is a fundamental right to be exercised to remind those in power that the people are aware, watching and will hold them accountable for failed responsibilities and broken promises.

Protest has always been the public force that unsettles leaders, keeping them awake at night wondering, testing their actions, exposing their weaknesses and failing promises and bringing public concerns to light. It pushes leaders to negotiate, plan more responsibly, use public resources wisely and remain mindful of international scrutiny on grants. The protest force leaders to listen, to act and when necessary to step down.

Without continued protest the system remains as it is normal. Continuing the protest is a constant reminder to those in power that the people are watching and holding them accountable. 'Protect the Protest' it guides the system.

Intimidation and efforts to silence peaceful protesters call for concern in The Gambia. As 100 peaceful protesters have been deprived of access to their national identity documents ( ID cards and passports) after authorities required them to surrender these documents as a condition for bail.And pending court cases. Said Gallas' a GALA member.

This practice raises serious human rights concerns. Denying peaceful protesters who have not done any crime access to their national identity documents undermines their dignity and restricts their ability to exercise fundamental constitutional rights i.e freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and personal opinion. The use of identity documents as bail conditions appears to be an attempt to silence and impose unjust limitations on these freedoms.

The Gambia’s National Human Rights Commission, The Gambia established by an Act of Parliament and funded by public resources with a mandate to protect citizens’ rights, has not issued any statement on this matter. There is an urgent need for the Commission to investigate and address this practice started by authorities in The Gambia.

This actions calls for immediate attention from the Human Rights Commission to ensure that all charges against the peaceful protesters are dropped, their identity documents are returned and their rights are fully respected and upheld.

The National Human Rights Commission has a mandate to act when citizens are treated unfairly. This practice is unfair and silence means consent. Look at your logo, do we have selective chain to break.