The United Democratic Party (UDP) notes with disappointment the misinformation being peddled by the state’s Minister of Information Dr. Ismaila Ceesay. In a recent appearance on state television GRTS, Mr. Ceesay stated that “…effectively, the reason we don’t have a constitution today [sic] is because of UDP and its leadership.” He unfairly speculated that “…UDP would likely continue to block the Barrow 2024 draft if it is reintroduced in parliament.”
The United Democratic Party’s position, which has been clearly communicated publicly, has been that any amendments, whether proposed from the cabinet or other stakeholders, MUST be subject to National Assembly procedures, and we remain committed to that view. In fact, this position is no different from the position Minister Ceesay took as leader of the then opposition party, the Citizens’ Alliance. As evidenced by his Twitter (now X) feed when he posted the following on September 22, 2020: “The final product of the draft constitution should be a compromise document, acceptable to a majority of Gambians rather than a compromised one to be rejected by NAMs. Let’s subject it to the next stage of parliamentary scrutiny to consider concerned voices.”
That last sentence in his post captures exactly what has been and remains UDP’s stated position. His convictions may have changed, but we remain committed to our values and advocating for the rule of law and due process. The mandate of the Constitutional Review Commission requires that any proposed draft emanating from their consultations with the people, would reflect the aspirations of the people, and we believe the 2020 Draft Constitution does exactly that.
Despite pressure from the executive, the CRC maintained certain clauses because they reflected the aspirations of the Gambian people and in the process demonstrated their independence. Suggesting that the CRC was selectively attentive, and that the CRC “rewarded” the UDP by altering the clause to allow convicted individuals to run for office is a direct attack to the person of our party leader and secretary general, who without his and his party’s sacrifice, both Minister Ceesay and President Barrow will not be in the position they are in today. We find it to be ungrateful to all those who contributed to the change, especially those who gave more to the point of going to prison to liberate the Gambia from the fronts of dictatorship that the Gambia experienced, an oversimplification of facts and undermines the thorough and consultative process the CRC followed for which all Gambians are proud.
As part of a democratic process, it is not unusual, in fact it is expected that various stakeholders will raise objections to specific provisions and clauses, that is expected and is a part of the process. Where we differ with the Minister is on how to address those concerns raised in objections. All objective minds would agree that the National Assembly is the proper institution in which to strike any compromises as opposed to the president and his appointed cabinet manipulating the people’s draft without consulting anyone, including Civil Society Organizations.
The minister made further distortions to the facts of the matter there was a consensus among all parties with the UDP as the only exception. In addition to the provisions on whether the term limit clause should be applied retroactively, there was no consensus on some provisions dealing with citizenship and on the constitutional designation of the Gambia as a secular state. The parties left Abuja with those sticking points.
Constitutional building is not an entirely partisan affair, neither is it about capitulating to the desires of Barrow and his executive, rather, we should advocate for the values we uphold. To that end, we would like to make it clear that the UDP is not advocating for taking the draft to referendum as is. Our position has always been to have any proposed amendments, whether recommended by the executive or other stakeholders, be subject to debate in the National Assembly and not before.
It is disheartening to note that someone once considered a rising star in the Gambia’s political future would take issue with a widely held view that too much power is concentrated in the hands of the president. Minister Ceesay’s critique of reducing presidential powers overlooks the historical context that informed the CRC’s decision-making. The CRC’s intent was to prevent the kind of power abuses that had plagued The Gambia under the previous regime. Strengthening checks and balances by empowering the National Assembly was not an attempt to strip the presidency of its legitimate authority but rather to ensure that power is exercised responsibly. Dr. Ceesay’s concerns about a potential “constitutional crisis” ignore the need for robust institutions that can prevent the concentration of power in a single office.
It is unfortunate that the Minister would disregard those facts just to attempt to cast a negative light on UDP whose only crime is to advocate its values.
We urge the Minister to execute his job functions with objective neutrality, with due regard to The Gambian people, and with sincere commitment to the truth.
As minister of Information, this means to simplify and effectively communicate government policy to the Gambian people. His job functions do not include being a propaganda spin doctor by feeding the people with disinformation, misinformation and half-truths.
UDP Media Team