By The Editorial Board
Over the weekend, a National Assembly Member, Hon. Sanna Jawara of Upper Falladu West, made accusations against President Adama Barrow for making structured payments to some members of the legislature in a scheme he, as a targeted recipient, understood was intended to buy their loyalties to the president. Many citizens presumed it was designed to enhance support for the president within the United Democratic Party (UDP). The State House, in Banjul, has released a statement last night denying the allegations arguing that Mr. Jawara provided no evidence to support his allegations. This official trumpery from the State House should be thrown on the tumbrel for its emptiness in the face of serious allegations of the continuation of the “sultanism” of Yahya Jammeh. The sentence that sums up the president’s defense is “no National Assembly Member was invited to State House to receive money in return for any favors, including political support.” This carefully worded denial should be given more attention for not what it says, but for what it did not say.
In an effort to dismiss Mr. Jawara’s allegations that National Assembly Members “physically queue up for monthly handouts,” the State House engaged in semantics and legalistic argument. It treats the saga as if we are in a court of law where the burden of proof is on Mr. Jawara, and that every aspect of that accusation as levelled must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. The president fails to realize that he is judged by the citizens for not only by his actions, deeds or inactions, but also by public perceptions of his words and conducts. The public see him, his wife and ministers as corrupt self-dealing public officials who are gaming the system to enrich themselves at the expense of poor Gambians. The corruptions of the so-called Adama Barrow Foundation for Inclusive Development, the Fatoumata Bah Barrow Foundation, and excessive official government travels to cash in per diems and travel allowances are just a few to mention.
In the statement of denial, the State House says, “no National Assembly Member was invited to State House to receive money.” This is sematic, pure and simple. The National Assembly Members may not have been invited purposely to receive money but end up receiving money as gifts, anyway. They could have even received money from the president’s aids out of the State House, as Hon. Madi Ceesay of Sere Kunda West Constituency admitted yesterday in an interview with Omar Wally of the FatuNetwork.
The sematic went further to qualify the statement by adding that “in return for any favors, including political support.” All that these words added to the denial is that the National Assembly Members could have visited the State House and even lined up for cash payments but only that they were not intended for a “return for any favors, including political support.” The profundity of the denial is in what it did not really say—a categorical denial that the president has not given cash money to any National Assembly Member since he assumed office in January 2017. The State House would not make that claim as the Director of Press and Public Relations at the Office of the President, Amie Bojang-Sissiho, told Kebba Camara of Paradise FM that the president gave the money only after some National Assembly Members asked for financial supports for their constituency services.
The statement, self-servingly but rightly, calls out the hypocrisy of Mr. Jawara for having received a pickup truck from the president last year, but criticized him for cash payments to members of the same body. The onus and burden of honor now lies on Mr. Jawara to return the purported gift — vehicle — he received from the president as a member of the National Assembly. It would be proper for Mr. Jawara to call on all his colleagues to declare and return all gifts they have received from the president. It’s only by doing so that the public will believe Mr. Jawara that he did not named and shamed the president for a UDP internal political wrangle but for the best interest of the people of The Gambia.
National Assembly Members should reorient themselves to understand that they do not need money from any president to perform their duties at the Assembly or in their constituencies. They control the purse of the government and could allocate resources through the process of normal budgeting for any expenses they deemed necessary to discharging their duties to their constituents. This includes allocating official vehicles for each member if they determined it best and financially prudent way to end undue influence, corruption and bribery of the president extended to the legislature.
All honest Gambians, regardless of their political parties or affiliations, should take this opportunity to acknowledge and appreciate the National Assembly Members of the People’s Democratic Organization for Independence and Socialism (PDOIS), who declined, on sheer principle and wisdom, to take the vehicles that President Barrow offered them. They deserved apologies especially from citizens who have criticized, blamed and even condemned them for not taking gifts from the president. They were right. For legislators to accept gifts from the president has a corrupting influence that would corrode our newfound democracy.
The president has more explanations to do. The carefully worded denial his office issued is nothing but an insult to the collective intelligence of the Gambian people. We deserved better from our president.
The National Assembly should investigate these allegations and bar all public officials from receiving or giving gifts in and outside of The Gambia while serving in office. It is only such an ineluctable anti-corruption legislation, which is fully enforced on every public official, including the president, that would reduce official corruption, bribery, kickbacks, inducement and influence peddling in the operations of our government.