By Kebba AF Touray
Lawmakers on Tuesday, September 16, 2025, challenged what they described as executive overreach during a tense debate on the Judicial Officers (Condition of Service) Bill, after discovering a clause in attached documents that appeared to retroactively approve revised salaries for judges.
The bill itself seeks to enforce constitutional provisions guaranteeing judicial independence and regulating judges’ pay. Section 120(3) of the Constitution states that “the judiciary shall be independent and shall be subject only to this Constitution and the law,” while Section 142 requires the National Assembly to prescribe judicial salaries and benefits and prohibits reducing them.
Controversy erupted when members pointed to a cover letter from the Ministry of Justice that appeared to validate payments already made to judges under a new pay scale.
Hon. Samba Jallow, Member for Niamina Dankunku, told the plenary, “I believe the Finance Minister should be here to inform the assembly where he is getting those funds for the adjustment, because we cannot adjust when we are in the dark as to the sources of those funds.”
Speaker Fabakary Tombong Jatta responded, “When the Supplementary Appropriation Bill (SAB) comes before the parliament and it is approved then the Minister goes and looks for funds.”
Hon. Sulayman Saho of Badibbu Central objected that no supplementary budget had been presented. “We are looking at the Judges; remuneration and something is attached to it, that has financial component, so we need to be cleared on the issue,” he said.
Minority Leader Hon. Alhagie S. Darboe of Brikama North read directly from the cover letter: “Please note that the revised pay scale contained in the attached schedule, reflects the remuneration structured approved by H.E the President of the republic and has been effective since 1st June 2025.” He said this meant the payments “have already been approved” and questioned, “Can the Minister take us through by the payment that has already been effective prior to its approval and what effect can that retrospective clause make that legal?”
Majority Leader Hon. Billay G. Tunkara dismissed the concerns, saying, “What we are concerned as parliament, we are going to legislate and it stars from today, whether retrogressive or not, we are not going to by that.” He urged lawmakers to disregard the letter. “I want to safely tell this assembly to ignore and disregard the content of the covered letter. This was being considered but it is no longer considered,” he said, adding that any previous actions “will be regularized.”
Darboe pressed that the letter could not be brushed aside. “It is confirmed that the payments have been approved by the President and effected since June,” he said. “What mandate has the President have to make that approval before the National Assembly approves it?”
Unable to resolve the dispute, Speaker Jatta ruled that the assembly would set aside the letter and proceed with a clause-by-clause review of the Judicial Officers Bill.
The move allowed consideration of the legislation to continue, but left lingering questions over the president’s role in authorizing judicial pay revisions before parliamentary approval.
