By Kemeseng Sanneh (Kexx)
The Kanifing Industrial Tribunal has dismissed the preliminary objections raised by the University of The Gambia (UTG) and its Acting Registrar, Bobo Baldeh, clearing the way for a full hearing into the alleged unlawful dismissal of Dr. Alieu Gibba and Professor Matarr Njie.
Dr. Gibba and Professor Njie filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration that their dismissal, dated November 27, 2024, was “unlawful, unfair, malicious, and repugnant to the principles of natural justice,” which they argue constitutes a breach of their employment contracts.
They are demanding reinstatement, back pay, significant damages for reputational harm of five million Dalasis each, and legal fees. They are being represented by Lawyer Malick H.B. Jallow.
When the case was initially filed, UTG and Mr. Baldeh’s defense counsel raised objections on several grounds. They argued that the Industrial Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear the case, asserting that the plaintiffs were civil servants, thus falling outside the purview of the Labour Act 2023, and that the case should have been heard by the UTG Tribunal under the Tertiary and Higher Education Act 2016. Additionally, they contested the inclusion of Mr. Baldeh in his personal capacity.
In a decisive ruling, the tribunal, chaired by Ms. Jallow, rejected these arguments. The tribunal clarified that while UTG is a government tertiary institution, it is not part of the civil service, meaning its employees are not considered civil servants. This rendered the defense’s first objection groundless.
On the matter of Bobo Baldeh, the tribunal determined that it could not yet decide whether he acted in his official or personal capacity, so his name would remain in the suit for the time being.
The tribunal further addressed the jurisdictional dispute, stating that while the Tertiary and Higher Education Act 2016 allows staff to file complaints with the UTG Tribunal, the Labour Act 2023 provides the Industrial Tribunal with “exclusive original jurisdiction” over employment-related disputes. The tribunal emphasized that the language of the Tertiary and Higher Education Act (“may file”) offers a choice, not a mandate. Thus, the plaintiffs were within their rights to bring the case before the Industrial Tribunal.
“The words ‘may file’ in subsection 3 of section 33 of the Tertiary & Higher Education Act give the plaintiffs the option of where to file, and the plaintiffs chose to file with the Industrial Tribunal, which has exclusive jurisdiction on matters relating to the employer-employee relationship,” the ruling stated.
The tribunal also clarified that appeals from either tribunal ultimately go to the High Court, further reinforcing the Industrial Tribunal’s authority in this matter.
With the preliminary objections overruled, the plaintiffs were instructed to present their case, and the defendants will have an opportunity to respond to the claims made against them.
The ruling has set the stage for what could become a landmark case in The Gambia, potentially redefining employment rights within the country’s tertiary education sector. Both the public and the academic community are expected to closely follow the case as it unfolds.
