By Kebba Gibba, Adjunct Lecturer; UTG
‘‘The recent press release issued by the Gambia Armed Forces (GAF) condemning what it refers to as “unethical commentary” by private citizens and political figures is of great concern to a democratic society. Although professionalism in the armed forces is crucial, the principle that all state institutions, particularly those with coercive power, must remain available for scrutiny, criticism, and accountability by citizens, political leaders, and the media is equally important.
The press release’s claim that discussing the GAF in public is “unpatriotic” or “unethical” betrays an antiquated, authoritarian stance. Public figures and citizens have both the right and the obligation to challenge the actions of state institutions in a constitutional democracy.
As a branch of the executive branch, the military must continue to answer to the public and be open to criticism. Whether or not one agrees with Mr. Samsudeen Sarr and Mr. Essa Mbaye Faal’s remarks, they are perfectly within the democratic right to free expression. Posing queries regarding.
In a transitioning democracy still healing from decades of military overreach, discussing issues like the presence of foreign forces at strategic installations, the integration of ECOMIG personnel into national command structures, or the operational readiness and neglect of the armed forces are not “incendiary,” but rather essential.
According to the Security Sector Reform agenda, the GAF is an apolitical, reformed organization. True reform, however, entails being able to take criticism without retaliating defensively and accepting oversight. It shows a lack of maturity and professionalism to accuse critics of pursuing “cheap popularity,” rather than a lack of tolerance for dissent.
The Armed Forces still function in an environment where appointments, promotions, and deployments are heavily influenced by executive power. Therefore, demands for neutrality must be accompanied by structural and visible disassociation from political meddling, such as full parliamentary supervision and civilian-led defence governance. It sends a chilling message to condemn public commentators or radio stations for talking about issues of national importance. It threatens civic space and media freedom, which are essential for the consolidation of democracy. Instead of condemnation, constructive criticism should be met with discussion.
Like all public institutions, the Gambia Armed Forces must continue to be receptive to public opinion because it exists to serve the people. More damage is done to national cohesion by stifling criticism, calling it unpatriotic, and discouraging public participation in national security discussions than any critical commentary could ever do. The GAF should be open to criticism, encourage discussion, and be tolerant of those who hold it responsible if it is a contemporary, democratic force.’’
