The recent report by a Special Select Committee of the National Assembly into the handling and disposal of assets linked to former Gambian president Yahya A. J. J. Jammeh has reignited a national conversation about transparency, accountability, and the unfinished business of transitional justice. The committee’s call for criminal investigations and urgent institutional reforms signals a critical moment for governance in The Gambia.
Following the fall of Jammeh’s 22-year rule in 2017, the Gambian government established the Janneh Commission to investigate alleged financial misconduct during his administration. The commission identified a vast network of assets — including properties, vehicles, livestock, and financial holdings — believed to have been acquired through corruption and the misuse of state resources. These assets were subsequently seized by the state with the expectation that their sale would contribute to national recovery and reparations for victims of Jammeh’s rule.
However, the parliamentary inquiry has revealed troubling irregularities in how these assets were managed and disposed of. According to the committee’s findings, the asset recovery process was characterized by fragmented institutional arrangements, weak documentation practices, corruption and poor coordination among government agencies. In some instances, state institutions reportedly failed to comply with court orders freezing Jammeh-linked properties, leading to gaps in asset preservation and financial losses.
Even more concerning are allegations that parts of the process may have circumvented established financial controls. The committee noted that proceeds from certain asset sales were deposited into commercial bank accounts rather than the country’s Consolidated Revenue Fund, potentially violating the Public Finance Act. Lawmakers argue that such practices undermined transparency and weakened parliamentary oversight of public finances.
The implications of these findings extend beyond administrative shortcomings. For many Gambians — particularly victims of past human rights abuses — the recovery of Jammeh’s wealth was seen as a pathway toward justice and reparations. Yet delays, opaque procedures, and questionable transactions have cast doubt on whether the process truly served the public interest.
The committee’s recommendation for criminal investigations therefore represents more than a legal step; it is a test of the country’s commitment to accountability. If wrongdoing occurred, those responsible must face the consequences, regardless of their position or past role in government.
Equally important are the institutional reforms proposed by lawmakers. Strengthening financial oversight, clarifying asset recovery procedures, and improving inter-agency coordination are essential to prevent similar failures in the future.
Nearly a decade after Jammeh’s departure, The Gambia continues to navigate the difficult path from authoritarian rule toward democratic governance. The findings of this inquiry remind us that justice is not achieved solely by removing a dictator; it requires transparent institutions, vigilant oversight, and the political will to confront wrongdoing wherever it appears.
For The Gambia, the credibility of its democratic transition may depend on what happens next.
