APP-Sobeya spokesperson Ousainou Bobb has criticised the structure and management of Coalition-2026, claiming that unresolved disagreements involving the Coalition Mediation Committee eventually undermined confidence in the opposition alliance.
Appearing on AG Radio’s People Power programme on Monday, Bobb said APP-Sobeya began identifying what he described as “abnormalities” in the coalition process as negotiations progressed and political actors began withdrawing.
According to him, the party had repeatedly raised concerns over how the CMC developed and implemented its coalition framework.
“As the political negotiation process proceeded, APP-Sobeya started seeing that there were some abnormalities presenting themselves because some parties had already started to exit,” Bobb said.
He added that APP-Sobeya leader Essa Mbye Faal subsequently voiced concerns over what he considered to be integrity issues within the mediation structure.
Bobb linked those concerns to a series of resignations and withdrawals involving individuals who had played prominent roles in the broader coalition initiative, including Fatoumatta Jallow-Tambajang, Professor Yerro Mballow, Ebrima S. Bah and Momodou Satou Dibba.
In Bobb’s account, those departures should not be viewed as isolated incidents but as warning signs that the coalition framework was struggling to maintain confidence among participants.
He said APP-Sobeya had earlier called for greater coordination between the CMC and another coalition-building initiative, APEX.
“In the first few months APP-Sobeya always requested for the CMC to invite other political parties as well,” Bobb said.
He claimed APP-Sobeya specifically proposed that the CMC work together with APEX to create a more unified process.
According to Bobb, APEX agreed to the idea and drafted a memorandum of understanding, but cooperation did not materialise.
“CMC was reluctant to work with APEX for a reason I do not know,” he said.
Bobb further claimed that APEX later proposed that participating parties sign an exclusivity arrangement determining whether they would pursue coalition discussions through APEX or the CMC. Political parties, however, were unwilling to make such a commitment.
That episode points to one of the structural weaknesses that often confront opposition alliances: multiple organisations may support the broad principle of unity while competing over who should coordinate the process and under what rules.
The result can be a coalition initiative with several centres of political authority but no universally accepted mechanism for resolving disputes.
For Coalition-2026, the problem appears to have become especially serious once candidate selection moved from an abstract discussion of unity to a contest with real political consequences.
Bobb’s criticism suggests that APP-Sobeya believed procedural issues raised earlier in the negotiations were never satisfactorily addressed before the coalition proceeded to choose its flagbearer.
However, questions remain for APP-Sobeya as well.
Having participated in the process for months, the party may be asked why it did not withdraw earlier if the alleged deficiencies were sufficiently serious to call the integrity of the process into question.
The CMC and remaining coalition participants may also be expected to explain whether formal mechanisms existed for parties to challenge procedures, seek internal review or amend the framework before candidate selection.
Ultimately, the controversy is bigger than the disagreement between APP-Sobeya and UMC.
It raises a fundamental question over whether opposition coalition-building in The Gambia can move beyond personality-driven negotiations and establish institutions strong enough to survive disagreements among ambitious political actors.
Without trusted rules, even the strongest calls for unity can collapse when the question changes from whether parties should work together to who should lead them.
