Disagreements over the structure of a proposed opposition coalition and the method of selecting its presidential candidate have continued to complicate negotiations ahead of The Gambia’s 2026 presidential election.
Coalition 2026 spokesperson Lawyer Assan Martin has offered his account of the internal disputes, including the circumstances that he believes led the United Democratic Party (UDP) to leave the talks.
Speaking during the weekly Sunday edition of AG Radio’s Citizen Empowerment programme, Martin said the negotiations had been affected by competing political interests, disagreements over leadership and conflicting interpretations of what transpired during closed-door meetings.
He also responded to criticism directed at him by some UDP members, particularly Dr. Lamin Manneh and Lare Ceesay, both of whom have been involved in discussions surrounding opposition unity.
Martin accused the two UDP officials of giving the public an inaccurate account of the negotiations. He further alleged that the information they provided to UDP leader Honourable Ousainou Darboe did not fully reflect what had taken place during the talks.
The claims were Martin’s account of the negotiations, and the UDP officials named during the programme were not present to respond.
At the centre of the dispute is whether the proposed coalition should adopt a candidate-led or party-led model.
According to Martin, most of the political parties and other stakeholders participating in the negotiations supported a candidate-led arrangement. Under such a model, the coalition would select an individual to lead the alliance, rather than automatically allowing one of the participating political parties to control the coalition.
“Most of the stakeholders in the coalition talks favoured a candidate-led model as opposed to a party-led model,” Martin said. “Only the UDP and a few other parties favoured a party-led model.”
Supporters of a candidate-led coalition argue that the arrangement could create a more inclusive platform and reduce competition among the participating parties. They believe that selecting a candidate through a jointly agreed process would allow the alliance to focus on defeating the governing party rather than promoting the interests of any single opposition party.
Those supporting a party-led model, however, maintain that an established political party should lead the coalition because it already possesses a recognised political structure, nationwide organisation, supporters and electoral experience.
The disagreement between the two models has become one of the major obstacles confronting the coalition process.
Martin alleged that the UDP entered the negotiations with two principal objectives: for the party to lead the coalition and for Honourable Ousainou Darboe to become its presidential flagbearer.
“UDP came to these coalition negotiations with two main intentions: for the UDP to lead the coalition and for Honourable Ousainou Darboe to become the flagbearer,” he said.
According to Martin, UDP representatives were unwilling to support an arrangement that did not satisfy those conditions. He argued that this disagreement contributed significantly to the party’s decision to discontinue its participation in the negotiations.
The UDP has previously defended its preference for a party-led coalition, arguing that the strength, organisation and electoral support of participating parties should be considered when deciding which party or candidate should lead an opposition alliance.
The party’s position has differed from that of stakeholders advocating equal participation among political parties, regardless of their size or previous electoral performance.
Martin acknowledged that the disagreement over the coalition model was not the only challenge facing the negotiations. He said questions surrounding the selection of a flagbearer, voting procedures and the political ambitions of individual stakeholders had also made it difficult to reach a compromise.
He alleged that some participants were pursuing interests that had not been openly declared during the discussions.
According to him, these competing ambitions and what he described as “hidden agendas” had weakened trust among some of the stakeholders and made consensus more difficult.
Martin did not provide detailed evidence during the programme to support all the allegations made against the UDP officials and other unnamed participants. His comments nevertheless provide further insight into the deep divisions affecting attempts to establish a united opposition coalition.
The competing accounts emerging from the negotiations have also raised questions about communication between representatives attending the meetings and the leadership of their respective political parties.
While Martin maintained that some UDP officials had misrepresented the discussions, UDP representatives have previously expressed dissatisfaction with the direction of the coalition process and the proposed method of selecting its leader.
The latest controversy therefore reflects a broader struggle among opposition parties over political influence, representation and the leadership of any future alliance.
Despite the UDP’s departure and the continuing disagreements, Martin insisted that the Coalition 2026 initiative had not collapsed.
He said negotiations among the remaining political parties, civil society representatives and other stakeholders were continuing. Efforts, he added, were being made to resolve the outstanding differences and develop an acceptable process for selecting a presidential candidate.
“The talks are still ongoing, and I am confident that there will be an agreement soon,” Martin concluded.
Whether the remaining participants can reach such an agreement will depend on their ability to address the disputes over leadership, voting arrangements and the balance between the interests of larger political parties and those of smaller parties and independent stakeholders.
The divisions have increased public concern about the opposition’s ability to form a united electoral platform. They have also placed greater pressure on coalition negotiators to conduct the process transparently and explain their decisions clearly to their supporters.
As the presidential election approaches, the opposition faces a choice between resolving its internal differences or contesting the election through separate political platforms.
For now, negotiations are continuing, but the disagreement surrounding the UDP’s departure demonstrates the difficulties involved in reconciling the ambitions, strategies and interests of The Gambia’s opposition parties.
