The 1997 Constitution of The Gambia outlines the foundation of governmental power and the aspirations for a unified nation, with Section 1 unequivocally stating, "The sovereignty of The Gambia resides in the people of The Gambia from whom all organs of government derive their authority." This foundational constitutional principle shows the nation's democratic ideals and its commitment to popular sovereignty, a principle that stands in stark contrast to recent public comments and emerging societal divisions. Amidst this constitutional bedrock, Imam Baba Leigh, a prominent religious figure whose words carry significant weight within Gambian society, recently made remarks that ignited widespread controversy. He denigrated the Mandinka ethnic group, describing them in inflammatory terms as "ignorant and perpetually angry," according to reports that quickly circulated. Leigh's statements have drawn sharp criticism from various quarters for their potential to exacerbate existing ethnic tensions and undermine the delicate social fabric within the country, raising serious questions about the adherence to the very principles enshrined in the nation's supreme law.
Echoes of Division
The constitutional framework of The Gambia explicitly mandates national cohesion and non-discrimination. Section 212 of The Gambia's Constitution, for instance, mandates that all state organs promote national unity, actively work to integrate the populace, and cultivate unwavering loyalty to The Gambia among all its citizens without any form of discrimination. Despite this clear constitutional directive, a series of pronouncements from influential political figures have consistently fueled concerns over escalating ethnic divisions. Former President Yaya Jammeh, during his tenure, notably declared that "no Mandinka would rule The Gambia," going so far as to call them "vermins to be exterminated." His inflammatory remarks noted a period of overt ethnic targeting and hostility within the country's political discourse, leaving a lasting scar on national unity.
More recently, Saihou Mballow of the National People's Party (NPP) characterized the current administration as a "Fula government," a statement that has drawn considerable criticism for its potential to exacerbate tribal sentiments and deepen ethnic fault lines. Such pronouncements resonate deeply within a political landscape where ethnic identity can regrettably become a focal point of contention and division, rather than a source of national diversity. Adding to these tensions, Deputy Speaker Seedy Njie also contributed to the divisive rhetoric, having "vowed to remove all Mandinkolu from government." These declarations from high-profile individuals, emanating from both past and present political spheres, show the ongoing and persistent challenges to national cohesion in The Gambia, directly contradicting the constitutional imperative for unity and integration. The repeated emergence of such ethnically charged statements from public figures indicates a troubling trend that threatens to unravel the very fabric of Gambian society, making the constitutional ideals of unity and non-discrimination appear increasingly fragile.
Constitutional Betrayal
The Gambian Constitution, in Sections 17 and 33, serves as a bulwark against discrimination, mandating profound respect for fundamental human rights, guaranteeing equality for all citizens before the law, and explicitly protecting citizens from discrimination based on ethnic origin. These provisions are designed to ensure that every individual, regardless of their background, is treated with dignity and fairness. Despite these explicit constitutional safeguards, recent data indicates a significant and alarming prevalence of hate speech specifically targeting certain ethnic groups within the nation. The National Human Rights Commission’s full 2025 survey on hate speech reveals a stark reality: a disproportionate 38% of all reported hate speech incidents target the Mandinka ethnic group. This figure is not merely a statistic; it notes a troubling and concentrated focus on one particular community within the country's public discourse, suggesting a systemic issue despite the constitutional promises of equality.
The same 2025 survey conducted by the National Human Rights Commission further illustrates the landscape of hate speech in The Gambia. It indicates that the Jola and Manjago communities are targeted by 5% of hate speech incidents, representing a significant but comparatively lower proportion. Comparatively, the Fula ethnic group is targeted by 4% of the reported hate speech incidents. These detailed statistics from the National Human Rights Commission show the persistent challenges to national cohesion, even as the Constitution outlines explicit protections against discrimination and mandates respect for fundamental rights. The findings suggest a worrying reality: despite the strong constitutional safeguards intended to prevent such divisions, certain ethnic groups, particularly the Mandinka, remain prominent and disproportionate targets of divisive rhetoric and hostility within The Gambia. This disparity raises critical questions about the effectiveness of existing legal frameworks and the urgent need for more strong enforcement and societal shifts to uphold the constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination for all.
A Call to Dismantle
After 60 years of independence, The Gambia continues to grapple with deep-seated ethnic divisions, a lamentable reality captured by the article stating that Gambians can still "hate, dismiss, and discriminate against a fellow citizen solely on the basis of ethnicity." This persistent and deeply ingrained issue raises critical questions about the nation's foundational values and its trajectory as a sovereign state. The article sharply questions whether the country has truly evolved into the "just, equal, and inclusive society enshrined in our Constitution," or if, disturbingly, it has become "a society of hypocrites and bigots, where we espouse high moral values while practicing discrimination, hate speech, and bigotry." This dichotomy between constitutional ideals and lived reality presents a profound challenge to the nation's conscience.
The analysis further suggests a phenomenon termed "Mandinka restraint," observing that the Mandinka are "by and large, less tribalist and more inclusive, having absorbed the civic and moral ideals of the nation." This perceived restraint, however, operates within what the article describes as "a Powder Keg," indicating an inherently unstable and volatile situation. The significant disparity in hate speech targeting, with a glaring 38% to 5% gap between the Mandinka and other groups, is presented not merely as a statistical anomaly but as "a serious warning." This imbalance, where one group disproportionately bears the brunt of ethnic animosity, demonstrates that while the Mandinka have shown "remarkable forbearance" in the face of provocation, continued and unchecked incitement poses "a clear and present threat to national peace." The article issues a stark and urgent warning: if the majority group, which has thus far exercised considerable restraint, decides to "abandon its restraint and reposition itself for defense or retaliation, the stability of this nation will shatter immediately," plunging the country into unforeseen turmoil.
The current trajectory, if allowed to continue unchecked and without serious intervention, suggests that the Republic is not only "flawed" in its current state but is also "heading toward a fratricidal conflict," a civil strife that would devastate the nation. The article emphasizes the imperative for urgent and decisive action, stating with conviction, "We cannot afford to be merely angry. We must halt, reflect, and dismantle the structures of this decadent republic." It advocates passionately for a serious, honest, and full national conversation to "rescue ourselves before it is too late," cautioning that without such a profound and transformative dialogue, "another Baba Leigh will emerge, and we will be trapped in an endless cycle of reaction, offering no cure for the cancer eating at our national soul." The time for this "tough, honest, and sincere national conversation is now," before the constitutional promises of unity and equality are irrevocably lost to the corrosive forces of division and hate.