The first demand of the Gambian people after 22 years of authoritarian rule from July 22, 1994, to December 2, 2016, has failed for the second time under President Adama Barrow.
The question everyone is now asking is: what is behind the failure of the Bill to pass its second reading, despite a process that has cost millions in taxpayers’ money?
In 2020, Gambia’s lawmakers rejected the first draft of a new constitution meant to replace the 1997 Constitution. The document, which aimed to reform the country’s governance system after 22 years under exiled former president Yahya Jammeh, could not secure enough votes in the National Assembly. At that time, 31 National Assembly Members voted in favour of the Bill while 23 rejected it.
The draft constitution was the product of two-and-a-half years of work, including a nationwide consultation with Gambians.
Tabling the Bill on Monday, Attorney General and Minister of Justice Dawda Jallow said it sought to replace the 1997 Constitution. For it to move to the next legislative stage, the Bill needed the support of at least 75 percent of all members or 44 out of 56 National Assembly Members. In the final vote, 35 members backed the Bill, 21 voted against it, and none abstained.
The 2020 Draft Constitution had sought to establish a two-term limit with a retroactive clause that would have counted the incumbent president’s current term, thus precluding President Barrow from running again in 2026. The absence of such a clause in the 2024 Draft remains a point of contention for various stakeholders.
The failure to pass the Bill at its second reading is not an isolated incident but echoes the rejection of the previous draft in 2020. Since the end of Jammeh’s autocratic rule in 2017, the clamor for a new, democratic constitution has been a central promise of the “New Gambia.” The 1997 Constitution, crafted under Jammeh’s military junta, is widely seen as an instrument that concentrated excessive power in the executive and lacked sufficient checks and balances to prevent abuses.
The failure of the 2024 Bill in its second reading can be attributed to a confluence of legal and political factors. Despite international and domestic calls for consensus, the political will to compromise on fundamental issues appears to be lacking. The process has been criticised for being too opaque and executive-led, leading to a situation where a significant portion of the population, including the diaspora and political actors, felt excluded or misrepresented in the drafting of the 2024 Bill. The postponement of the second hearing meant to build consensus, clearly fell short of achieving the necessary buy-in.
The immediate implication of the Bill’s failure is that The Gambia will continue to operate under the 1997 Constitution. This means that the existing legal framework, including the criticised aspects of executive powers and the absence of presidential term limits, will remain in effect. The failure to adopt a more democratic constitution may perpetuate concerns about the rule of law and good governance, particularly regarding executive overreach.
