By: Fatou Krubally
Former Attorney General Abubacarr B. Tambadou has clarified that the dismissal of Alhagie Mamadi Kurang as Secretary to the Janneh Commission was based on operational considerations and not a refusal to follow government instructions.
Mr. Tambadou, who was also the former Minister of Justice, clarified while talking to the parliamentary Special Select Committee investigating the sale and disposal of Jammeh’s assets identified by the Janneh Commission.
Speaking on Thursday, Tambadou sought to clarify evidence previously presented to the committee by Kurang and the Secretary to the Cabinet, Mr. Ebrima Ceesay, who had stated that Kurang was removed because he did not heed orders from the executive. The former AG disputed this account, saying the decision for Kurang’s removal followed his recommendation to the President, after commissioners and counsel reported they could no longer work with him effectively.
“Mr. Kurang had irreconcilable differences not only with the lead counsel but also with the commissioners,” Tambadou told the committee. “They explicitly informed me that they could no longer collaborate with him. I therefore recommended to His Excellency the President that he be relieved of his duties.”
Tambadou emphasized that Kurang’s removal occurred seven days after a letter requesting him to retract statements he had made, highlighting that the timing aligned with internal working dynamics rather than immediate disciplinary action by the government. He also noted that while Kurang was a person of strong character and professionalism, leadership sometimes requires making difficult decisions when relationships sour within critical government bodies.
The former AG further addressed claims of government interference in the Commission’s work, particularly regarding the temporary suspension of tractor sales. Tambadou described the government’s communication as “a request rather than an instruction,” and said the Commission’s decisions were independent and not dictated by the executive. He underscored that while certain letters from the Cabinet were “ill-advised,” the Commission ultimately acted based on its own reasoning.
Tambadou’s testimony provides a nuanced account of the circumstances surrounding Kurang’s removal, contrasting earlier narratives that suggested executive overreach. He argued that the decision was rooted in the necessity to maintain harmonious working relationships within the Commission, rather than retaliation or punishment for non-compliance with government requests.
