By Fatou Krubally
Gambian lawmakers have cautioned the government against delaying the implementation of a key parole provision in the Criminal Procedure Act 2025 solely because the facilities and funding required to operate it are not yet available.
The concerns were raised Tuesday during debate on the second reading of the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill 2026, which seeks to amend Section 258 of the Act and postpone its implementation until the necessary facilities and rehabilitation programmes are established.
Moving the bill, Attorney General and Minister for Justice Dawda A. Jallow said the 2025 Act introduced reforms including suspended sentences, community service and parole.
He explained, however, that some of the reforms require supporting institutions and facilities, which have significant financial implications for the government.
According to the Attorney General, the government currently lacks the funds and rehabilitation facilities required to effectively implement the parole provision.
He said the proposed amendment followed High Court cases involving applications for parole under Section 258, creating the need to clarify when the provision could be operationalised.
The proposal drew concern from some lawmakers, who argued that financial constraints should not be used to weaken or indefinitely delay justice reforms.
Member for Wuli East Suwaibou Touray said justice was a fundamental responsibility of the state and urged the government to mobilise the resources needed to implement the provision.
“We should not drop laws because they are expensive,” Mr. Touray said, suggesting that implementation could be phased if necessary.
Member for Foni Kansala Almameh Gibba also urged the government to include the required facilities in the national budget, arguing that Parliament could approve the necessary funding and allow implementation to proceed gradually.
Member for Upper Saloum Alagie Mbowe supported the general objective of the amendment but questioned the absence of a specific timeframe for operationalising the parole provision.
He suggested that government could be given three or five years to establish the required facilities rather than leaving implementation open-ended.
Member for Serrekunda Musa Cham defended the proposed suspension, saying it would not remove parole from the law but temporarily prevent its implementation until the necessary conditions were in place.
He said the absence of rehabilitation facilities was already creating difficulties, with individuals applying for parole while the authorities lacked the capacity to operationalise the provision effectively.
The debate centred on whether the government should postpone implementation until the required facilities are established or commit the necessary resources to give effect to the provision.
Following the debate, the Speaker put the bill to a vote after a division was requested. The “ayes” carried the motion.
The Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill 2026 was subsequently referred to the Assembly Business Committee for committal to a relevant committee or the Committee of the Whole Assembly for further consideration.