11
By Alieu Jallow
The National Assembly Member for Foni Kansala, Almameh Gibba, has threatened legal action if the Barrow administration fails to reverse its decision to replace Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Almameh Manga as a commissioner of The Gambia’s Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).
Gibba’s remarks follow revelations by Vice President Muhammed B.S. Jallow during a question-and-answer session in the National Assembly concerning delays in the formal appointment of commissioners to the newly established Anti-Corruption Commission.
Responding to questions from Brikama North lawmaker and Minority Leader Alagie S. Darboe on June 17, 2026, the Vice President disclosed that the Executive had decided to replace one of the three nominees previously approved by Parliament, citing corruption allegations made against the individual.
“I wish to inform this August Assembly that the delay in issuing the appointment letters is due to the need to replace one of the three approved nominees in keeping with integrity and suitability standards set out in the Act,” Vice President Jallow told lawmakers.
The Vice President, however, stressed that no adverse findings had been established against the nominee.
“I didn’t say that there was an adverse finding. I said there were accusations of corruption. If there is a specter of doubt on one of the commissioners, that is why it is necessary to replace that person,” he explained.
The nominee in question, ACP Almameh Manga, had earlier appeared on The Fatu Network, where he rejected allegations circulating on social media and maintained that he had committed no wrongdoing.
Reacting to the Vice President’s statement, Gibba described the Executive’s decision as unjustified and unsupported by evidence, arguing that Parliament had already subjected all nominees to rigorous scrutiny before approving their appointments.
“If such a decision is maintained based on mere allegations without evidence, then we will seek advice and pursue redress before the courts,” Gibba declared.
“We will not accept a situation where someone is removed simply because allegations were made against him without any investigation, evidence, or findings. I am speaking not only as a representative of Foni but as a Gambian and parliamentarian who participated in approving these commissioners. As far as I am concerned, and as far as Parliament is concerned, the three approved commissioners still stand, including Manga,” he added.
The Foni Kansala lawmaker questioned the legal basis on which the Executive could discard a nominee who had already received parliamentary approval.
“The Vice President could not substantiate why the Executive had to drop Almameh Manga. What facts did he lay before Parliament? None. What justification did he provide? None. What empirical evidence was presented? Zero,” Gibba argued.
He further pointed to numerous allegations made against public officials over the years that did not result in disciplinary action or prosecution, insisting that accusations alone should not be sufficient grounds to deny an individual a public appointment.
“How many allegations have been made against senior government officials? How many allegations currently exist against the Minister of Justice, the Solicitor General, and the Chief of Defence Staff? How many allegations concerning unaccounted public resources have been raised over the years? We have seen reports of millions of dalasis linked to the COVID-19 funds, supported by audit findings and evidence, yet no one has been removed or punished. Numerous allegations and adverse findings have also been made against state-owned enterprises through audit reports, many of which remain unaddressed. Why then should an individual be denied an appointment solely on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations for which no evidence has been presented?” he asked.
Gibba also questioned whether the Executive could unilaterally reverse a decision that had already received parliamentary approval.
“Cabinet cannot make decisions based on unverified allegations. Parliament conducted its constitutional duty, vetted the nominees, and approved them. The Executive cannot simply bypass Parliament without providing evidence or returning to seek Parliament’s reconsideration,” he said.
Meanwhile, a legal expert consulted by The Fatu Network expressed concern over the constitutional and governance implications of the Executive’s decision.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the legal analyst said the Anti-Corruption Act 2023 requires presidential appointments to the Commission to be made subject to National Assembly approval. Once Parliament has approved a nominee, the expert argued, any subsequent decision to withdraw or replace that nominee should ordinarily be referred back to the Assembly.
“The proper course of action would have been to return the matter to the National Assembly for reconsideration. It raises serious concerns about governance and the rule of law when the Executive unilaterally decides to replace a nominee already approved by Parliament,” the expert said.
The analyst acknowledged the importance of maintaining public confidence in anti-corruption institutions but argued that allegations alone should not be treated as proof of misconduct.
“Mr. Manga enjoys the constitutional right to be presumed innocent. The Government itself has indicated that no wrongdoing was established against him. If the investigation failed to uncover evidence sufficient to support misconduct allegations, then relying on mere accusations to justify his removal raises significant fairness concerns,” the source added.
The legal expert also criticised what was described as a lack of consultation with both ACP Manga and the National Assembly before the decision was publicly announced.
“It is unfortunate that Mr. Manga appears to have learned of the withdrawal of his approved nomination through statements made on the floor of Parliament. Proper governance would have required engagement with him and consultation with the National Assembly before such a significant decision was announced,” the analyst observed.
The controversy has intensified debate over how public institutions should balance protecting their integrity with safeguarding the rights of individuals facing unproven allegations.
With Gibba now threatening legal action and constitutional questions being raised over the Executive’s authority to replace a nominee already approved by Parliament, the matter is likely to remain the subject of significant legal, political and public debate in the weeks ahead.
