By Baba Galleh Jallow

In July 2002, The Gambia’s National Assembly passed the media commission bill by 53 votes to 3. Predictably, all members of the ruling party voted yes to the bill. The three no votes came from the only opposition voices in the house - two PDOIS and one NRP.

This clear-cut pattern of voting is characteristic of a legislature where political loyalties rather than the pertinence of issues are the primary consideration. It is characteristic of a political system that feeds on mediocrity and thrives on mediocrity and therefore insists on mediocrity. A political system that frowns on excellence and seeks to create a slave mentality that would reduce every citizen to a level below that of a political leadership suffering from a severe inferiority complex and a severely atrophied and deficient intellect. It is an unfortunate fact of life that mediocrity, finding itself in a position of power, is incapable of beholding excellence and seeks to stifle excellence at every possible opportunity. This urge to stifle excellence and perpetuate a culture of mediocrity, we would argue, is the basic motivation for the enactment of the media commission bill; a bill that not only violates the provisions of our constitution, but purports to be above and beyond the constitution, the supreme law of the land.

Both before and after the passing of the bill, members of The Gambia’s free press raised a number of objections to its draconian provisions. The Gambia Press Union issued statement after statement pointing out the fact that the bill contravened all the provisions of the 1997 constitution guaranteeing freedom of expression and of the press. On August 6^th 2003, the press union in collaboration with the free press filed a suit in the Supreme Court of The Gambia challenging the legality of the bill. Again, predictably, one of what are now called the mercenary judges of The Gambia, the Chief Justice himself, threw out the application without giving any reasons whatsoever for his action. One would have thought that if a judge throws out a case, he would at least give some reasons for his action. But again, one should not be surprised that a chief justice appointed by a paranoid monarchical president who insists on absolute obedience should take such a strange action. In any case, the press union continued to pursue its case until earlier this month when the commission, already constituted, issued an ultimatum that all private media houses must register with it or face closure. The deadline was May 14. This, in spite of the fact that the press union’s case is still pending in the courts. The press union and the affected media houses reacted appropriately by declaring their open refusal to register so long as the case remained pending in the courts. They decided to cease publishing for one week in protest at the commission’s illegal insistence on their registration. Two days into the private news blackout, the government backed down and declared that it was extending the deadline for registration for another three months. When upon return form an overseas trip he was asked at the airport to comment on the media commission issue, he declared among other things: "You either register or you don’t write. You can go to hell." Very nice words from a head of state. But his best words were a very logical argument he made on the issue of registration, which was left out by some papers but quoted by others. His angry Excellency asked if motor vehicles were registering, why not journalists? Yes, motor vehicles also shine their lights on the government; they cover news, write editorials and publish analyses of government actions and policies. They are also journalists; so if they could register, why not their counterparts in the media houses?

We need not go into the nitty-gritties of the media commission bill. Suffice it to say that the bill requires all private media houses to register with the commission and to register each and every one of their editors and reporters. This registration is to be renewed every year. Which means that if a particular media house or journalist writes or broadcasts anything that offends the truth-shy sensibilities of the government during the year, that media house or journalist could be denied registration the following year. In addition to its registration requirement, the media commission is given powers equivalent to that of the high court. It can issue arrest warrants for journalists, put them on trial, suspend their licenses and impose prison sentences on them; and its decisions cannot be challenged in any court of law. In addition, it can force journalists to reveal their sources and is empowered to formulate a code of ethics for journalists. Most seriously, the media commission bill declares that it is the supreme law of the land. Clause 39 of the bill declares that "where any provision of this Act is inconsistent with that of any other law, the provisions of this Act shall prevail." How do we reconcile this with the provision of the 1997 Constitution, Chapter II, section 4 which states that "This constitution is the supreme law of The Gambia and any other law found to be inconsistent with any provision of this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void." And clearly, the media commission bill contravened many provisions of the constitution, particularly section 25 (1a), which states that "every person shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media." But in the politics of mediocrity that characterizes governance in The Gambia today, the constitution must play second fiddle to the whims and caprices of the political leadership. Constitutional provisions, so long as they conform to the whims and caprices of the political leadership, are lifted up and cited as justifications for government action. And so long as they contravene the whims and caprices of the political leadership, they are simply ignored or carelessly by-passed. What this tells us is that in the politics of mediocrity, the whims and caprices of the political leadership are the supreme laws of the land.

When we ask why governments try to suppress freedom of expression and of the press, we often come up with simple answers: they are intolerant of dissent; they do not want to be criticized; they have something to hide. And when we say they have something to hide, the common understanding is that they are engaged in corrupt practices that they do not want to get exposed; or that they are carrying out repressive policies they do not want to get exposed. All these are valid explanations. But a closer scrutiny reveals that governments that seek to curtail press freedom have something else to hide: they want to hide themselves; they are afraid, mortally afraid, of being seen and known for what they are. They feel terribly weak, insecure and empty and live in mortal fear that the people will recognize this fact and be emboldened to question or challenge their authority. It is only in countries characterized by the politics of mediocrity that freedom of the press and of expression is under constant fire from the government. That is why we feel that The Gambia’s media commission offers us a good guide to understanding the nature of our national politics. It is our right to know what the leadership of our country is like. And if the leadership of our country happens to be mediocre and deficient, it should be seen for what it is and confronted for what it is.

The politics of mediocrity has certain salient characteristics. The most prominent of these is a mediocre leadership. The leadership of a mediocre political system is generally vested in one man. Thus, a mediocre political system is a one-man system. This one-man, totally bereft of any progressive ideas, feeling small in the extreme, generally tries to make himself look big in the eyes of the world by donning oversized gowns and holding strange objects in his hands. It is not unusual to see such a leader extravagantly dressed in twenty-meter grand boubous and clutching a pigtail in one hand and a cow horn in the other. The mediocre political leader seeks not only to look big, but also to appear mysterious and possessed of strange powers. Thus, having assumed ownership of the country itself, he assumes a position of infallibility and pretends to be an expert in all fields of knowledge, particularly philosophy. He assumes a monopoly on truth, intelligence and virtue and appoints himself the very paragon of morality in the country. He often wears a distant and knowing look in his eyes and is given to the exposition of strange philosophies of life. He is always in denial. Nothing is ever wrong with him or any policy of his government. Everything is always working just fine. When the economy is going to the dogs, he insists that the country is making economic progress. When inflation is rocketing and basic commodities become unaffordable, he blames it on foreigners and petty traders. When people are starving and children and rummaging rubbish heaps and competing with stray dogs for food, he insists that there is food in abundance. And when journalists and critics of his regime are being harassed and abused at every turn, when draconian laws are being promulgated and imposed on the people, he insists that his government is a paragon of human rights and the rule of law. Whatever is not right according to him must be wrong. Under the leadership of such a man, policy formulation becomes an impromptu affair. In other words, policies jump out of his mouth according to his moods, whims and caprices. Such a leader will wake up one day, see a story he does not like in a newspaper and say, in fact we are going to have a media commission in this country. And so a media commission we must have. There is no consultation as to the feasibility or otherwise of such a policy. The fact that it came from the infallible leader is ample evidence that is a good and workable policy.

Bereft of any progressive ideas, the mediocre political leadership, when it assumes power, normally through the barrel of the gun, realizes that it is totally incapable of dealing with the complex responsibilities associated with its station. After a step or two towards progress, it beholds the huge mountain of national responsibilities looming large before it. It abruptly stops and turns to face the people, its back to the huge mountain of responsibilities. It raises its arms into the air and orders everyone to stop. We have arrived, it declares. Everybody must either stay where they are or turn back. No one must cross this line. And no one must raise their heads above this line or look beyond this line. Rather than admit its incapacity to deal with the challenges of national leadership and step aside for more qualified candidates to lead the nation forward, the mediocre political leadership, having tasted power and motivated by incontinent greed, decides to hang on to power till death do us part. Rather than bend to the dictates of reason and the will of the people, it seeks to bend the dictates of reason and the will of the people to its own will. Henceforth, all its energies are directed towards the attainment of one goal: staying in power forever. And it would do anything to achieve this goal. It simply are incapable of imagining themselves joining the ordinary crowds again. It lives in mortal fear of being questioned about its dismal record in office and would rather die in office by whatever means than subject itself to public questioning and accountability.

With this goal in mind, the mediocre political leadership turns its attention to the emasculation and total subjugation of the people and the various institutions of state. It seeks to subdue the cabinet, the judiciary, the legislature and the public media. As all these are part of the state, which is now rendered synonymous to the leader, emasculating and micromanaging them is relatively easy. By a frenzied process of hiring and firing, the mediocre political leadership turns the machinery of state into a confused mass of bureaucratic impotence. Intellectual vigor is shunned and only the intellectually impotent are appointed or promoted to high office. Cronyism, rather than merit and professional competence, becomes the ticket to high office in all branches of government. In our own case, even journalists have lost count of how many ministers have been appointed and sacked since July 1994. It is a historical world record that The Gambia has had nine Justice ministers in nine years; and at least four Chief Justices within the same period of time. Never through the entire written history of mankind has a single government sacked so many justice ministers and other civil servants in so short a time. And, curiously enough, not in any of these sackings have any reason ever been given. Needless to say, where the sackings are not politically motivated, they are probably the result of a minor disagreement with the supreme leader. For a mediocre political leadership, to quote Frantz Fannon, "the vocation of the people is to obey, to go on obeying, and to be obedient till the end of time." And so eventually, the cabinet, the judiciary, the legislature and the public media, are all staffed with runaway doctors, mercenary judges, semi-literate stooges and chicken-hearted journalists. At this stage, these institutions are added to the coercive machinery of the mediocre political leadership and used to harass, intimidate and neutralize all dissenting voices.

The mediocre political leadership is paranoid in the extreme. Mortally afraid of visibility, it is obsessed with a burning desire to see and know everything that goes on in every part of society. It thus assumes the form of a giant political octopus which sends its hundreds or even thousands of tentacles into every nook and cranny of national society. These tentacles, in the form of both paid and unpaid informers, spy on the activities of the people and report back to the leader either directly or through a complex web of intermediaries. Thus, in The Gambia today, we have NIA agents and other informers in every single ministry, every department of state, every unit within a department; informers and agents are planted in every unit of the airport and seaport, in every police station and post across the country, and at every border post and customs office; they are to be found in every area council, every commissioner’s office, chief’s office and alkalo’s entourage. They are planted in all the hotels and casinos and major pleasure resorts. They seek to know which guests are booked into which hotels and who dines where. They roam our beaches, frequent major bars and restaurants, and are to be found in every school staff room, college board and student body. They are among the members of trade unions and lurk in the offices of non-governmental agencies, parastatals, banks and post offices. They infest the ranks of the military and even within their own ranks, there are special agents devoted to watching the activities of their peers and reporting directly to the paranoid leadership. They are to be found on every state-constituted board, committee and commission, including the Public Service Commission and the so-called Independent Electoral Commission. Indeed, it may not be far-fetched to say that they are to be found even among religious groups in the country; for as far as the paranoid political leadership is concerned, nothing is out of bounds. They are to be found in all diplomatic missions abroad and mingle freely in Gambian communities in the Diaspora. They join internet mailing lists such as the Gambiapost and Gambia-L and frantically seek to know who says what and where what is happening. Indeed, its obsession with assuming a god-like status makes the mediocre political leadership go to extreme and almost unbelievable lengths to know what’s going on among the people. And sadly enough, they claim to be doing all this for the national interest, which sounds absurd until we begin to see that the national interest is now synonymous with the interest of the one-man political leadership. The only way to deal with this all-pervasive intrusion is simply to ignore the informers and do what one has to do. Of course, there is invariably a high price to pay, as evidenced by the multitudes of sackings that have rocked the Gambian civil service and the horrendous outrages committed against journalists and members of the opposition since 1994. But no price is too high to pay for freedom.

It is in the light of this all-pervasive influence of the mediocre political leadership that we must understand how the lawyers at the Attorney General’s chambers could draft the media commission bill – a law that claims to be supreme to the country’s constitution. In effect, what they are saying is that this bill is the very voice of the president and therefore as the voice of the president, it is above the law. It is in this light that we must also understand how the national assembly can pass such an unconstitutional law. What matters to the national assembly is not the legality or otherwise of the law, but that the law represents the voice of the president, which is above the law. And it is this light that we must understand the readiness of the law enforcement agencies to enforce the illegal provisions of the media commission bill. What matters to them is not the legality or otherwise of the law, but that it represents the voice of the president, which is above the law. The only two sectors of the Gambian public that refuses to accept the slave mentality sought by the mediocre political leadership are the opposition parties and the media. Thus, the mediocre political leadership employs all its coercive powers to subdue these two dissenting groups through continuous surveillance, arbitrary arrests and detentions, harassment and torture, illegal imprisonment, intimidation, nocturnal kidnappings and arson attacks on media houses and private properties, and of late, attempted murders. In all these activities, the mediocre political leadership is motivated by the fear of being seen for what it is – a mighty fumbling elephant on mosquito legs.

The mediocre political leadership is not concerned with building bridges and building hope. These noble concepts do not exist on its myopic radar screen. It trumpets the concepts of national development without actually knowing the import of what it is saying. It borrows the high-sounding phrases of the so-called developed world about democracy, the rule of law and the universal declaration of human rights and makes a great show of having the best interest of the people at heart. In reality, it is deeply scornful of the people and treats them like small children deserving of constant reprimands and beatings to make them do what they are supposed to do. It hijacks the rights of the people to development, to self-discovery and self-improvement. It keeps the lid tightly shut over the society, refusing to open up and seeks to cover the eyes of the people. It seeks to create a slave mentality where no one questions anything; a society where the people must hear no evil, see no evil; where the political leadership, which sees itself and wants to be seen as the representative of God on earth, is never questioned and never challenged. The Gambia will only survive if we all say a loud and universal NO to these hideous efforts at turning us into one big crowd of deaf, dumb and blind slaves. We must insist on being the very free people we were created to be; we must insist on being masters of our own destiny; we must insist on our inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of meaningful progress.