Greetings Yero,

I am a democrat and believe in democracy but not in the context of The Gambia under President Yahya Jammeh. The Gambian situation is very complex and deeply troubling. In The Gambia’s case, it is my view that elections will never unseat President Jammeh. In fact, presidential elections in The Gambia are so predictable because the playing field clearly, is not level. The outcome of Presidential Elections in the Gambian under Jammeh is always a foregone conclusion, in my view. When I listen to Presidential election result in the Gambia, I do so, not because I am expecting an opposition upset, but just to hear how big Jammeh’s winning margin would be as opposed to the preceding elections.

The sad thing is that we are dealing with a person (Jammeh) who is ritualistic and believes in the superstitious practice of ritual killings. For instance, a western diplomat in Banjul said, off the record, just the other day, that he had seen enough evidence to convince him that the execution of nine prisoners in the Gambia in August 2012 was for ritual purposes. In July 2012, a Senegalese (female) ‘sorceress’ predicted Jammeh’s overthrow within 100 days, unless he sacrificed human blood and organs. To prolong his stay in power, Jammeh was told to kill an odd number of people (nine), including a woman, and then to retrieve some of their organs for ritual purposes. This explains why Jammeh has, to date, refused to hand over (or return) the corpses to family members and loved ones. It is an open secret that Jammeh, since 1994, has been practising the ritual slaughter/sacrifice of animals. Mutilated bodies of animals have been found in the gardens of State House in Banjul several times. A Malian (male) ‘sorcerer’ warned Jammeh to be wary of a woman in his Cabinet who was wearing a Muslim hijab. The next day, the President sacked his Higher Education Minister, Dr Mariama Sarr-Ceesay - she was the only one in the Cabinet who wore a Muslim hijab on a daily basis.

Dictator Jammeh gives the appearance of subscribing to the democratic process to The Gambian people and to the international community. For him, as I explained in great detail in my book, the elections have served the very useful purpose of giving him a ‘legitimacy card’ to play on the political scene in The Gambia. Jammeh has been careful to use elections to set the stage in his favour. However, the outcome of these elections has never been in doubt to the ruling regime in The Gambia. Defeat at the ballot box is not an issue since the regime rigs the elections to suit itself. The elections serve to give some credence to the existence of a functioning democratic state whilst masking the reality of an absolute dictatorship. The Presidential elections have over the years served the purpose of legitimising the Jammeh/APRC regime.

In fact, since the July 1994 coup, elections and electioneering processes in the Gambia have increasingly edged towards the consolidation of incumbency. Patterns of elections in The Gambia suggest a move towards a de facto one-party system and the status quo has not been caused by the lack of an opposition, nor is the opposition to blame for the fact that the Gambia is today for, all intents and purposes, a one party dictatorship. What has happened is that Jammeh has, over the years, used the politics of fear, force, terror and coercion quite effectively. He made sure that he has institutionalised, militarised and polarised the entire political and social spaces in the country. He has effectively used terror, force, fear and coercion as a driving and motivating factor, in order to get the Gambian people to vote for him.

In other words, by successfully employing the politics of fear, force, brutality, terror, and coercion, the civil service and public enterprises (institutionalisation), the security forces and party militants (militarisation) and society (polarisation) have all openly and actively supported and campaigned for the ruling APRC. And sadly, this has meant that the opposition has been squeezed out.

In the Democratisation (academic) literature, the phrase “fear-induced landslide election victories” has been used in relation to cases like the Gambia and Zimbabwe (under Mugabe). To understand the Gambian/African situation better, I suggest you read this excellent book, Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument African Issues, by Patrick Chabal, Jean-Pascal Daloz.

Comparing/contrasting elections in the pre-1994 period and the post-1994 era is quite instructive. Under former president Jawara, there was a sense of independence between government, state institutions and the rest of society. In short, there was autonomy between the State and other social powers, such as the military, the Mosque, Church, Public Enterprises and the social movements. But under Jammeh, their identities have been blurred - through the politics of fear, force, brutality, terror and coercion. Through fear, repression, tyranny, terror and coercion, Jammeh has had a total control of the political and social spaces, and this has meant that opposition voices cannot be heard and that the majority of the Gambian people cannot express their hopes and aspirations outside the structures of the ruling APRC.

Therefore, elections, in my view, will not unseat Jammeh, nor do I expect a successful coup or a people’s uprising. A coup attempt is possible, but a successful coup is unlikely, given the composition of the Gambia National Army, whose key positions are today, occupied/manned by Jammeh loyalists - mainly from his Jola tribe. In fact, it has since been confirmed that Jammeh’s personal security protection is provided by MFDC rebels from Casamance who belong to his Jola tribe. Uprising in The Gambia is also unlikely, as long as Gambians in the Diaspora are sending remittances to the country (which now amount to $150 Million Dollars per annum). Although there is severe economic hardship in the country, the remittances from Diaporan Gambians have meant that the real nature of the economic hardship gripping average Gambians today is not as evident/observable, as it should be. In other words, the true economic crisis in the country is not biting the average Gambian, as it should be, because of the endless financial support that local Gambians are getting from family members and loved ones in the Diaspora. But given the sizeable youthful population of the Gambia, one can speculate here, that an internally-driven uprising in the country would have been likely/possible if the remittances were to stop today. Although this is moot point (or unrealistic) given the fact that Diaporan Gambians will never stop sending money to family members and loved ones.

In my view, for now, only two things can only lead to the ousting of Yahya Jammeh.