Despite commanding significant youth engagement, political visibility, and financial resources, the UNITE movement remains unregistered as a political party in The Gambia. The Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) attributes this impasse to procedural shortcomings rather than political interference, exposing a stark contradiction: UNITE—second only to the ruling National People’s Party (NPP) in influence—has fallen short on legal preparedness.
Led by two-term Mayor Talib Ahmed Bensouda, UNITE has failed to secure registration ahead of the December elections, despite its youthful energy and substantial funding. This issue transcends mere bureaucracy. It highlights a critical gap between political momentum and legal compliance, and between public perception and actual requirements. The IEC states that UNITE did not meet the legal standards, particularly regarding the accuracy and clarity of its party name. The result, the Commission insists, is not due to political factors or leadership.
Why can’t the UNITE Movement get registered? It’s one of the most puzzling twists in our political landscape. Led by the mayor of the largest municipality, the movement boasts a massive youth following, bolstered by defectors from the UDP—including a sitting National Assembly member—and fronted by Talib Ahmed Bensouda, a former UDP Organizing Secretary with national prominence.
Moreover, UNITE is among the best-funded political groups in the country, second only to the ruling NPP, as evidenced by its nationwide fleet of vehicles and motorbikes. Yet, despite this energy and momentum, it still cannot secure registration before the December elections.
According to The Standard newspaper, the IEC did not reject UNITE for political reasons, but due to serious procedural issues. Of the 30,000 signatures submitted, only 5,000 to 7,000 were intact, legible, and compliant with the Electoral Act’s requirements. Additionally, thousands of forms listed “UMC” instead of “UNITE”—a legal mismatch the Commission could not ignore. These are not minor clerical errors; they are major compliance failures. The IEC deals in documents, not enthusiasm; it verifies signatures, not rallies; it enforces compliance, not charisma.
So the real question is: how does a movement with such visibility, resources, and political drive stumble at the most basic legal hurdle? And why would a group with access to some of the country’s top legal minds—including Senior Counsel Amie Bensouda’s respected chambers—let procedural mistakes sink its registration?
My advice to young politicians is this: always hire a competent lawyer who handles legal matters thoroughly. Rely on legal principles, not public drama. Politicians should prioritize substantive legal work and procedural discipline. UNITE’s situation demonstrates that resources cannot substitute for compliance, reflecting organizational shortcomings, not persecution.
The real question remains: how can a group with resources and legal access miss basic compliance? Get a skilled lawyer for proper legal work, and steer clear of activist lawyers who focus more on commentary than action. As UNITE’s experience shows, popularity doesn’t equal compliance, enthusiasm doesn’t replace paperwork, and activism alone can’t handle institutional tasks.
Politicians should avoid activist lawyers, legal vultures, and so-called legal carpenters who prioritize social media chatter over solid legal arguments. These types often lack the procedural discipline needed for effective legal work.
UNITE’s situation proves that popularity and media buzz cannot substitute for legal compliance and discipline. It is ironic that a movement with such vast resources fell short on legal discipline, exposing organizational weaknesses.
Mayor Bensouda has called registration “only a formality” and suggested he could contest as an independent. This perspective trivializes institutional processes, raising concerns about UNITE’s capacity for governance. The central issue is procedural discipline.
The IEC and the law are not obstacles; procedural discipline within UNITE is the primary challenge. Many submitted signatures were incomplete, inconsistent, or illegible, and the forms listed “UMC” instead of “UNITE.” Consequently, only a fraction of the required signatures were validated, revealing compliance failures under the Electoral Act. These are fundamental compliance failures under the law. The IEC validates documents and compliance. Why does a movement with visibility, resources, and legal expertise allow procedural errors to undermine its registration?
If UNITE aspires to credibility as a governing party, it must demonstrate legal proficiency and compliance. The IEC and the law are not impediments; procedural discipline is the challenge. Without corrective action, UNITE’s credibility will be jeopardized.
May wisdom guide our leaders. May truth light their way, discipline steady each step, and clarity last. Let us keep clarity in our politics. Let truth and discipline guide us.
By Alagi Yorro Jallow
Post Views:4