Gambiaj.com – (Banjul, The Gambia) – Building on last month’s article, When the Past Still Speaks, and drawing on the reflections in When Nothing Surprises Anymore, this sequel revisits how The Gambia continues to confront its past while navigating an uncertain present. Whereas the earlier piece examined political events and public reactions, this installment focuses on how societies and individuals cultivate resilience, patience, and clarity through repeated exposure to uncertainty.
The recent cancellation of Yahya Jammeh’s planned return and the arrest of Sanna Manjang, though very different events, intersect in their implications.
Both underscore how history continues to speak, sometimes quietly, sometimes forcefully, and how every new challenge tests the nation’s collective wisdom. They remind us that stability is not born of fear or impulse, but of measured judgment, strong institutions, and responsible citizenship.
Recent developments demonstrate that even established institutions must remain vigilant. National stability depends on their consistency and alertness, and the public’s responses reflect a growing political maturity.
Despite the charged emotions that Jammeh’s audio message might once have provoked, the national conversation remained grounded in respect for the law, civic duty, and the need for continuity. Increasingly, it is institutions, not personalities, that shape public expectations.
President Adama Barrow made it clear that Jammeh cannot return without explicit governmental approval. Any such return must follow lawful and institutional processes, reaffirming that no individual, past or present, stands above the law.
Shortly thereafter, Jammeh’s camp announced a postponement of his planned return, citing logistical issues and the need for further coordination.
The tone of the statement reflected an understanding of the legal, political, and regional ramifications surrounding any potential return. These developments shifted public attention toward institutional preparedness rather than individual ambition, illustrating how easily the shadows of history can reappear when vigilance wanes.
Public reactions were diverse. For some, Jammeh’s announcement felt provocative; for others, it offered a moment for reflection. Meanwhile, an old claim resurfaced alleging that Halifa Sallah had signed the 2016 coalition agreement on behalf of the coalition, a claim he firmly denied, noting he was not even at State House at the time.
The contrast between assertion and documentation demonstrated how political memory can fracture, reinforcing the need to distinguish recorded fact from recollection.
The National Assembly took up the matter as well. Lawmakers such as Sainey Jawara warned that Jammeh’s return could jeopardize national security and hinder reconciliation efforts.
Others, including Assan Touray, urged a cautious, procedural approach, calling for legal compliance, diplomacy, and coordination with regional partners like ECOWAS, the African Union, and the United Nations. Together, these debates reflected a serious and balanced attempt to reconcile political realities with peace and legality.
From a security standpoint, preparedness requires more than physical readiness. It requires managing public narratives, setting expectations, and ensuring legal clarity.
The alignment between Halifa Sallah’s clarification, parliamentary debates, and Barrow’s firm guidance illustrates a careful balancing of stability, legality, and democratic principle.
Meanwhile, the arrest of Sanna Manjang in Senegal added a significant new dimension. Long associated with the darker chapters of the Jammeh era, his detention reminded Gambians that accountability, however delayed, remains possible, and that regional cooperation on justice is strengthening.
As investigations continue, the public would be best served by relying on verified information rather than speculation. Reflection, after all, is not escapism; it is how a nation measures its steps and safeguards its future.
The timing of Jammeh’s postponed return and the detention of a former security operative underscores a broader truth: one event represents an ambition that cannot yet be realized, while the other marks a consequence that can no longer be evaded.
Together, they suggest that The Gambia’s future is increasingly shaped by institutions, not by unrestrained individual power.
Institutional integrity remains the anchor of national stability. Security agencies, oversight bodies, and civil society must uphold the law, while citizens exercise restraint and civic responsibility. Regional partners can provide counsel, but the ultimate guarantor of peace is the collective maturity of Gambians.
The democratic gains secured over the past decade must be protected through vigilance, responsibility, and respect for the institutional order.
The past will continue to speak, sometimes loudly, sometimes softly. What matters most is how Gambians choose to listen.
The calm manner in which recent events were handled, Halifa Sallah’s clarification, the Assembly’s measured debate, President Barrow’s clear guidance, Jammeh’s postponed return, and the arrest of Sanna Manjang reflect a nation able to confront its past without being destabilized by it.
Gambians are showing that it is possible to acknowledge history, insist on accountability, and uphold the rule of law without surrendering to partisan divides.
The country’s future will not be secured by panic or fear, but by attentiveness, principle, and unity. The shadows of the past may linger, but they no longer dictate The Gambia’s direction. That responsibility, and that power, rests with its people, guided by law, truth, and a shared democratic purpose.
