NHRC dialogue on the electricity crisis raises serious questions

The National Human Rights Commission has just issued a statement indicating that it hosted a consultative meeting today at its headquarters to discuss the ongoing electricity crisis. According to the statement, participants included GALA, Team Gom Sa Bopa, TANGO, the Supreme Islamic Council, the Christian Council, Nawec, and the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), which the NHRC erroneously referred to as the SIS.

Curiously, photographs from the meeting also show Presidential Adviser on Youth Affairs Lamin K. Saidy in attendance, yet neither he nor his office was mentioned in the NHRC statement.

The NHRC further stated that the engagement was initiated by the NIA “to foster understanding among stakeholders and help prevent potential conflict.” This explanation raises serious concerns.

First, why was such a meeting not convened two or three weeks ago when severe power cuts began disrupting the lives and livelihoods of citizens across the country? Why was it convened only on the eve of a nationally announced protest against the electricity crisis? The timing alone inevitably creates the perception that the objective was not to address the utility crisis but rather to influence or discourage the planned protest.

More troubling is the reference to “preventing potential conflict.” What conflict exactly was NIA anticipating?

GALA publicly announced its intention to hold a peaceful protest and lawfully applied for a permit, which was duly granted by the police. Peaceful protest is neither a crime nor a conflict. It is a constitutional right guaranteed to every citizen. There has been no indication whatsoever that the planned protest poses any threat to public order or national security.

Indeed, available evidence demonstrates that protests organised with police approval in the Gambia have generally remained peaceful. The unfortunate episodes of violence associated with protests in our history have often resulted from the actions of security forces rather than the conduct of protesters themselves. The April 2000 student demonstrations, the April 2016 Solo Sandeng protest, the February 2018 Faraba Banta protest, and the January 2019 Three Years Jotna protest all serve as reminders of this reality.

Against this backdrop, it is difficult to understand why the NIA would initiate a dialogue involving protest organisers and civil society actors under the justification of preventing conflict. While the NIA has a mandate to safeguard national security, that mandate does not extend to treating the exercise of constitutional rights as a security threat.

Peaceful protest does not endanger national security, and protesters should never be viewed as potential criminals merely because they seek to express dissatisfaction with public services.

Equally concerning is the role assumed by the NHRC. The Commission’s primary mandate is to promote and protect human rights. If the NIA genuinely believed there was a credible threat of conflict, it should have presented evidence to the appropriate security and law enforcement authorities. The NHRC is not a security institution and should not allow itself to become a platform for security-driven interventions aimed at activities that are fully protected by law.

Dialogue is certainly an important tool in any democracy. However, dialogue must be rooted in the promotion and protection of rights, not in efforts, real or perceived, to discourage citizens from exercising those rights.

In this instance, the NHRC should have made it unequivocally clear that the right to peaceful protest is guaranteed under the Constitution and that any concerns regarding security must be addressed through lawful and evidence-based mechanisms.

The failure of Nawec to provide reliable electricity is ultimately a governance and service delivery issue. There are established institutions responsible for overseeing, regulating, financing, and managing the utility sector. The NHRC is not the venue where solutions to NAWEC’s operational failures will be found, nor is the NIA the institution responsible for resolving electricity shortages. It is therefore difficult to see what practical purpose this meeting served beyond creating pressure, directly or indirectly, on those planning to protest.

The situation inevitably recalls events in 2017 when the Office of the Vice President convened religious leaders, civil society actors, and others to persuade organisers of the Occupy Westfield protest against corruption and poor electricity supply to abandon their plans. While today’s meeting took place at a different venue and involved different actors, the underlying approach appears strikingly similar.

For this reason, I am disappointed that the NHRC agreed to host such an engagement and equally concerned that TANGO, as the umbrella body of civil society organisations, participated without publicly reaffirming the legitimacy of peaceful protest as a constitutional right.

If the NIA wishes to contribute to resolving the electricity crisis, it should engage directly with Nawec and other relevant state institutions with appropriate mandate. But it should not be engaging protest organisers or institutions established to protect human rights.

Notably, the NHRC statement itself suggests that the meeting produced no concrete solution to the electricity crisis. Power cuts continue unabated, citizens continue to suffer, and the grievances that prompted the planned protest remain unresolved.

Above all, the protest will proceed as planned on Friday, June 19. Citizens have every right to peacefully assemble and express their dissatisfaction with the persistent failure of public institutions to deliver essential services.

The NIA should refrain from unnecessary involvement in the civic space, while the NHRC should remain firmly focused on its mandate to protect and promote human rights, including the right to peaceful assembly and protest. It has never been a good idea when intelligence agencies enter a human rights institution to discuss rights! It’s a contradiction in terms.

For The Gambia Our Homeland.