All You Need to Know About Citizens’ Alliance’s Suit Against the Independent Electoral Commission

Sheriff Saidykhan

In a press conference yesterday, Dr. Ismaila Ceesay, party leader and flagbearer of the Citizens’ Alliance (CA) confirmed that lawyers for his party have “already issued proceedings against the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC)”. Speaking to journalists from the party’s headquarters in Kanifing Estate, a calm and collected Dr Ceesay details that the lawsuit against the IEC is “scheduled to be heard on Tuesday 16th November 2021 at the High Court in Banjul”. The CA leader did not offer any in-depth details about the case but highly placed sources have informed this medium that the Chief Justice, Hassan  Jallow “has reserved the case to himself” which makes this high profile and unprecedented suit all the more interesting. 

It could be recalled that on Saturday 7th November 2021, Dr. Ceesay was among one of over a dozen Presidential aspirants who had their nominations for the presidential elections scheduled for 4th December 2021 rejected. A number of these, including Dr Ceesay appealed against such rejection but without success. Such developments are against the backdrop of other controversial ones not least the refusal on the part of the IEC to comply with a Supreme court declaration that Gambians in the Diaspora should be registered to vote. 

During the press conference, the renowned university lecturer turned politician was asked about the fate of the ‘Alliance for Change’ which constitutes the Gambia Moral Congress whose candidate was also rejected by the IEC and the All People’s Party which has since entered into an informal pact with the People’s Democratic Organisation for Independence and Socialism. However, Ceesay batted off these, insisting that such was an issue for another day. It is not clear what the fate of this alliance is but what was however clear from the press conference was that CA is determined to pursue all lawful avenues to ensure that its candidate’s and the party’s participation in the historic elections will not be hampered by what is widely lamented across the political spectrum as ‘IEC incompetence’.

There are unsubstantiated claims by some commentators that the mass rejection of candidates is an IEC solution to its much lamented ‘logistical challenges’ for which reason it also blamed its ‘inability’ to register the Gambians in the Diaspora. It could also be recalled that the IEC’s spokesperson, Pa Makhan Khan in recent media engagements gave the impression that should all twenty-three candidates make it to the ballot, the IEC may not be in a position to cater for the required 14,600 plus ballot boxes across the 630 plus polling stations and the necessary logistics to support such operations. These controversial issues were however not advanced by CA in their press conference nor did the journalists present put any questions to Ceesay regarding them but they are nonetheless worthy of mention. 

From what Ceesay said, it is understood that CA’s lawyers will challenge the decision by the IEC on two fronts. Firstly, the unfairness of the reasons advanced by the IEC for the rejection (that some of the voters CA submitted as signatories supporting Ceesay’s nomination, also offered the same support to at least one of the candidates whose nominations were received ahead of Ceesay’s). It is understood that CA’s position is that the relevant voters attested for Dr Ceesay before any of the other candidates and as such, their candidate should not suffer a detriment solely on account of submitting his nomination papers after the other candidates for whom those same voters also provided signatures. Another claim which Ceesay hints that their lawyers will advance is that, as the IEC rejection came after nominations were closed, their candidate’s right under section 47 subsection (3) of the Elections Act to submit fresh nomination papers prior to the end of nominations was automatically denied .

It is highly probable that the IEC will seek to rely on section 49 subsection (5) of the Elections Act to claim that no court has jurisdiction to call its decision to reject a candidate’s nomination into question. It will be fascinating to see how this fares against the Constitution at section 120 which vests judicial authority in the courts and section 4 which states that “the 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”. Whether CA’s or the IEC’s position will prevail, it is a matter for the court to decide on Tuesday 16th November 2021.