On 25th August 2021, many Gambians turned to their televisions and social media platforms to watch a debate involving women representatives from four political parties in The Gambia. The highly-mediatised debate followed on the heels of an even bigger, more-anticipated one between two male party flag bearers, a few weeks ago.

These are exciting times, as The Gambia prepares for its first democratic presidential election post-dictatorship era. There has been high commendation for the environment being created by these debates. Many people hope that the debates will inspire a much-needed shift towards a politics of issues, ideas and policies over our current model centred on personalities and aged loyalty.

The women’s debate focused on a specific theme: Interrogating Party Policies/Positions on Women, Youth & Children. When the organisers announced that the debate will be among women representatives from four of the political parties in the country, there were rightful questions about the reasoning behind this representation. Only a few weeks ago, we watched party flag-bearers themselves debate on a range of issues. Was it a classic case of relegating women to deal with the ‘soft’ issues? Was it an opportunity to have women’s voices heard in the context of the dominant male leadership in political parties? Was it an attempt to prevent the usual case of men speaking on issues affecting women, youth and children? Would the women have been selected if the debate were focused on another topic?

I went into the debate hall hopeful, looking forward to a rich exchange of ideas, and expecting to leave with a better understanding of the policy positions of the parties represented. I must also admit that I was excited by the possibility of listening to women speak on women, and what their parties plan to do to elevate the quality of life of women, youth and children in The Gambia.

For me, it was a refreshing change from the usual dynamic of men speaking for and about us, without us. Like one of the debaters said, “we know better the challenges that women face”. While this may be true, I am not sure it was adequately reflected in the information shared during the debate. Can the women be blamed for this? What did we really take away from the debate?

I do not have answers to all the questions I’ve asked so far. What I do have is a reflection from my experience watching the debate which was abruptly ended by power cuts from NAWEC; perhaps a useful reminder of where we still are as a country.

I appreciated the platform and was happy to see women represent their political parties. I must also admit that the debate left me none the wiser about the policies and positions on women, youth and children within the represented parties. Through the course of the discussion – because the debate left the room from the start – we were served platters full of abstract plans and ideas. Often, these were poorly-articulated and rarely provided details on how these plans will be initiated and successfully implemented.

I acknowledge the possible weakness in expression due to the language of the debate, as could be seen right from the start. Most of the debaters missed the instruction to use their first five minutes for a summary presentation of their party positions and policy plans in relation to the debate theme. However, even in the time given for them to express themselves in our Gambian languages, I struggled to pick the policy information from their submissions. What we got was much fluff and repetition, even from the more articulate speakers of the night.

The quality of the responses to the specific questions being asked suggested two things to me:
(i)  the parties represented at the debate may not have clear, defined policies specific to women, youth and children OR
(ii) the women speaking for the parties do not know/are not very familiar with these policies, if they exist

At one point, the host interrogated the actual role of women within the political parties, making reference to the issue of tokenised representation as opposed to meaningful participation. This is a relevant question that was also running through my head, as I sank deeper into my seat with each response.

It is great to speak of the many leadership positions women occupy in parties, as these latter work to look more inclusive and progressive. The reality of tokenism, however, is that women may be assigned fancy titles to tick boxes, but they may not hold real authority and decision-making power within party structures. Their relegation to Women’s Wings and the allocation of ‘deputy’ roles, secondary to men, do not allow for much room in the design of party policies. It wouldn’t be surprising, therefore, for these same women to face challenges in articulating these policies. We cannot speak comfortably about what we do not know.

If this is the reality, the call is for political parties to work towards more meaningful representation and LEADERSHIP of women within their structures. I have always held the belief that parties that are as progressive as they want the electorate to believe will not have “wings” dedicated to certain demographics, i.e women and youth. Access to leadership will be free for all. In this regard, I have not yet seen a party in The Gambia that has been fully inclusive, especially in the determination of leadership.

If the first suggestion is true, and parties have not devised clear policies on women, youth and children, it is still not too late. The Gambia is blessed with so many women, young people and children who are of progressive thought and can be consulted to support the development of these policies. There is also no shortage of gender and feminist experts that can help in ensuring that these policies adopt an intersectional approach, especially in a country where vulnerabilities do not stand alone. There really is no need to reinvent an already-turning wheel. However, without a real commitment to creating and working towards these policies, I’m afraid we will continue to face the same cycle of empty rhetoric filled with progressive language, without the actions to back it up.

I do not wish to go into the details of the many issues raised for reaction during the debate. However, the responses on the issues of land ownership, ending Female Genital Mutilation, introduction of Comprehensive Sexuality Education, criminalising marital rape, as well as the dynamics of maternity leave and support for women working in both the formal and informal sectors signalled a great need for a more nuanced understanding of these issues in the context of patriarchal Gambia. It is an important starting point if we are to see relevant and effective policy development.

Without addressing patriarchy and the structures borne therefrom, we may simply continue plucking at leaves, hoping the branches do not produce any more. The root, where it remains firm, will continue to uphold a stem that may often be swayed but will rarely ever be broken. From a political perspective, and in a country ridden by partisan politics, we must see this uprooting begin within party structures, even as we continue to push towards radical shifts in the main incubators: our homes.

Women and youth are often touted as the kingmakers in this country. This year is no different, as we move steadily towards the 4th December presidential elections. With this recognition, more effort should go into articulating policies and plans for their advancement, both within party level and to the wider voting populace. The children, forever named future leaders, will only grow up to lead if the environment is conducive, their most basic needs provided, and their rights fulfilled. From the debate, I’m not exactly sure what the plan is for the children in this country.

When NAWEC cut off the electricity and the debate had to end, one thing I wished for was to have a debate on the same theme, involving other political parties. I would very much like to see this debate among PDOIS, Citizens’ Alliance and UDP, whether led by their flag-bearers or by any of the women leaders in the parties. Perhaps, we will be served a richer debate then, with more focus on their policies and positions, and how the parties intend to achieve them. Perhaps, this is wishful thinking on my part.

For now, I am just glad that we are moving towards a direction where people are beginning to pay more attention to what is being sold by political parties. And while it may not be the absolute deciding factor for this year’s election, we may be living within a more demanding and accountability-driven electorate in the next few election cycles. The more debates we have, even when the quality leaves us wanting more, the easier it may be to build it as part of our political culture and eventually move into healthier, issue-based politics in The Gambia.

Kudos and much respect to the debaters: Fatou Jallow, Ya Kumba Jaiteh, Tida Kijera and Yamundaw Faye for setting the stage. I hope it opens up space for more women in politics to be heard, on their own terms, and representing platforms that are truly invested in their full participation, engagement and leadership. Thank you for your voices.

 

————————-

Copyright Notice

All files and information contained in this Website are copyright by Jama Jack, and may not be duplicated, copied, modified or adapted, in any way without my written permission. My website may contain my service marks or trademarks as well as those of my affiliates or other companies, in the form of words, graphics, and logos.

Your use of this website does not constitute any right or license for you to use my service marks or trademarks, without the prior written permission of Jama Jack.

The copying, redistribution, use or publication by you of any content from this website is strictly prohibited. Your use of this website and services does not grant you any ownership rights to my content.

(c) Jama Jack | 26 August 2021.