Since
he was ushered onto The Gambia’s political scene in the tense and waning days
of the interregnum between the colonial administration and self-rule the notion
that Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara, the founding father of the Gambia, was a leader
with exceptional qualities has been universally present in the conscious or
subconscious minds of all senior adult Gambians who witnessed his extraordinary
rise to power and the deliberate and measured manner in which he exercised that
power for decades. It would not be unrealistic to assume that even younger
Gambians born just before and immediately after Sir Dawda’s democratic rule
ended in 1994 must have learned from their parents or grandparents that he was
a good, able and amiable leader. On the 27th of August 2019, Sir Dawda passed
away at the age of 95. At the state- sponsored funeral service in the National
Assembly in Banjul on the 29th of August several prominent Gambians including
President Adama Barrow, the Speaker of the National Assembly, Mrs. Mariam Jack
Denton, the Chief Justice, Mr. Hassan B. Jallow, Mr. Omar Jallow (OJ), former
Agriculture Minister under Sir Dawda and Mr. Sidia Jatta, National Assembly
Member gave moving tributes extolling the virtues of Sir Dawda’s leadership and
his remarkable accomplishments as the first President of The Gambia. Similar
glowing eulogies were given through various media outlets by other Gambians at
home and abroad while prayers were offered in various religious gatherings. At
private homes, work places and places of social rendezvous throughout the
country Sir Dawda’s life and legacy drew lavish praise from Gambians from all
walks of life for many weeks following his passing.
I
was abroad when Sir Dawda died in August. On my return I listened to the tapes
of the various tributes paid to the late President at the state funeral service
as noted above. In this brief Note some of the salient points made by the
individual speakers at the state funeral relating to Sir Dawda’s unique
character and style of leadership will be highlighted and discussed in the
broad context of some Islamic virtues and the cardinal virtues associated with
great leaders since ancient times, and on the basis of my own experience as a
senior officer, speech-writer and Technical Adviser on the Senegambia
Confederation under the direction of the Secretary General in the Office of the
President during the second half of the 1980s.
According
to the Virtuous Leadership Institute, leadership involves inter alia the
practice of human virtues (https://www.virtuousleadership.org/history). As
virtue essentially constitutes moral habits of behavior, people of high moral
standing, like Sir Dawda, tend to act in accordance with values and principles,
rather than by whims and caprices. They tend to be honest and just, respectful,
thoughtful and courageous. These virtues are all related to the four cardinal
virtues of ancient philosophy, namely prudence, justice, fortitude, and
temperance or moderation as well as the Islamic virtues of humility, patience,
forgiveness, courtesy and discipline.
Leadership in general is a complex subject and it has been conceived and
analyzed in various ways by various researchers. For example, according to the
Machiavellian “school”, a leader (the
Prince) who wants to maintain his power ought to know that he is not always
obliged to do good. He should be both ‘a fox and a lion’ - a power seeker with
a spirit that changes along with the wind of fortune (cited in J.T. Wren et al
eds., Traditional Classics on Leadership, Northampton, MA, 2004). Others see
leadership as a function of the acceptance of followers- the leader-led
relationship concept. In recent times,
some social scientists have turned their attention to issues relating to
identifying the sources of leadership: To what extent does the social and
political system elevate certain individuals to prominence? Are leaders
representative of the larger society, in other words, from what segments of
society do leaders come from? What are the avenues or channels of their ascent
to power? It is not the intention here to examine these questions and other
theories of leadership such as the transactional and transformational
leadership theories. For the purpose of this Note, we focus on the notion that
leaders emerge as a result of the tensions or demands of a particular time (
Lester G. Seligman, “The Study of
Political Leadership”, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 44, No. 4
(Dec., 1950), pp. 904-915) ; in other words, a great leader is often the
product of great historical moments and one who has a clear understanding of
the significance and demands of those moments. Jawara emerged to preeminence
in1959 at a critical time in Gambian history. It was a time of great anticipation
for self- rule and independence in the Gambia and throughout the European
colonies in Africa and a time of intense rivalry within the small elite of
Gambian politicians for recognition and leadership. The country was effectively
dichotomized between the colony, a comparatively small colonial settlement
around the capital Bathurst and the rest of the country, the protectorate which
was largely neglected during much of the colonial period. This clear division
created by the colonial administration and deliberately maintained because of
administrative convenience but largely because of the longstanding reticence of
the British to invest in the colony and its related hinterlands. The result of
this colonial disposition was major structural imbalances and economic,
political and social inequities that the post colonial independent government
had to address as a priority. When
Jawara accepted the invitation by prominent Gambians of protectorate origin to
head their newly formed political party, the Protectorate People’s Party, he
had a clear perception of the pressing needs and challenges of the time. At the
time of this invitation Jawara was a senior civil servant and head of a
department but never an emergent career politician. He was thus inducted to head
the new party, but he willingly accepted the challenge, because he realized
that he was at the beck and call of a historic moment and of the Gambian
people. As noted in the Talmud, “It can be proved by the Law, The prophets and
The Writings that a man is led along the road he wishes to follow” (cited in
Alfred D. Steinberg, “On Immortality”, Journal of the Washington Academy of
Sciences V 71 N 3 September 1981 (pp147-151).
Jawara thus arrived at the helm of the new party fully formed and ready
to carry the heavy burden of the hopes and aspirations of an incipient nation
whose immediate prospects for self-rule were perceived in some quarters
(particularly among the departing colonial administrators and their superiors
in the Colonial Office) with apprehension, and whose long term survivability as
an independent sovereign state was associated with trials, tribulations and
improbability. Jawara’s first order of business was to convince his enlisters
to remove any semblance of territoriality in the new party’s nominal identity.
With its acronym intact, the Protectorate People’s Party became the People’s
Progressive Party implying a more broad-based and inclusive organization not
only in name but also in composition and practice, as it became apparent
subsequently.
Upon
assuming the leadership of the PPP, Jawara showed a single minded focus on
mobilizing the population for the attainment of independence without delay.
This was made explicit in the party’s Independence Manifesto calling for
internal self-government in 1961 and full independence in 1962. Meanwhile,
Jawara‘s key rival P.S. Njie, Chief Minister and leader of the United Party was
busy with his “Gambia is in no hurry” (for
independence) slogan stressing their belief in “evolution and not
revolution” as his patty’s rallying cry
during the campaign for the 1962 elections. At a campaign rally in Bathurst he
had some strong words for the opposition PPP: “The more I look at the People’s
Progressive Party the more I discover what is foul and filthy in this organization.
Their intention is to leave the West and join Ghana and Russia,” (Raya
Dunayeskaya, “In The Gambia during elections”, Africa Today v9 n6 1962,
p.14). Although the PPP failed to meet
its targets for internal self-government and independence, according to their
manifesto, the party continued to forge ahead, generating significant momentum
which resulted in their victory in the 1962 elections thus becoming the
majority party in the House of Representatives. Full internal self-government
was attained in 1963 and independence followed two years later with Jawara as
Prime Minister.
As
mentioned earlier, some remarks were made in the various tributes delivered at
the state funeral service which revealed a number of essential attributes of
the late president’s personality and leadership style. What follows is a brief
discussion of selected remarks by the various speakers as they relate to the
purpose of this Note.
President
Barrow
In
his tribute President Barrow described Sir Dawda as a distinguished statesman,
a compassionate leader and a unifying force. A statesman is a political figure
who is widely recognized and respected for his wise and skilled management of
public and international affairs. To be a distinguished statement is to be
conspicuously eminent in managing both domestic and international affairs, with
patience, compassion, respect, magnanimity and fortitude as Sir Dawda had done
throughout his political career. A compassionate leader is a sympathetic and
empathetic leader, like Sir Dawda. These and allied virtues also made him a
unifying force, as the president stated. The efforts he made to refocus the PPP
as an all- encompassing umbrella political organization rather than a parochial
or provincial organization was the first major indication that he was endowed
with a significant repertoire of leadership skills. As a force for unity and
integrated nation-building, Jawara’s unflinching determination to maintaining
an open political space for wider and greater participation in the democratic process-
pluralism, through which citizens could perceive a stake in national affairs
was one key way of ensuring unity among Gambians and promoting social and
economic development. During the celebrations marking the 11th anniversary of
The Gambia’s independence and following the attainment of Republican status, a
journalist representing the Senegalese magazine, “Griot du Cayor” (No.16,1976)
noted that through Jawara’s “open-mindedness and “selflessness” he had
maintained a multi-party system in the Gambia and wanted to know if that could
lead to difficulties in the government’s ability to maintain stability and
promote “socio-political evolution of the masses”. The president’s response was
simple but emphatic: “On the contrary, liberty can’t exist in a country where
the sense of liberty and the feeling of liberty are absent. Liberty of meeting
the freedom of the press and freedom of speech…All these can exist but in a
pluralism of political parties. In a state where there is but one single party
these liberties are restricted…the existence of several parties makes it
possible for the creation of a national unity…”(p.7).
The
journalist further asked Jawara to respond to accusations that there were only
Wollofs in his government. “The accusation is groundless,” he answered;“…there
are Fulas, Sarakoles and mandingos…the wollofs are a minority in my
government…” (pp. 9-10). In fact, generally, Sir Dawda tried to ensure that the
composition of his cabinet always reflected, as much as possible, the ethnic
contours of the country. It was largely because of his open-mindedness,
recurrent electoral successes and constant calls for national unity that led to
a spate of defections from the leading opposition parties, and all new comers
to his party were received with open arms and in many cases given prominent
appointments in government. By the sheer force of his personality and his
vision for the country and his commitment to a united and prosperous nation, he
was able to hold together the social edifice of the nation seen around the
world as a stable and peaceful country. By the 1972 elections the country came
under a single dominant party not by coercion or policy but by default, arising
largely from the steady decline in the popularity of other political parties
including the UP. By and large, the country became unified under Sir Dawda’s
leadership in spite of the formation of a new political party in 1975 under the
leadership Sheriff Mustapha Dibba, a former PPP bigwig.
Speaker
of the National Assembly
The
Speaker of the National Assembly made two critical remarks that drew attention
to Sir Dawda’s unique leadership style and his achievements during his tenure.
She stated that the late president led with decency, dignity and sound judgment
and that he “developed the country from scratch”.
Sir
Dawda’s reputation for common sense, decency and grit was always apparent in
his staunch adherence to recognized standards of righteous, honest and proper
behavior. His calm and dignified style of leadership enabled him to confront
complex and heavy-duty issues with circumspection, perspicacity and prudence,
and to make decisions based on reason and studious assessment of the facts
before him, uninfluenced by emotion or personal prejudice. His virtuous
leadership style was clearly ennobled by his pleasant and sublime personality,
typified by an unmistakable trained intellect and sobriety of thought, speech,
and action. In all his written speeches, for example, he made sure that they
contained no strong language of any kind (the virtue of good speech, Al-Quraan
22:24). I recall a case of one draft speech prepared for him for delivery as
Secretary General of the PPP at one of the party’s congresses in the 198os. In
that draft, he deleted all references to “Comrades!” as a salutation to party
members. The word comrade could simply mean, friend, companion or an associate
in a political party; but because it historically referred to a member of the
Communist Party or someone with strongly leftist views, he would not use it. Sir Dawda was essentially a third way
politician with no pronounced inclination toward either left or right. He was a
straight, judicious and humble centrist but constantly and fiercely focused on
the task of advancing the interest of the Gambia and supporting all efforts
aimed at safeguarding human rights everywhere.
Upon
the attainment of political independence the new government of Prime Minister
Jawara was faced with enormous tasks of nationhood. First and foremost was the
widespread apprehension about the Gambia’s viability as a nation-state; such
apprehension was fed largely by perceptions of the country’s small and peculiar
size and location and the fact that it was and still remains ill-endowed with
natural resources, safe for its resilient and resourceful people. In addition,
the country inherited numerous and monumental challenges including vastly
underdeveloped infrastructure, poor, inadequate and fragmented social services
as well as weak economic and administrative institutions. As the Colonial
Annual Reports for the years 1952-1955 showed, developments in all sectors
including agriculture, forestry, fisheries and the social sectors were
essentially rudimentary. To address these pressing inadequacies and problems,
the new government quickly embarked on fostering and strengthening a common
sense of citizenship and national identity among Gambians, imbued with
self-confidence and a desire for self -reliance following the negative effects
of colonial domination such as economic and social distortions and retardation.
Within
the first year of independence the country gained membership of the UN, OAU and
the Commonwealth, and introduced ‘right hand drive’ throughout the
country. By the end of the first ten
years of independence, major improvements in social services in the provinces,
particularly medical services to control the scourge of malaria, leprosy,
sleeping sickness and other diseases as well as the expansion of educational
provisions in many areas of the country were registered. Other landmark
developments during this period included the commencement of critical
infrastructural programs and projects including road construction and Banjul
port reconstruction; establishment of the central bank as a symbol of national
sovereignty, the Ministry of Economic Planning to guide medium and long term
development initiatives; and the start of tourism promotion as part of the
government’s economic diversification strategy. On foreign affairs, the
government adopted a pragmatic and gradual approach to opening diplomatic missions
abroad. Immediately after independence, the first two missions were opened in
London and in Dakar, with the High Commissioners accredited to both their host
countries as well as to neighboring countries in each of their respective
regions. Over time more diplomatic ties were established in tandem with the
country’s economic growth (The Gambia Information and Broadcasting Services,
“The Gambia-Ten Years of Nationhood”, 1975). The drive for growth and
development continued through the mid 1980s when the economy suffered major
setbacks arising mainly from steep global recession following the second oil
shock of 1979, persistent droughts, declining world market prices for the
country’s domestic exports and increased public expenditures. Working in close
partnership with the World Bank, the IMF and other donors the crisis was
brought under control through comprehensive and rigorous adjustments and
reforms backed by a strong political will on the part of the government. The
reforms enabled the government to reconfigure its development strategy and
focus more on improving productivity and stimulating growth on a sustainable
basis.
Some
observers have noted that while the great paladins or vanguards of the
independence movement in Africa were effective in the decolonization process,
they, however, fell awfully short in the process of nation-building (Ladipo
Adamolekun, “Political Leadership in Sub-Saharan Africa: From Giants to
Dwarfs”, International Political Science Review, April 1988, pp. 95-106). After independence a good number of African
leaders were more engaged in national populism and the pursuit of ideological
purity. Perhaps the stark record of leadership failures in the region confirms
that. Sir Dawda, the figure head in the negotiations and driving force for The
Gambia’s independence, was a clear and convincing exception. After the
attainment of political independence in 1965, Sir Dawda immersed himself in the
task of nation-building, economic planning and development management in
general. From the early stages in the late 1960s through the turbulent period
of economic reforms and stabilization in the mid1980s he constantly exhibited
extensive and deep understanding of the complexities of the development process
and kept abreast of program and project activities in all sectors. All those
who worked with him within and outside cabinet must have realized how engaged
he was and the prodigious and eidetic memory he possessed in readily recalling
details of development plans and project implementation trends. He was a genuine “hands on” leader as he
devoted his energies to the task of developing the country “from scratch”.
The
Chief Justice
Having
served Sir Dawda’s government as Justice Minister for a decade, current Chief
Justice, Mr. Hassan Jallow, provided deep insights into the late president’s
infrangible commitment to justice, the rule of law and human rights in his
tribute statement. In that statement the Chief Justice highlighted some key
attributes or virtues of Sir Dawda’s personality and style of governance: That
he was a true humanist and a strong and scrupulous adherent to political
pluralism, democracy and the rule of law; that he did not embrace these
qualities for political expediency but that these qualities, and more were
integral to his fine character.
To
describe Sir Dawda as a humanist is wholly befitting. Humanists are motivated
by compassion; they recognize the worth of every individual and each is treated
with dignity and respect; they are strong advocates of democracy, multi-party
politics, the rule of law and a rational approach to decision making. The Chief
Justice pointed out that on every step of the way to independence, Sir Dawda
proved his skeptics wrong, not least the departing colonial administrators who
doubted the ability of the Gambia to manage its own affairs upon gaining
independence. Among the leading colonial skeptic was Governor Sir Edward Henry
Windley (1958-2962), who appointed P.S. Njie as Chief Minister. In an address
to the House of Representatives at a session held on the 19th of April 1961, he
said the Gambia’s economic and political future must be considered “against the
background of what may be described as the accident of history which created
the Gambia too small and too ill-endowed with natural resources to develop
economically in isolation”(The Gambia Echo,1 May 1961). (In fact, it had been said that this Governor
took it upon himself to explore the possibility of a union with Senegal).
During the Independence Conference in 1964, the Colonial Secretary himself
expressed “disappointment” about the financial position of the country,
implying the need for the Gambia to forge ties with its neighbors. These and
other remarks by the colonial administration led the Rev. J.C. Fye to oberve
that “The aim of the British is to edge us toward Senegal, they do not want to
see us independent.” Jawara’s reactions to such remarks reflected solid
reasoning which effectively silenced many of the doubting Thomases. He argued
that “before you establish ties with independent countries your own country
should first be independent” to give you the authority and legitimacy to enter
into international agreements.
Furthermore, in direct response to the comment that given its small size
and its lack of ‘rich resource’ The Gambia ‘dare not claim its freedom’, he
said: “This argument is not valid as all
peoples, rich or poor, are equally entitled to freedom”( Dunayeskaya
1962,p.14). In accordance with his firm and consistent position, the Prime Minister
made direct contacts with Senegal immediately after independence, to build upon
earlier informal consultations following the attainment of internal
self-government.
It
is important to recall that the colonial administrators’ skepticism about the
Gambia’s future had deep historical roots. Ever since the British discovered
that the settlement had little to offer by way of wealth for the Imperial
government, they began to show little interest in the general security and
welfare of the colony. In fact back in 1870 a member of the House of Lords described
the Gambia as “an absolute burden without any redeeming characteristics”
(quoted in H.A. Gailey, A History of the Gambia, London, 1964, p. 86). This in
essence was the driving force behind the unsuccessful attempt to surrender the
territory to France in exchange for a more profitable settlement elsewhere.
Jawara, however, was able to overcome this lingering grim pessimism about the
Gambia’s fortunes and turn it into a palpable and reassuring optimism in the
run up to self-rule and independence.
President
Jawara rarely quoted any notable authority on any subject. During his inaugural
address on 11 may 1987 at the McCarthy Square in Banjul following his victory
at the polls in 1987, however, he quoted the following words of a prominent
American theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr,(with the 1981 abortive coup in mind):
“Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man’s inclination for
injustice makes democracy necessary.” In addition, he reaffirmed his
government’s continued commitment to the democratic process. “We in the Gambia
decided long time ago on the necessity for a democratic way of life and today,
I wish, on behalf of the Gambian people, to re-affirm our commitment to the
democratic process and the rule of law, and the pursuit of nation- building
within that framework.” The Gambia’s adoption of the parliamentary system of
government under Sir Dawda’s leadership was clearly not accidental. His first
major public indication of his commitment to democracy was given during the
independence conference held in July 1964 at Marlboro House in London. In his
response to the opening remarks of the British Colonial Secretary, Duncan
Sandys , who spoke intently on the difficulties and challenges of nationhood
particularly for a small poor country like the Gambia, the future Gambian Prime
Minister and President made explicit his
intentions for his country. He stressed
that his delegation were fully aware that independence came with challenges,
“challenges of hard work, sensible planning, patience and tolerance”, but that
he and the Gambian people remained confident in facing those challenges. On the
matter of democracy, Jawara added, “The Gambia’s reputation as a peaceful,
friendly and law-abiding country is well known…We will continue to practice the
democratic principles which you have bequeathed to us and make the Gambia a
shining example of democracy and stability” (The Gambia News Bulletin, 23 July
1964).
In
a similar vein, in his reply to the remarks of the Duke of Kent (representing
the Queen) on the occasion of the first Opening of Parliament in 1965 in
Bathurst, Jawara declared, again making reference to tolerance: “We are
determined that the parliamentary democracy that has been bequeathed to us by
our British friends shall be maintained by tolerance, goodwill and the common
goal of the common good” (Sessional Paper No. 2 1965).
Sir
Dawda’s commitment and approach to enforcing the rule of law was consistently
straight-laced. Perhaps one of the best
examples of his demonstration of this commitment was when rumors were
circulating on the West African coast in the mid 1980s that some unscrupulous
individuals on foreign vessels were attempting to negotiate with some
governments in the sub-region to dump hazardous material in the area reportedly
for cash. When Sir Dawda learned about
this while he was abroad, he immediately instructed his Attorney General and Minister of Justice to
immediately introduce a bill in parliament making dumping of any harmful
material within the Gambia illegal and punishable by fine and
imprisonment. In order to make his views
clearly known on this issue he later put up a minute on file condemning any
attempts to dump any hazardous material within the territorial and maritime
boundaries of the Gambia, and that any such attempts should be rejected “out of
hand” as deplorable “in the extreme”. The result of his intervention was the
enactment of the Environmental Protection (Prevention of Dumping) Act of 1988.
Former
Minister OJ Jallow
In
his passionate and glowing tribute to his late mentor, former minister Omar
Jallow (OJ) and one of the prominent political disciples of Sir Dawda offered
some important highlights of the late president’s achievements and a profile of
his personality and leadership style, with special emphasis on his humility and
high level tolerance. To demonstrate Sir Dawda’s yen for unity OJ cited his
rejection of tribalism or any other form of sectionalism; he recalled a number
of occasions when the late president in pursuit of a united front for national
development invited leaders of opposition parties to meet with him to confer
and deliberate and take joint on issues of national importance in a
non-political and salubrious atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. All
this was happening in the Gambia at a time when the trend in many African
countries was to suppress and frustrate opposition parties.
Another
point that OJ raised says a lot about the late president’s true values, namely
that Sir Dawda never used his office or massive influence to benefit any member
of his family. The civil service is one area unscrupulous leaders use to help
members of their families, friends and political supporters. Sir Dawda had
never interfered in the running of the civil service and never used it for the
benefit of his family, because he genuinely honored and respected the
institutional norms of the civil service- its tradition, merit-based,
professional and politically neutral status. Furthermore he never placed any
member of his family on the path of lucrative ventures in the Gambia’s thriving
private sector. Sir Dawda never used his position to create wealth for himself
in any form. Some would argue that he indeed denied his own family and indeed
himself from the many privileges and appurtenances associated with the highest
office in the land. He was content with his earned income as head of state. His
primary concern was to serve his people with humility and grace. As OJ put it,
“Sir Dawda was a great man who had nothing to think about except the welfare of
the Gambian people”.
National
Assembly Member Sidia Jatta
In
his remarks, the National Assembly Member Mr. Jatta stated that Sir Dawda never
got angry with anybody or over anything; he ardently spoke about how calm and
collected the late president behaved even under attack or provocation,
describing him as a model of a leader who belongs to the dedicated ranks of the
immortals. Many of those who knew the late president would confirm that they
never saw him display anger or even raise his voice, always genial with a first
rate sangfroid or imperturbability in full display- even in the most trying
circumstances. For example, there had been several instances (one of which I
witnessed in the old Cabinet Office in State House during a press briefing
sometime in 1987) in which contumacious individuals posing as professional
journalists coarsely and obstinately confronted
him with questions ostensibly intended to unfairly denigrate government
policy. True to character, Sir Dawda always handled all such situations without
any rancor whatsoever (but while some of his high ranking staffers simmered
with rage), but simply with a laconic, relevant and polite reply, leaving the
offending pugnacious ‘journalists’ effectively disarmed. Such demonstration of
uncommon restraint by a powerful executive was typical of his behavior in
office, which exemplified the Islamic virtues of humility and tolerance- Al-Quraan (25:63), the true believer and
servant of Al.lah “are those who walk upon the earth easily (gently and without
arrogance) and when the ignorant address them (harshly) they say (words of)
‘peace’” Related to his humility is his virtue of forgiveness. I accompanied
the late president at an ECOWAS annual summit meeting in one of the member
states in the mid 1980s, and an incident occurred there that revealed Sir Dawda’s immeasurable
capacity for forgiveness. A young man who was allegedly involved in the 1981
coup attempt in the Gambia and who escaped and settled in that member state
wanted to meet Sir Dawda at his hotel residence. Some of the security and
protocol personnel wanted to keep the young man away; but when he got wind of
the man’s request he asked that he be allowed in. When they met, the young man
expressed regret for his involvement in the attempted coup and sought forgiveness.
Sir Dawda with a gentle smile and with angelic beams of compassion radiating
from his face replied along these paraphrased lines: “well you know what you
did was unlawful. All you needed to do was to freely participate in the
political process by forming a political party and competing for office, but
not through arms or violence”. He took some money from his pocket and gave it
to the man who left looking immensely relieved – another clear reminder of the
man’s high-mindedness and a key religious precept: “Practice forgiveness, (and)
command decency...”(Al-Quraan 7: 199); “…Forgive, and you will be forgiven Luke
6:37...
Sir
Dawda was more than any ordinary model. He was a peerless example of what is
fundamentally good for the public realm. His life story offers countless
lessons on and examples of good conduct by a public official for all,
especially young or aspiring leaders to learn from. By any standard, he
represented the best possible exemplification of honest, selfless leadership
anywhere in the world but particularly in poor developing countries where
otherwise self- serving leaders plunder scarce resources and stifle the entire
polity through mismanagement and the incessant proclivity to control power.
For
the purpose of this Note another important remark Mr. Jatta made was that Sir
Dawda should be memorialized as an immortal, pointing out that “immortals are
those who “lived their lives in the service of others”. Indeed Sir Dawda lived
his entire active life working tirelessly to uplift the status of an entire
nation and through that he improved the lives of his people, It is the man’s
great deeds and thoughts and moral standing that arouse calls for
immortalization. Basically, Immortality is relative- how long leaders or
society’s outstanding figures are remembered and how many or what percentage of
the living at any given time remember them. Cultures and societies differ in
the way they honor their greats. According to Alfred D. Steinberg (1981), in
Greek, Egyptian and Chinese history great people, artist, scientists and
political figures have been remembered for thousands of years. Since Sir Dawda
died some two months ago there have been calls to commemorate his legacy by
naming at least one national asset in his honor. The Banjul International
airport has been mentioned as a good candidate, following the examples of many
countries including some of our neighbors in the sub region. In Senegal, Yoff
airport was renamed Léopold Sédar Senghor International Airport in1996 to honor
the first president of Senegal and in 2017 the new Senegalese airport in
Diass-Thies was inaugurated as the Blaise Diagne International Airport in
recognition of Diagne’s ground breaking
election to the French Parliament in 1914 as the first African to serve in that
role. Nigeria’s, busiest airport Lagos
International Airport was renamed after General Murtala Muhammed, a young
military head of state whose rein was less than a year (July 20, 1975-february
13, 1976) and whose life was cut short by an assassin, but who inspired a whole nation with his youthful
dynamism and vision and vision for his country. Nnamdi Azikiwe International
Airport of the capital territory of Abuja, the second busiest airport, was
named in honor of Nigeria’s first president. Of course honoring great national
notables is not limited to international airports although they are useful
conduits for name recognition and signification, especially for outsiders.
Important business centers, universities, for example, have been named after
historic figures. In Britain for instance, two royal navy warships and the main
squares in Canary Wharf, the secondary business district of London have been named after Winston Churchill a
former British army officer and wartime prime minister. In the Gambia the choices
are limited, but the University of the Gambia could be worthy of consideration
at the appropriate time, and if the late president would ever be honored. It
was under Jawara’s leadership that major strides were made in developing the
country’s tertiary education sector, with the establishment of the Gambia
college (from the amalgamation of Yumdum Teachers College with other separate
sector training facilities) in 1978, and the creation of the Management
Development Institute and the Gambia Technical Training Institute in the early
1980s. In the early 1990’s the government with support of the Commonwealth
Foundation commissioned a major consultancy led by high level international
educational specialists to look into the most viable options for the establishment
of the first university of the Gambia. As part of that effort the former Vice
President and Minister of Education Mr. B.B. Dabo led a delegation to a number
of Commonwealth Caribbean countries to study the approaches they adopted in
developing their higher education system, the University of the West Indies.
Whatever
choice, if any, is eventually made to honor Sir Dawda’s achievements and
contributions, we should always remember that memorialization or
Immortalization requires putting into effect great, befitting and enduring
decisions that would help to ensure that his legacy sinks down into the deeper
reaches of our collective memory. Walter
Lippmann, a prominent American writer and political commentator, in a tribute
to Franklin Roosevelt wrote: “The final test of a leader is that he leaves
behind him in other men the conviction and the will to carry on” (quoted in C.
Gray and M. McPherson “The Leadership Factor in African Policy Reform and
Growth”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, v 49 n 4, July 2001, p.
709). In the grand scheme of things, it is to be expected that Sir Dawda left
behind a multitude of men and women equipped with the conviction and the will
to carry on with his virtuous way of governance and the humanist manner of his
inter-personal relations. Already a number of speakers at the state funeral
service had called for action to recognize, preserve and build upon Sir Dawda’s
legacy. For his part, President Barrow yearned and prayed for the required
strength to “build on the foundation and legacy he left behind”, while OJ
passionately and vehemently declared: “(Sir Dawda) you are going physically,
but spiritually and mentally you’re with us forever. We will strive to emulate
your standards and values” for the younger generations to see and follow.
Similarly, the National Assembly Member, Mr. Jatta, called on all to learn from
Sir Dawda’s virtues of tolerance, humility and humor “in building this country
from where he left it,”
Closing
Remarks
The
legacy of a political leader is rarely planned; it evolves along his footpaths
in the course of his career. The basic test of any political leader is the
extent of his achievements. The legacy of Sir Dawda should be understood
against the record of dismal failures of African leadership since independence.
On Independence Day in 1965, he declared: “In time, Gambians will prove that a
small country can stand on its own feet, and play its part in world affairs by
providing an example of stability and progress and good sense.” Under Sir Dawda’s
leadership Gambians have also proved that their country was equally, in
Aristotelian terms, “a good state-a community of common interest dedicated to
virtue and justice” {J.T. Wren eds., Traditional Classics on Leadership, 2004,
p.xvi).
A
single factor that unifies all the tributes selectively reviewed here, tributes
by prominent Gambians but of different professional backgrounds, is the
convergence of views that Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara was a man of fine mettle,
fortitude and firm moral fiber. The late president never got snared by power or
the trappings of electoral successes, and if there is any truth in the
shibboleth that “politics is a dirty game”, no single streak of Sir Dawda’s
vision or actions throughout his career was either dirty or game-like. Rather,
and as observed by many, decency, humility and temperance were the hallmarks of
his personality, and an enduring commitment to justice and the rule of law and
service to country were the guiding principles of his approach to governance.
When
all is said and done apropos the unwavering commitment to democratic principles
and compassionate leadership, Sir Dawda Kairaba Jawara was the great man,
l’homme fort, of The Gambia and the Africa region.
Dr.
K.M.Bayo
October
25, 2019
