For sixty years, The Gambia has been governing without a national communication policy. Think about that.
Ministries have spoken. Officials have briefed. Press releases have flown — often late, often contradictory, often in language ordinary Gambians don’t use. As Permanent Secretary Cordu L. Jabang put it bluntly, there has never been a shared framework that says what government communication is for, who leads it, and what standard it must meet.
That is not a small administrative gap. It is a democratic deficit.
Thus, the two-day convention to craft The Gambia’s first-ever National Communication Policy and Implementation Strategy, supported by WACA ResIP 2, matters more than it sounds. This is not about logos or letterheads. It is about trust.
As Minister Dr. Ismaila Ceesay rightly noted, trust cannot be demanded. It must be earned — through accuracy, openness, consistency, responsiveness and accountability.
Today, government communication is fragmented and uneven. One ministry says one thing, another says nothing, and citizens are left to fill the gap with rumour. In that gap, misinformation thrives and public confidence dies.
The genius of this convention is that it is not a validation workshop where a consultant presents a finished document for applause. It is, by design, a negotiation. Stakeholders from all eight Local Government Areas — where the team already held listening sessions — are being asked to co-create the pillars and define the red lines.
That approach is correct. A communication policy written in Banjul for Banjul will fail. A policy written with Basse, Kuntaur, Kerewan and Brikama in mind might stand a chance.
We also welcome the honesty in the process. The Ministry admits we have laws — the Constitution, the Access to Information Act 2021, the Data Protection Act 2025 — but laws do not implement themselves. Without clear institutional responsibilities, professional standards, and practical systems, rights remain words on paper.
But let us sound a warning, too.
This policy must not become a tool to control public discussion. The Minister said it himself, and we hold him to it: the objective is not to control, but to make reliable information easier to find. If this policy ends up centralizing propaganda, scripting all institutions to say the same thing, or muzzling independent communication officers, it will have betrayed its purpose.
What we need is coherence, not conformity. Clarity, not censorship. Every institution must know its role, verify its facts, and speak responsibly — but it must be allowed to speak.
We also note the irony that this vital democratic exercise is being supported by a coastal resilience project, WACA ResIP 2. It shows how far we have stretched donor baskets to do what the national budget should have done decades ago. When the policy is done, government must fund it.
After sixty years of silence, of ad-hoc briefing and reactive press releases, The Gambia is finally trying to learn how to talk to its own people — and more importantly, how to listen.
If we get this right, citizens will get timely, accurate and accessible information in languages and channels they understand. Government will become more responsive. And perhaps, just perhaps, citizens will start to believe what government says.
Let’s remember that in a democracy, communication is not a favour government does for the people. It is the contract.