Her repeated insistence that she was “not part and parcel of the sales” provoked sharp rebukes from lawmakers, who openly questioned her competence and accused her of dodging responsibility.
Appearing before the Special Select Committee on the Sale and Disposal of Assets identified by the Janneh Commission on Tuesday, Ms Sarr faced a barrage of questions over the disposal of 186 tractors seized from Jammeh’s estates. Records showed that the first phase of auctions, conducted by Alhaji Mamadi Kurang, raised D10.5 million from just 43 tractors. But a second phase, involving more than double the number of tractors, yielded only D13 million, a discrepancy that lawmakers said “defied logic”.
When pressed to explain the shortfall, Ms Sarr distanced herself from the sales process, insisting she had only written letters and notices but did not directly monitor the auctions. “I was not part and parcel of the sales,” she repeated, adding that her focus was on other Commission tasks.
“From what I’m hearing, it seems like you’re not sure of anything,” Counsel snapped. “Except for sending notices which you don’t even know the contents of. You’re the head of the Secretariat, yet you claim you know nothing about the activities of your team. That is appalling.”
At one point, Counsel warned that her evasiveness could lead to contempt charges. “Ms Sarr, as long as you are okay and very healthy today, you will be cited for contempt,” he cautioned.
Despite being the custodian of Commission files and the officer who authorised allowances for the auction teams, Ms Sarr maintained she was “not involved” and had not even read key reports until years later.
She admitted she never asked her team for clarification on why revenues from the auctions were so low, nor did she follow up on reports that tractors had been tampered with and stripped of parts under the Commission’s custody.
The committee was left grappling with a troubling picture: a senior official entrusted with safeguarding state assets but apparently unaware of or unwilling to account for the losses that occurred under her watch.
For lawmakers, Ms Sarr’s testimony raised as many questions as it answered. Was she deliberately sidelined by others in the Commission? Or was she, as one member bluntly put it, “nonchalant” in fulfilling her duties?
