UDP’s Lamin Manneh Criticizes Revising Courts Over Dismissal of Voter Registration Challenges

By Makutu Manneh

Lamin Manneh, the United Democratic Party’s (UDP) Deputy Administrative Secretary for External Affairs, has criticized the handling of voter registration disputes by revising courts, describing their procedures as flawed and unfair to those challenging the eligibility of registered voters.

Speaking on Kerr Fatou’s Politic Kaacha show, Mr. Manneh expressed frustration over what he described as procedural shortcomings that have made it difficult for petitioners to challenge questionable entries on the electoral register.

He cited a case in the Lower River Region, where a UDP member filed eight challenges against individuals whose eligibility to vote was being questioned. According to Mr. Manneh, none of the respondents appeared before the court despite being summoned.

He said the court subsequently attempted to locate the individuals by visiting the registration centres where they had enrolled and leaving notices requiring their appearance. Summons sent to the residential addresses provided during registration had gone unanswered, he said.

Efforts to locate the respondents through local authorities, including village heads (Alikalolu) and district chiefs (Seyfolu), were also unsuccessful, according to Mr. Manneh.

Despite those efforts, he said, the court dismissed the challenges rather than taking action against the individuals who failed to appear.

Mr. Manneh argued that respondents who disregard court summons should face legal consequences, including possible removal from the voter register where warranted by law.

“All the individuals involved had been registered through attestation. When the Alkalo was asked about their whereabouts, he said he did not know where they lived, yet the court turned to the UDP to provide their residential information, which is not the party’s responsibility,” he said.

He questioned why petitioners were expected to establish the whereabouts of individuals whose residential information had already been supplied during voter registration.

Mr. Manneh also challenged the way revising courts apply the burden of proof in disputes involving age and citizenship.

He argued that when a registered voter’s age or Gambian nationality is challenged, the individual concerned should be required to establish their eligibility rather than placing the entire burden on the petitioner.

According to him, petitioners are being asked to produce documentary evidence that they often cannot access, making it difficult to pursue challenges even when they have legitimate concerns about a person’s eligibility.

He cited another instance in which the Gambia Immigration Department was subpoenaed to provide information relevant to a voter registration dispute. An immigration officer, he said, informed the court that the department could not verify the individuals concerned because it lacked access to data held by Semlex, the company associated with the country’s biometric identification system.

Mr. Manneh maintained that these difficulties exposed serious weaknesses in the procedures being followed by the revising courts.

Beyond the handling of individual cases, he raised concerns about restrictions on who can initiate voter registration challenges.

He said political parties are not permitted to file cases directly before revising courts, leaving individual citizens to bring challenges in their own names.

That requirement, combined with what he described as pressure and accusations of political bias directed at witnesses, had discouraged potential petitioners and limited the number of cases the UDP could pursue, he said.

Mr. Manneh rejected suggestions that the party’s challenges were motivated by hostility toward particular individuals or political considerations.

He insisted that the UDP’s actions were grounded in the law and intended to protect the integrity of the electoral process.

He maintained that ensuring only eligible citizens appear on the voter register was a matter of national interest, particularly as The Gambia prepares for the December 5 presidential election.

The allegations raise questions about the effectiveness of the voter registration dispute-resolution process, including the enforcement of court summons, access to official records and the evidentiary requirements imposed on those challenging voter eligibility.

Mr. Manneh’s account of the proceedings and his interpretation of the applicable procedures could not be independently verified from the information provided.