Defending and exposing corruption: The case of Ousman Jobarteh

By Mohammed Jallow The Gambia today stands at a crossroads between responsible governance and the creeping decay of institutional trust. Nowhere is this dilemma more pronounced than in the unfolding discourse surrounding the Gambia Ports Authority (GPA), its Managing Director, Mr Ousman Jobarteh, and the controversial Memorandum of Understanding with Albayrak Port Management. The narrative has been dominated by sensationalism, half-truths, and politically motivated commentaries that blur the line between accountability and agenda-driven journalism. For decades, the GPA has functioned as one of the financial arteries of the Gambian state. Its operations sustain government revenue, trade facilitation, and regional commerce. It is no exaggeration to say that along with the Gambia Revenue Authority (GRA), it forms the fiscal backbone of the national economy. Yet, in the rush to attract clicks, followers, and online engagement, some media outlets particularly What’s On Gambia have reduced the complex realities of port management to tabloid caricature. Their recurring attacks on public institutions, often devoid of evidence or balanced inquiry, reveal a deeper malaise in our media ecosystem: the pursuit of viewership at the expense of truth, national stability, and institutional integrity. Media, misinformation, and the erosion of national confidenceIn democratic societies, the media serves as the conscience of the nation. It is expected to hold power accountable while safeguarding the public interest. However, in The Gambia’s increasingly polarised environment, portions of the digital media have abandoned this sacred duty. Instead of fostering constructive dialogue, they have become instruments of disinformation reducing national discourse to a theatre of scandal. Every reckless headline, every unverified accusation, and every insinuation of corruption spreads beyond Banjul’s borders. In an interconnected global economy, these narratives reach investors, donors, and grant facilitators who evaluate countries not merely by their macroeconomic data but by the stability of their governance and credibility of their institutions. What goes viral on our local newsfeeds often ends up shaping international perceptions. When unverified stories about the GPA or its leadership circulate unchallenged, they not only damage reputations but also expose our country’s weak news architecture. Such exposure diminishes investor confidence, reduces foreign interest in our logistics sector, and casts a shadow over the nation’s financial sovereignty. The stability of the financial sector is not merely an economic question; it is an existential matter of national security. The Albayrak MoU: Between reform and controversyThe signing of the MoU between the GPA and the Turkish firm Albayrak in July 2024 was meant to mark a new chapter in port modernisation and private-public partnership. Yet it quickly became a political lightning rod. Accusations of non-transparency and speculation about the terms of engagement flooded the media space before the ink even dried. While it is legitimate for citizens and journalists to question the terms of such a strategic agreement, it is equally crucial that criticism be informed, factual, and grounded in national interest rather than political bias. The GPA, operating under the Ministry of Transport, Works and Infrastructure, has maintained that the MoU is a framework for feasibility and investment not a concession agreement transferring ownership. Yet few media outlets took the time to clarify this distinction. Instead, sensational reports created an impression that national assets were being “sold” to foreign interests. Such narratives, when unsubstantiated, not only undermine public confidence but also complicate diplomatic and commercial engagements. It is a pattern that reveals how misinformation, when amplified by media actors seeking popularity, can inflict lasting damage on a nation’s global standing. The leadership of Ousman Jobarteh: Between allegation and legacyMr Ousman Jobarteh’s stewardship of the GPA has not been without controversy. Yet, to reduce his tenure to recent allegations of corruption is to ignore a decade-long record of institutional strengthening, digital transformation, and regional cooperation. His administration’s efforts to modernize port infrastructure, improve customs interface systems, and expand training opportunities for staff have contributed significantly to the GPA’s growing operational capacity. Under his leadership, the GPA has sponsored professional development programs abroad, exposed its workforce to international best practices, and implemented safety and compliance reforms aligning with International Maritime Organisation standards. These achievements are tangible reflections of institutional growth. They represent a vision of transforming the port into a regional maritime hub capable of competing with peers like Dakar or Abidjan. Moreover, the GPA’s steady revenue performance even amidst global supply chain disruptions attests to competent fiscal management. Its contribution to national coffers remains substantial, reinforcing the view that along with the GRA, the Ports Authority remains one of the “cash cows” of the Gambian economy. Citizens must therefore acknowledge that attacking the credibility of these institutions is not simply an attack on individuals but a destabilisation of the state’s economic foundations. The Weaponisation of corruption allegationsThe emergence of the so-called “D20 million case” against Mr Jobarteh must be examined critically. The timing coming shortly after reports that he opposed Albayrak’s alleged attempt to use the Port of Banjul as collateral for a foreign loan raises serious concerns about the political uses of anti-corruption rhetoric. It would be naïve to ignore that in The Gambia, as in many fragile democracies, anti-corruption campaigns often serve dual purposes: to appear reformist to the public while silencing dissenting voices within power structures. If the government were genuinely committed to accountability, it would have acted long ago on audit reports detailing procurement irregularities, mismanagement, and financial leakages. The selective urgency surrounding this particular case suggests not the birth of justice, but the continuation of political theatre. Nevertheless, defending the integrity of an individual should never mean shielding wrongdoing. If there is credible evidence against Mr Jobarteh, due process must prevail. But justice cannot be selective. Accountability must extend to all actors involved in the Albayrak engagement from the Presidency to the Ministry of Finance because such agreements are never unilateral decisions. If the concession was flawed, the responsibility is collective, not individual. The politics of silence and sacrificeWhat this moment reveals is the fragility of institutional independence in The Gambia. When political patronage determines who is protected and who is prosecuted, governance becomes transactional. Mr Jobarteh’s earlier gestures such as the GPA’s financing of public projects including a police station in Mankamang Kunda might have been viewed as loyalty to power, but they now illustrate how temporary such protection can be. Silence, in such systems, is not neutrality. It is complicity. The same machinery that once celebrated the GPA’s “progress” under his leadership is now poised to dismantle his reputation to serve new political interests. If he chooses to remain silent, he risks becoming another casualty of selective justice. But if he decides to reveal the full extent of the Albayrak negotiations, and the political interference that shaped them, he could help The Gambia confront the deeper structural corruption that has long crippled its public institutions. Corruption as a structural conditionThe core lesson from this saga is that corruption in The Gambia is not an isolated behavior it is an institutional design. From inflated procurement contracts to manipulated recruitment, from opaque MOUs to the diversion of public resources for political ends, corruption operates as a network that protects itself through selective enforcement and public distraction. By focusing national outrage on one individual, the system preserves itself. The public is made to believe that “something is being done,” while the deeper rot continues unchecked. This is why every new scandal begins with sensational headlines and ends in silence. It is why the culture of impunity persists. What is required is not another press conference or scapegoating ritual, but a structural reckoning with how power is exercised, monitored, and held accountable. Transparency must begin not at the level of middle management but at the apex of decision-making where policy, contracts, and national assets are negotiated. Media responsibility and national sovereigntyIn this context, the role of the media becomes indispensable. A truly patriotic media must recognize that national development and freedom of the press are not adversaries but partners. To criticize is noble, but to defame is destructive. The journalist’s pen should be a scalpel that dissects truth, not a sword that slashes reputations. Platforms like What’s On Gambia, which have influence over public opinion, must therefore reassess their editorial ethics. Pursuing viewership at the cost of national integrity is neither journalism nor patriotism. It is reckless opportunism. A responsible press interrogates power but also protects national institutions from external discredit. The sovereignty of a small nation like The Gambia depends as much on the credibility of its institutions as on the discipline of its media. The way forward: Reclaiming integrity and reforming institutionsThe Gambia must learn from this moment. The GPA’s internal reforms, its investment in human capital, and its efforts to digitise operations should be consolidated, not politicised. The government, under the leadership of the President and through the Ministry of Transport, Works and Infrastructure, must reaffirm its support for transparent port governance while resisting the temptation to manipulate accountability for political convenience. Equally, the GPA management must strengthen its internal audit and compliance frameworks to ensure that allegations whether true or fabricated find no fertile ground. Institutional transparency is the only antidote to media distortion. Citizens, too, must rise above the seduction of online sensationalism. National development requires collective maturity the discipline to differentiate between constructive criticism and calculated sabotage. The Gambia belongs to all of us, and its institutions are reflections of our collective reputation. Conclusion: A call for balance, integrity, and visionThe ongoing debate around the GPA and Ousman Jobarteh is more than a story about corruption; it is a mirror reflecting who we are as a nation. It tests our moral compass, our media integrity, and our capacity to separate justice from vengeance. If Mr Jobarteh is guilty, the law must take its course. But if he is being sacrificed on the altar of political expediency, then the conscience of this nation must awaken. Either way, The Gambia cannot afford another cycle of scandal, silence, and selective justice. The Gambia Ports Authority remains a strategic national institution whose stability and credibility directly affect the nation’s economy, trade, and global image. The courage of its management in pursuing modernization, training staff, and expanding international partnerships deserves recognition. The GPA’s success is not just institutional it is national. It is time for the media, the public, and policymakers to exercise both intellect and integrity. The future of our nation depends not on who wins a media battle, but on whether we preserve the institutions that keep The Gambia standing. For The Gambia, Our Homeland.