Remember when the debate over three or five years was the talk in town?  We interviewed even the European Union Ambassador to the Gambia H.E Attila Lajos. The Barrow administration basked in a constitutional glory saying, we have to follow the constitution. That was the popular mantra then. Today, the same constitution is being cast aside for Barrow’s executive to siphon D700 million and D500 million Dalasis earlier without informing the National Assembly. So, the constitution reigns supreme when it is in Barrow’s interest and cast aside when not. Below, we interview Gambia’s legislators in a series of exclusives:

Hon. Ya Kumba Jaiteh:

“It’s not because of election campaign that “We’re doing this. These monies are not coming from Adama Barrow’s pocket. It’s clear to everyone that these moneys are the country’s money.

These monies are tax payers money and it’s coming straight from the budget. Adama Barrow doesn’t contribute. He doesn’t even pay tax. So, he doesn’t contribute to this budget.

The entire discussion was based on the modus operandi of the finance Minister, the methods he’s trying to use from one budget to another in order to gather money for the purchase of the Covid-19 food relief and also medical equipment.

What happened was they first declared a D500 million, which when we called them, they said it was done via virement.

 So, we raised the issue whether virement was the right procedure to use in this because the constitution is very clear. We are in an emergency and the constitution under section 153 to 154 provides what should happen during an emergency.

 And when there is an emergency normally there should be an Act of parliament which will create a contingency fund and the president can make advances from this fund.

 But there is no contingency fund and it says when a situation arises where we need to make an expenditure that is not budgeted, this is section 153, the estimate should be laid, supplementary appropriation estimate should be laid before parliament. Now this is what parliament was expecting from them.

To be honest, when these people first came for parliament to approve a ninety-day emergency extension, we raised the issue you cannot put the country in a state of emergency for 90 days without providing compensation for those affected.

 This is what the emergency regulation Act is saying. So, they did not even think of the compensation aspect. It was parliament that raised this issue with them. So, we told them we’re going to approve 45 days. They said they were gathering data and the following day we saw food being deposited at McCarthy Square.”

The virement method, Jaiteh stated is not the appropriate method for this current situation in the Gambia “because it is going to significantly affect the national budget itself. The best option would have been to come with an SAP or to come with a supplementary budget, not to vire.

 They are changing the entire budget without parliament’s approval. This is what they’re doing because right now they have now vired almost, with D700 million food relief and D500 million for medical purchases, that would be about 1.3 billion dollars vired by the minister!”

Hon. Madi Ceesay:

He defined virement as “a government re-allocation of money from one entity to another, especially if the earlier entity did not need that money. Right now, what is pertinent is the money that has been vired and how is it being spent because Gambians need help at this moment just like the way other countries did in helping their people in this emergency by allocating funds.

 Although we’re not in a total lockdown, the state of emergency has affected people’s earnings. Government, therefore should redistribute tax payers’ money back to them.

The method of such distribution is the subject of debate right now. Such method, in my view is not being transparent. If a thing is transparent, not much push and pull or rumoring follows it.

D700 million is a lot of money. Even if you purchase rice with it, how many people should get it because this country is two million people. If the president says only 84% will have it, that means 1,680,000. Then what about the rest of the population?

What kind of people should have it and how is the distribution done? The way the rice is being distributed, in my view is not fair because they’ve given it to the regional governors.

 It should have been given to the local governments. Mayors, councilors, chairmen, should be the ones working with the Alkalos, but the governors shouldn’t have a say in this because they are handpicked by the president.

Governors would only distribute the rice with the message that its from the president’s generosity and this isn’t the president’s money. It is the people’s money who rightfully own such money being given back.

The injustice and opacity are centered in this area and it should not be like that. The people’s representatives should have been given the items for distribution.

Barrow hasn’t donated any rice to anybody [before becoming president]. Anybody believing that Barrow is using this as a campaign tool is actually right because a public property should be given to the right people to distribute, not the president’s hand-picked men.

Otherwise, this should be seen as politicking—and politicking with people’s wealth. But Colley, I’ll give you one assurance for the 2021 election, God-willing, what the people want is what’s going to take place.

Gambia is now beyond fooling people, metaphorically putting a reign on them like animals for a ride. Even, for example President Barrow wants to do it like that, it’s not going to happen because people will come out…

Barrow has not given one bag of rice to anybody before being president. So, if he now gives it, one should understand that he’s doing it with the money of the recipient.”

Majority Leader Hon. Kebba K. Barrow:

“The constitution has empowered the National Assembly to come up with standing committees that provide oversight to various government agencies. These committees are brought about by the constitution itself.

But what should be clear to Gambians is that their work is only centered on three things: NAMs are the people’s eyes, ears, and limbs to make sure the provisions governing their education, health, communication/transportation are put to scrutiny.

Secondly, NAMs’ job is to legislate laws that govern the nation as well as the operations of various department ministries. Thirdly, how do those entrusted with such operations perform their duties and under what rules and regulations with regards to the constitution because all these laws emanate from the constitution for the smooth running of things.

The constitution also defines how various departments should perform their functions. This is why such departments/agencies bring bills to the National assembly which become acts and laws.

The constitution is the origin and forebearer of all these rules and regulations. Anything done in the country is governed by that constitution, thus such laws being very important.

All government workers, agencies, and their satellite entities should work according to the dictates of the same constitution. So, the national assembly’s committee for public finance overseas the wellbeing of financial matters in the country which encompasses all ministries.

The committee ensures clear hands operate the finances of government and its agencies. And the constitution has empowered the National Assembly in ensuring the president allows the finance minister to draft a budget for a 12-month period that is brought to parliament before the end of a year.

When such data from all government agencies and departments are brought before the house, they don’t say this belongs to one person, but every department has rules with which to operate.

So, if they say Ministry of Health should have D1 million, such money caters to the department’s logistics, salaries, etc. Every department is thus. When an appropriation is effected, in the house it becomes a law already. So, section 151 to 154 of the constitution provides rules to govern expenditure.

One should come back to the same constitution when spending matters arise. The dispute right now is that the executive has effected a payment without bringing it to the National assembly [as stipulated by the constitution].

They just went ahead and did it on their own. And one should consult the budget time and gatekeeper before any spending is done. [The executive] cannot sit and do all these on its own without notifying the House, that’s not possible.

This is what we pointed out to the minister [Mamburay Njie] to tell him that he has not respected the constitution and the National Assembly. The bad public finance act he quotes is subservient to the constitution in times of dispute over supremacy.

The constitution is the supreme book of law in the land which no other rule rises above. In matters of dispute [as in the case of the D700 million and D500 million Covid relief spendings], the constitution reigns supreme as regards methodology of action.

And that constitution says that the National Assembly should be consulted in anything regarding this kind of expenditure so as to come up with the right appropriation according to law. This is our bone of contention with the finance minister right now.”

Hon. Amul Nyassi:

Foni Kansala deputy Hon. Amul Nyassi, in his short exclusive with this medium stated that Hon. Mamburreh Njie is no stranger to legislation pertaining to spending and appropriation. Njie, he said had served as finance minister in both the second and third republics and matters of this nature should be nothing new to him.

He mentioned 1997 constitution’s sections 153 and 154 clarification on how the supplementary appropriation should be undertaken. Section 153, he continued empowered the National Assembly of the Gambia for this matter in question. “If the executive should unilaterally engage in a spending without consultation with the National Assembly, then they are wrong.

If an issue arises where what we are seeing is happening, Mambureh Njie should be the one to redirect his colleagues because of his tenures and experience with two different regimes he served as finance minister. He said it is section 154 that empowers the president to use 1% of an appropriation to his contingency directive. But if they are invoking section 153, that one clearly empowers the National Assembly to make sure it directs the withdrawal and spending of every Butut.