Access Bank (Gambia) Ltd. and Keystone Bank (Gambia) Ltd. under supervision : who's next?

The Central Bank of the Gambia's announcement that Access Bank (Gambia) Limited and Keystone Bank (Gambia) Limited, two Nigerian banks, have been "taken over" is just one more reminder of a struggling monetary policy environment that remained persistent throughout the period of the Jammeh regime, but particularly since 2007.

The exponential growth in the number of commercial banks in The Gambia since the year 2000 is phenomenal as it is worrying.  Between 2007 and 2010, the number of banks doubled from 7 to 14 which represents a phenomenal rate of growth for any economy, regardless of size.  But for a small economy like The Gambia's, it is worrying.  The doubling of the number of banks resulted in intensified competition and diminished profits, bringing the sustainability and viability of these banks into the fore.

In 2010, two banks went into voluntary liquidation.  They were Prime Bank Gambia (PBG) Limited and Oceanic Bank Plc. who opted to close shop than meet the two-step increase in the minimum capital requirement implimented end 2010 and end 2012.   Of course, Prime Bank (PBG) was accused by the United States Treasury Department of "money laundering" and "funding international terrorism" which provided the convenient cover and a decision point for management to opt for liquidation.

Recent increases in the reserve requirement on deposits did two things :  they increased banks' intermediation costs by depriving them on income they could have generated income for them, and in requiring high reserves, it placed fiancial squeeze on small and less efficient bank.  There are many weak and exposed banks that run the risk of going under at anytime.

There is currently one bank that has changed hands before, that is about to change hands again to be bought reportedly by a Gambian businessman.  We are still in the process of getting additional details as the bank in question continues to invite its premium and preferred clients for consultations about the possible transfer of ownership.

The Central Bank announcement was issued on Monday but was deliberately ignored by the regime's own mouthpiece, The Daily Observer, that acts as the paper of record.  By ignoring the fact that two banks have been "taken over" by the Central Bank as it "sort out irregularities in their operations."  According to StarAfrica.com, "the move is meant to stabilize and bring sanity to the Gambia's Nigerian-dominated banking industry."  That sanity will not come until more banks go under, allowing the strongest and viable banks to re-organize themselves to serve their clients and the economy better.

Gambians must fight the predatory power of Jammeh

It is the unchecked predatory power of Yaya Jammeh that has been a contributing factor to the current economic problems facing The Gambia.

Jammeh has been a dominate player in the Gambian economy which sets him apart from many heads of states in the world, perhaps in the same league as Angola; even Dos Santos has his bidding done through his daughter and other proxies.

Jammeh runs enterprises himself, together with family members, and on our dime.  He spends more time on his businesses than on the affairs of state, and when he does spend some time on official functions he devotes less time and pays less attention to details, unless it personally benefits him either financially, or affects his personal security.  He hardly shows up for work, and when he does he's known to be notoriously late.  His poor work habit is well known.

You cannot, however, tell that he's lazy by watching him conduct his 21-day tour of the provinces.  He's full of energy and enthusiasm, not because he is genuinely interested in advancing the interest and welfare of Gambians but because he sees great opportunity in opening up a new front in his quest to expand his business empire - an empire that expands the length and breath of the Gambian landscape that involves every sector, from agriculture to mining.

His recent craze is what he calls agricultural land development.  We call land speculation because we know better.  Vision 2016, we are told, is about rice self-sufficiency which would require a fundamental change in Gambia's traditional land tenure system.  In the truly Jammeh reckless fashion, he's about to make these monumental changes to the tenure system without the engagement of the services of expertise, ranging from land tenure experts, to agronomists to legal experts.  The concept probably came as a result of his numerous "ataya"sessions (Chinese green tea drinking sessions) with members of his security detail, most of whom are either primary school products or are outright illiterates.

It is evident that Jammeh has already decided that any "excess land", including, presumably those laying in temporary fallow, will be transferred to a yet to be formed Food Security Corporation.  But before it is formed, a Commission will be appointed to study his proposal and a cabinet sub-committee selected to monitor the activities of the Corporation. We have raised concerns about the treatment of the "excess land" that will be transferred to the Corporation, will it be held in escrow or will it be sold or leased to investors abroad.  We are totally opposed to the tampering of the tenure system without competent advise from international experts because Gambian experts have all been turned into refugees by an incompetent, corrupt and brutal regime.

Jammeh's party Secretary General revealed that the "operations" of the Food Security Corporation will not only be involved in rice but also in fishing and other crops.  Since the Corporation is still on the drawing boards, it's structure and mission will remain a mystery to Gambians, except Yaya Jammeh.  Will FSC be involved in production, processing or marketing or will it be another vertically-integrated entity like the infamous Gambia Groundnut Corporation (GGC).

We all know what happened to the Gambia Ports Authority and GAMTEL and Social Security - they have all been bankrupted by the Gambian dictator. Unless we stop the Food Security Corporation from being formed, and refuse to allow for the drastic transformation of existing tenure system that Jammeh is trying to implement, it will not only disrupt the social order but will change the face of rural Gambia for good and for the worse, and in doing so, bankrupt the Corporation in the process.  The predatory power of Jammeh must be curbed, and now is as good a time as any to start resisting these asinine policies.      

The deplorable state of Gambia's diplomatic missions

Deputy Ambassador Bojang with Head of Tourist Office, UK

It is generally agreed that the state of Gambian diplomacy is in shambles at best, and dysfunctional at worst.

The state of its missions abroad is in no better shape than its diplomacy which is to be expected. The state of your Embassy, physical location, general appearance and most importantly, the caliber of diplomats that staff the facility usually reflect the state of your diplomacy.

A government that withdraws its membership from the Commonwealth without a sensible reason except to attribute it to the spurious claim that the organization has done nothing for The Gambia and that is a colonial relic, cannot be considered as having neither a functioning foreign policy nor an effective diplomatic corp. Even the handful of trained professionals currently serving abroad cannot salvage a broken system brought on by the extreme form of dictatorship The Gambia is going through with Jammeh.  Almost all professional diplomats have left the service and The Gambia because of the incompetent and corrupt leadership of Yaya Jammeh.

The break-up of diplomatic relations with Taiwan illustrates the point of a dysfunctional and personalized form of diplomacy.  When the notification emanated from the Office of the President that caught everyone by surprise, it included the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Head of Gambia's diplomacy who learned about the decision after the Taiwanese Ambassador, but with the rest of the world in the news.

The state of the missions abroad are equally dysfunctional.  We did write about the Washington Embassy which is still without an Ambassador for almost two years, and how staff welfare has been neglected and the sick among them have been left to fend for themselves for lack of lack of health insurance coverage. Consequently, staff morale is low and it should not come as a surprise if some decide not to return to The Gambia when their tour is up or recalled as it is often the case.

The disposal of the Embassy building located on fashionable High Street Kensington only to move to a residential area of London was a sign of things to come because the formally Gambia High Commission, now Gambia Embassy in the U.K. is presently caught up in a scandal involving allegations of trafficking in duty-free contraband, involving the Deputy Ambassador, the Head of the Tourist promotion Office and a protocol officer.

The fates of the three Gambian diplomats are still in doubt because of the uncertainty surrounding their current diplomatic status.  The British authorities did request the Jammeh regime to waive immunity of the diplomats concerned so that they could be tried in a British court, and if found guilty, sentenced and subsequently deported from British shores.  What we've been able to gather thus far is that Jammeh did throw his diplomats to the wolves by agreeing to the lifting of the diplomats' diplomatic immunities.   However, the defense claimed in court that (i) the "Waiver of Immunity" was illegally obtained, and (ii) the Waiver was not signed by the Designated Permanent Secretary.

This is a plausible outcome, especially where Yaya Jammeh is involved.  He probably instructed his Secretary General or one of his two Permanent Secretaries at the Office of the President to sign the waiver instead of the Authorizing Officer or Permanent Secretary 1 at the Foreign Affairs Ministry.  Rather than engage in yet another request to the regime for the proper signature, the British authorities would rather end the ordeal by expelling the officers outright and never to enter Britain again, and saving them the possibility of jail time.  Britain is as fed-up with Jammeh as the rest of the world.

Jammeh's other diplomatic posts are not faring any better.  Some Gambian diplomats from Rabat to New Delhi to Caracas are today sleeping in the dark because the regime did not pay their electricity bills or pay their salaries on time, exposing them to temptations that can only bring disgrace to The Gambia.  No wonder that standards have dropped so low that a cinema hall gatekeeper and ticket vendor can end up being Deputy Head of Mission.  Only in Yaya Jammeh's Gambia.

Jammeh is the law

The Gambian dictator has decreed that every civil servant, including staff of the Medical Research Council (MRC), will contribute D25.00 each towards the celebration of 20 years of the July 22nd Revolution.

The dictator's edict did not exempt school children.  They are each to contribute D10.00.

The civil servants' involuntary contributions will be deducted from source this month to meet the D60 million target that Jammeh wants for the 22nd July bash.  Jammeh has, according to him, already contributed D200,000.

Welcome to Jammeh's Gambia

An open letter to IFAD President, Kanayo Nwanze

H.E. Kanayo Nwanze
President, International Fund for Agricultural Development
Via Paolo di Dono, 44
00142 Rome
ITALY

Dear President Nwanze,

Subject :  GAMBIA : NEMA Project and the proposed Food Security Corporation

We write to flag our concern about a proposal by The Gambian leader, His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr. Yahya A. J. J. Jammeh to establish a Food Security Corporation (FSC), an idea that appears to be still in the works, so to speak, and thus evolving.

The announcement that is causing consternation in the Gambian farming community came as a complete surprise to farmers attending a political gatherings during Jammeh's 21-day tour of the rural areas to sell the idea.

What is the FSC?  Information is scanty but what Gambians have been told by Jammeh and his Secretary General of his ruling party, Momodou Sabally, is that a "comprehensive review" of Gambia's traditional tenure system will be undertaken with a view to, and we quote "freeing surplus land for agricultural production."

Will the "freed surplus land" be deeded to or owned by FSC?  What does the shareholder structure looks like?  We believe the Government of The Gambia needs to step back and study this issue carefully with IFAD, EU and other donors involved. The EU design experts that have collaborated with your organization in the design of NEMA should be involved in this review exercise as well.

The legal implications of a botched experimentation with our traditional tenure system, especially when foreign entities are involved, will be unimaginable.  The social and cultural implications will be even far more disruptive threatening the very social and cultural cohesion that has held rural farming communities together for centuries. At the risk of being seen as engaging in hyperbole, we say Jammeh's proposition is dangerous.

We are, therefore, suggesting to your esteemed organization known for its efficient management, excellent project designs and effective M&E system, study Gambia's proposal within the context of the Gambia's National Agricultural Land and Water Management Development Project, referred to as NEMA, and funded by IFAD.

NEMA is one of the single-biggest project in The Gambia, at a total estimated cost of about US$65 million, designed for "poor smallholders, predominant women engaged in vegetable and rice production."

As we understand it, the commercialization component of the project provides strategic support, and it also complements the first component with investments in "private economic assets of producer organizations and entrepreneurs" which makes it all the more important for IFAD to investigate whether a Food Security Corporation, as outlined by the Gambian leader, will adversely affect NEMA in such a manner that it will require re-assessment or a re-appraisal of the project.

We look forward to your early reaction to our suggestions.

Sincerely yours


Sidi Sanneh
Former Executive Director, AfDB
on behalf of a group of Gambian farmers

Serving notice to Jammeh and an alert to IFAD

By request of readership of sidisanneh.blogspot.com, we are reproducing a Facebook entry that was intended to be just that - an entry in our Facebook page regarding the proposed establishment of the Food Security Corporation (FSC).  The FSC has been dealt with our blog post of 30th April 2014 entitled "Food Security Corporation: This is a dangerous idea". If you've missed it, check it out here: http://sidisanneh.blogspot.com/2014/04/food-security-corporation-this-is.html
                                +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Momodou Sabally, Secretary General of the APRC claims that Jammeh has succeeded in attracting the attention of the international community,  community that is now beginning to understand that the food self-sufficiency target that the dictator is pursuing is not a far-fetched objective.

We have said a couple of days ago that the target of 24 months to achieve rice self-sufficiency is not only far-fetched but it is ludicrously dangerous. These bozos grabbed the international community's attention not because of the brilliance of Vision 2016 but because of it's ridiculousness.

Since National Agricultural Land and Water Management Development Project (NEMA) is International Fund for Agricultural Development-funded, a Rome-based UN organization (IFAD-funded), and we see great similarities in the focus and objectives of Vision 2016, we will be writing to the President of IFAD to raise our concern about the potential impact the proposed Food Security Corporation (FSC) will have on the $65 million NEMA Project.

If the FSC is formed, and there are identifiable linkages - as we suspect there will be - between it and NEMA, we will be petitioning IFAD to have the entire NEMA re-appraised for reasons that would be clear to IFAD experts as it would be to us.

We will share our IFAD letter with the readership of sidisanneh.blogspot.com

The Constitution should not have mandated "Dialogue with the People Tour"

Jammeh on the "towering mountain top" 

Gambian pundits are quick to remind readers that "Dialogue with Farmers Tour" successor to "Meet with the Farmers Tour" is a constitutionally mandated event that the President of the Republic is sworn to undertake, at least, once every year.

The leader of the largest opposition party, Ousainou Darboe while praising the Constitutional Review Committee for "doing a good job" of  inserting the clause in the Constitution, he, however, lamented at the fact that Jammeh "has...somehow misused, and made [the tour] a campaign tour with the Yayi Compins, mobilizers; the sort of gathering you find at mass rallies."

The problem we find wrong with the UDP leader's complaint is in trying to draw the line between apolitical campaign and political one in the Gambian context, given the nature of these types of tours which originated from Sir Dawda's administration and borne out of necessity of a decade-long drought of the 1970s and early 1980s.  The "tour" was originally designed to meet the farmers, and to explain evolving government policy as the drought conditions persisted.

Consequently, most of the policies relating to the environment had their roots in the Meet the Farmers Tour, culminating in the "Banjul Declaration" of 1977, pledging the government of Sir Dawda "to conserve to now and posterity as wide a spectrum as possible of our remaining fauna and flora".  Even then, politics reared its ugly head but not as overtly as the "Dialogue with the People" which broadened the audience to include other non-farmer issues, increasing the propensity to politicize the event.  Indeed, it has now evolved into a blatantly political campaign event with, as Ousinaou Darboe described it, " Yayi Compins, mobilizers" in tow.

Section 222, paragraph 15 provides that the president undertakes a "nation-wide tour at least twice a year in order to familiarize himself or herself with current conditions and the effect of government policies."  The intent of the clause may be well-meaning but the rationale is flawed., and we have seen in the past 20 years the provision has been abused - an abuse that has grossly contributed to the skewed political landscape at a huge cost to the national treasury that led an astute observer of Gambian politics to succinctly remark that the dialogue has become a "gross abuse of state funds to promote a political party."

As we have noted previously in our Facebook page, the Dialogue is no longer a dialogue.  It has become a monologue, a one-man-show, Yaya Jammeh's show.  You hardly see or hear farmers occupy center stage with their problems.  If the tour was mandated for the purposes of the president to familiarize himself with current conditions and the effect of government policies, the center piece of the tour should always be the farmer and/or the rural folk.  The opposite is, of course, the case.

The Dialogue tour has become The Jammeh Show.  The stage is managed well to screen speakers, or more appropriately 'praise singers'.  Anything question that reveals the incompetence of the regime and that is deemed as embarrassing to the regime is not entertained.  For example, ferry services have been unavailable for the people of Nuimi for several weeks but they dare not ask questions as to why this is the case.  Instead, farmers are required to listen to the dictator's plans for his re-election campaign.

It is difficult to justify a constitutional clause such as the one in Sec.222, para 15 that mandates not one but two tours annually, given the cost of each tour which, by Jammeh's standards, requires 21-days, a minimum of a 300- vehicle convoy, and hundreds of "Yayi Compins" and political hacks.  It is unjustifiable in good times as in bad times, both from the standpoint of cost and its appropriateness as a means of assessing the impact of government policy.  The impact of government policy can be assessed without leaving State House.

The Office of the President is surrounded by advisers of all shades and hue, and inundated with reports from competent government agencies like the Central Bank, Finance Ministry and other specialized agencies like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund that give an accurate assessment of the state of the economy.

In short, leave the assessment to the bureaucrat and technical expertise, national and international, and the politics to the politicians.  Any tour of the provinces should be the responsibility of the politician to be funded by his political party and not the tax payer.  It was therefore a big mistake to have constitutionally mandated what turns out to be an all-expense-paid political campaign.