In a compelling opinion piece, U.S.-based Gambian legal luminary Hon. Sarjo Barrow, Esq., has highlighted the barriers that ordinary citizens face when seeking justice in The Gambia’s courts, arguing that archaic procedural rules inherited from colonial times effectively lock most people out of the legal system.
Barrow, whose views are his own and do not represent those of the United States Department of Justice, describes the High Court in Banjul as a place where grievances often die before they reach a judge, not due to lack of merit, but because of rigid formalities. “Walk into the High Court with a grievance, and you will quickly discover that the law has a vocabulary problem,” he writes. For unrepresented litigants, missing a specific form title, failing to file an affidavit correctly, or using the wrong procedural vehicle can result in a case being dismissed outright, regardless of its substance.
This issue affects two main groups. First, public interest cases aimed at holding the government accountable face insurmountable hurdles. Barrow points to the controversial $20 (now $25 in some reports) security levy imposed at Banjul International Airport since 2019 under a contract with U.S.-based Securiport. Investigative reports from 2022, including from Malagen and references to National Audit Office (NAO) findings, indicated potential financial losses to the state of at least 274 million dalasis due to procurement issues, exemptions for certain passport holders, and other breaches. Despite public frustration, IATA objections, and ongoing traveler complaints, no lawsuit has successfully challenged the levy. Barrow attributes this not to apathy but to the “procedural mountain” requiring precise invocation of constitutional provisions, specific motions, affidavits, and service rules.
The second, more widespread problem impacts everyday disputes among citizens: unpaid debts, landlord-tenant conflicts, wage disputes, or real estate fraud in an unregulated market lacking accessible title verification. A trader owed 10,000 dalasis navigates the same complex Victorian-era civil procedure—endorsed writs of summons, formal pleadings, strict timelines—as a corporation suing for millions. With no dedicated small claims track, minor cases drown in the same machinery.
Recent data underscores the strain: At the opening of the 2026 Legal Year, Chief Justice Hassan B. Jallow reported that the judiciary had nearly 10,000 pending cases as of January 1, 2026—a 49% increase from 2024 levels—contributing to chronic backlogs and delays.
Barrow contrasts The Gambia’s system with reforms elsewhere. In 1999, England’s Lord Woolf overhaul replaced rigid originating documents with a single unified Claim Form, emphasized plain language, and introduced an “overriding objective” of just, proportionate, and accessible justice. England also established small claims courts in the 1970s for claims up to £10,000 (with ongoing adjustments), featuring informal hearings, relaxed evidence rules, and judges actively guiding unrepresented parties.
The United States has long embraced simplicity: Federal Rule 8 requires only a “short and plain statement” of the claim and relief sought, with no mandatory forms or affidavits. State small claims courts handle disputes from a few thousand to $25,000 informally, without requiring lawyers. Countries like Jamaica, Kenya, and Trinidad and Tobago have adapted similar models to their common law systems.
Critics who defend the status quo cite The Gambia’s common law heritage from England, but Barrow counters that England abandoned these rigidities over 25 years ago. More crucially, The Gambia’s 1997 Constitution marks a departure from Westminster parliamentary sovereignty toward a constitutional republic akin to the U.S. model. The Constitution is supreme, the National Assembly is limited, and courts can strike down legislation—powers U.K. courts lack. Retaining “fossils” from a pre-1997 monarchical framework mismatches this framework.
The consequences are stark: an enforceable Bill of Rights remains theoretical for those unable to afford lawyers, disputes fester unresolved, and faith in the system erodes. Courts disproportionately serve the educated and wealthy, inverting justice’s purpose.
Barrow proposes modest, feasible reforms. The Chief Justice, empowered by the Constitution to issue practice directions, could simplify constitutional claims: allow plain statements of facts, cited provisions, relief sought, and short verification—no rigid titles or sequences. For the airport levy, a citizen could simply state the payment, the lack of an authorizing law, and the desired declaration/return.
Second, introduce a small claims court for disputes below a threshold, such as 50,000 dalasis: informal, no mandatory representation, relaxed rules, and judge-assisted processes.
“Pro se litigants are not an embarrassment to the legal system. They are its truest test,” Barrow concludes. A system functioning only for paying clients fails to deliver justice. With a citizen-centered Constitution, The Gambia has “every reason and no good excuse” to lighten the courthouse door.
