Dr. Alieu SK Manjang
Amid discussions about the possible successor to Ousainou Darboe as leader of the United Democratic Party (UDP), the mayor of the Kanifing Municipal Council (KMC), Talib Ahmed Bensouda, initially stood out as my preferred candidate. My preference was based on several considerations. First, his record of development and the achievements registered during his first years in office gave him an advantage over his immediate rival, the chairman of the Brikama Area Council, Yankuba Darboe. Although Yankuba Darboe has also demonstrated similar developmental achievements, he is still relatively new in the position and arguably has more to prove compared to Talib, who is now serving a second term as mayor.
Second, Talib enjoys strong grassroots support within KMC, which could potentially place him ahead of Lamin J. Sanneh, who may not command similar political influence in the second-largest administrative area of the country. For these reasons, Talib featured prominently in my earlier political analyses as a preferred candidate to succeed Darboe.
However, this position began to change as I observed a troubling discourse emerging both within and outside the UDP. Some narratives presented Talib as a “winnable” candidate not primarily because of his performance as mayor, but because of who he is not — especially when contrasted with Lawyer Darboe, Yankuba Darboe, and Lamin J. Sanneh. Being conscious of the coded rhetoric embedded in such discourse and aware of its potential long-term implications, I reconsidered my position. I came to believe that the UDP deserves a better political narrative than one built on such reasoning.
While I believe that the current leadership of the United Democratic Party deserves respect and recognition for the sacrifices made for the party over many years, I also share the view expressed by some individuals affiliated with the United Movement for Change (UMC) that it may be time for the leadership to allow a younger generation to take up the mantle of leadership. The UDP is certainly not short of capable younger figures who can assume such responsibility. However, any transition of leadership should emerge through democratic processes within the party, not through publicized sentiments or pressure from individuals who are not members of the party.
My position on the need for leadership change is further reinforced by the growing tendency of some individuals to personalize the party to the extent that the UDP is increasingly portrayed as synonymous with its long-time leader, Ousainou Darboe. Ironically, this very perception of personalization has been cited by some former UDP members—now part of the UMC—as one of the reasons for their departure from the party.
Therefore, while I have remained skeptical about the political ambitions of the leadership of the UMC and the rationale behind their departure from the UDP, I did not expect that a party less than a year old would begin to reflect the same sentimental and personality-driven politics that many of its members once criticized in other long-standing political parties.
Yet recent developments suggest otherwise. A close examination of some of UMC’s political messaging, promotional materials, and campaign imagery indicates that the party appears heavily centered on Talib himself. In many cases, the party’s logo is displayed alongside Talib’s image. This is visible on the fleet of vehicles purchased by the party as well as in the distribution of Ramadan food supplies to the needy.
This approach contrasts with the practice within the UDP, where vehicles purchased for the 2021 campaign and other party activities generally carry only the party’s logo rather than the image of any individual.
Another factor reinforcing concerns about UMC being closely tied to Talib’s personal identity is the question of financial support. While the sources of funding are not publicly detailed, Talib’s previous statements about his personal contributions to the UDP — along with those of his family and business network — could suggest that similar sources are now sustaining UMC. When one considers the scale of the party’s activities, its organizational bureaus, vehicles, and outreach programs, it is reasonable to assume that Talib plays a significant role in funding these initiatives, either directly or indirectly.
Moreover, the zealous approach adopted by some of Talib’s supporters in defending him and his family further raises concerns about the emergence of a cult-like political culture. When loyalty to an individual becomes the defining feature of a party, its survival may ultimately depend on the continued presence of that individual.
As a young political party, the UMC has the opportunity to establish itself as a serious force in Gambian politics. However, to do so credibly, it must distinguish itself from the very political practices it once criticized. The cultivation of personality cults and the personalization of political parties — accusations once directed at the UDP — should not be replicated.
Ultimately, UMC’s ability to win the hearts and minds of Gambians will not depend solely on the personalities it presents, but on its credibility in establishing political standards that are genuinely different from those of existing parties.
