By Mustapha Mbye, Board Member, Media Council of The Gambia
Recently, Minister of Information, Media and Broadcasting Services, Dr. Ismaila Ceesay, labeled the Media Council of The Gambia (MCG) as “ineffective” while backing the government’s proposed journalist accreditation framework. This calls for a clear and factual response.
Public officials certainly have the right to voice their opinions about institutions, but they must not misrepresent them.
The Minister’s statements could mislead Gambians regarding the Media Council’s role, mandate, and legitimacy, especially at a time when our nation is still in the process of rebuilding democratic institutions after years of state hostility towards independent journalism.
We must not forget Gambia’s painful past.
The relationship between the government and the media in The Gambia has always been fraught with tension. From colonial times to various post-independence administrations, efforts to regulate, intimidate, and silence the media have been a constant theme in our national narrative.
Journalists have faced harassment, arbitrary arrests, torture, forced exile, and, in the darkest moments of our history, even murder at the hands of state agents. The tragic assassination of Deyda Hydara, the mysterious disappearance of Chief Ebrima Manneh, the imprisonment of journalists under oppressive media laws, and the exile of numerous media professionals serve as stark reminders of the dangers that arise when governments seek to control journalism rather than safeguard press freedom.
This very history is why Gambians called for a new approach following our democratic transition.
The Media Council was established as a result of reform—not as a tool of government control.
After extensive discussions led by the Gambia Press Union with various media stakeholders, civil society groups, development partners, and government representatives, a new framework has emerged as part of the democratic media reforms. The goal is straightforward: to hold the media accountable to the public through self-regulation instead of relying on state regulation.
The Council’s Rules of Procedure outline it as a self-regulatory mechanism that spans the entire industry, aimed at promoting professional and ethical standards within the Gambian media and addressing complaints related to ethical misconduct in journalism.
This distinction is crucial. A self-regulatory body operates quite differently from a government regulator. It safeguards editorial independence while ensuring that there is professional accountability in place. It’s important to clarify that self-regulation doesn’t equate to a lack of accountability.
One common misconception that has surfaced in recent discussions is the belief that the Media Council lacks authority simply because it wasn’t established through an Act of Parliament. This perspective misses the essence of self-regulation.
Globally, many esteemed media councils are formed through voluntary agreements and constitutions created by industry stakeholders, rather than through legislation that gives governments control over editorial practices. The legitimacy of a self-regulatory body stems from the active participation and commitment of the industry and the public it serves, not from political oversight.
The MCG adheres to its Constitution, Rules of Procedure, and the Gambia Press Union Code of Conduct, while also considering relevant national and international standards in its decision-making processes.
It’s also important to note that the Media Council is not a court of law. Another common misunderstanding is the expectation that the Council should operate like a criminal court. It does not imprison journalists, impose criminal fines, or prosecute anyone. Its focus is strictly on professional and ethical matters.
When a journalist or media organization is found to have breached ethical standards, the Council has the authority to impose various sanctions, including:
– reprimands
– public apologies and corrections
– suggestions for additional training
– recommendations for a temporary suspension of a professional journalist card through the Gambia Press Union or the media outlet
– advice to employers in serious ethical situations.
These measures are aimed at promoting ethical journalism rather than serving as criminal penalties. The Council is a representation of the entire Gambian society.
One of the most misleading claims is that the Media Council is merely a group of journalists policing themselves in secrecy. In reality, the Governing Council is intentionally diverse, comprising members from:
– civil society organizations
– child rights advocates
– women’s rights groups
– the legal field
– publishers
– broadcasters
– academia
– the private sector
– organizations for persons with disabilities
– editors
– and crucially, the Government of The Gambia through the Ministry of Information.
The government already has a voice in these discussions. This diversity ensures that the Council effectively balances media freedom with public interest, human rights, and accountability.
Due process is integral to every complaint. The Minister’s critique overlooks the thorough procedures that govern complaints submitted to the Council. Any individual or organization can lodge an ethics complaint, and the Council can also initiate investigations when deemed necessary.
Every complaint goes through a preliminary review to assess jurisdiction and whether there’s enough basis for action. If a complaint moves forward:
– the respondent receives the complaint along with supporting evidence
– the respondent is provided with the Code of Conduct and Rules of Procedure
– the respondent is allowed time to respond
– the respondent can challenge panel members if there’s a conflict of interest or bias.
An independent adjudicator can be appointed when necessary. The Council also promotes mediation and conciliation before any formal hearings kick off. This is what due process looks like—not just arbitrary judgment. Decisions are made transparently and can be appealed. The Council maintains records of all proceedings and decisions, ensuring that vulnerable complainants, like children and victims of sexual offenses, are protected. Its findings are published, and both complainants and respondents have the right to appeal to the Governing Council, which acts as the Appeals Panel. These safeguards help build public trust in ethical accountability.
If the Council has its flaws, the solution is to strengthen it—replacing it isn’t the answer. No institution is without its imperfections. The Media Council has dealt with resource limitations, funding issues, staffing challenges, and varying compliance levels from some media organizations. These are valid topics for discussion. However, just because there are weaknesses doesn’t mean the Council is irrelevant.
If the government thinks the Council needs bolstering, it should focus on capacity building, promote adherence to ethical standards, and engage positively with stakeholders—rather than undermining the institution while suggesting more government control over journalist accreditation. Accreditation should never be a means to control journalism.
The government’s proposed accreditation framework raises genuine concerns within the media community, as state-administered accreditation could easily turn into a gatekeeping tool for who gets recognized as a journalist. Given our country’s history, this concern is far from theoretical. Media accreditation should enhance professionalism, not serve as a political tool for granting permission to practice journalism. The Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and press freedom—these rights belong to the citizens, not the government. The path forward should be one of partnership, not confrontation.
The Media Council came into being because the people of The Gambia wanted accountability without censorship. Its role is to uphold ethical journalism while ensuring that editorial independence is shielded from political pressures. Instead of labeling the Council as ineffective, the government should acknowledge the institution it played a part in creating during the nation’s journey toward democracy and collaborate with it to elevate standards throughout the media landscape. The real discussion The Gambia needs isn’t about whether the government should oversee journalists. It’s about how we can enhance independent self-regulation to ensure that journalism remains ethical, responsible, and free.
A democratic society deserves nothing less.
