It appears that The Gambia is now on its way to being controlled by the highest bidders. That is the only interpretation one can draw from the latest episode of the Securiport Saga. A letter dated 19 September 2022 from the Gambian lawyers of Securiport addressed to the “Secretary General and Head of Civil Service” should be a serious concern to all Gambian citizens. It shows a breathtaking level of audacity from a foreign investor that signed an unfair contract feeling emboldened enough to demand that the government investigate officials and ministries because of serious allegations reported about its conduct.
Here is the necessary background. On 16th September 2022, the award-winning investigative journalist, Mustapha K Darboe of Malagen, broke a well-researched report on the contract that the government of The Gambia signed in 2018 with Securiport, a US-based company. The report meticulously documented a highly unfair contract that has so far cost The Gambia government about D274.9 million. Among other egregious clauses in the agreement are unwarranted tax holidays for a company whose operations have no justification for such concessions.
There was no public bidding for the contract, and the relevant government units that were supposed to be overseeing such a contract were kept completely in the dark. Even the Attorney General advised against signing the contract. The Barrow State House directly oversaw the negotiations with the government mainly through a single permanent secretary, Yankuba Saidy. Other government units were effectively ordered to endorse the agreement after the fact without any meaningful consultations.
Mr. Darboe’s article was a masterpiece of investigative reporting. The article clearly shows the terrible toll on the country of an unfair contract that is the product of either unscrupulous government officials that do not have the long-term interest of the country at heart or highly incompetent officials being in charge of issues they have no qualification for or both. Such an article deserves nothing but commendation from all well-meaning individuals. For those who have been directly implicated, they should be hiding in shame or fear.
Instead, what we witnessed from the letter of the Securiport’s lawyers is a level of audacity and complete disregard for the country’s interest and dignity. For how else would one view a letter from a private company demanding that the government investigate whistleblowers and itself. At no point in the letter did Securiport and their lawyers even tried to refute any of the damning claims in the Malagen story. What is more, they did not provide any claim of any Gambian law being broken. Even if a confidentiality clause were broken, that would be a civil matter.
And why would there even be a confidentiality clause about an agreement that is supposed to be a public document? After all, the document is subject to audit, after which it is supposed to go to the National Assembly for discussion and publication thereafter. If all the clauses in the agreement are fair and are not one sided, why would the company object to any aspect of the agreement being released? Indeed, there is nothing about that agreement that could be taken as divulging a trade secret or information detrimental to a company’s normal operations.
What we see from the letter of Securiport’s lawyers is a behavior from the company which is quite revealing beyond its breathtaking temerity. For one, the confidence that Securiport has to demand an investigation reveals an unhealthy level of comfort and confidence it has that the government will do its bidding irrespective of how outrageous the demand.
One wonders what exactly transpired during the contract negotiations to give them such a level of confidence. The fact that the company is averse to the public knowing about the details of the agreement is also indicative of its fear of what increased scrutiny will bring to this contract that deserves nothing but even greater scrutiny.
It is important to remind key government officials their proper roles and responsibilities in the government and the fact that their allegiance should be to the country first, rather than a private company no matter how deep its pockets are. The “Secretary General and Head of Civil Service” should think twice before forwarding the letter to the Ministry of Interior for any action. After all, what Gambian laws were broken? If the police are instructed to investigate whistleblowers, they should remember their relevant oaths and responsibilities to investigate actual law-breaking rather than revelations that inconvenience certain high-level officials.
The National Assembly also owes the Gambian people timely public hearings on this contract. Every public official that played a key role in this dubious contract needs to answer publicly for their roles in it. The National Audit Office should only be asked about the thoroughness and quality of their auditing rather than any questions about purported leaks.
Finally, the Gambian press should bring this issue to the attention of the US Embassy as Securiport is US registered and headquartered in Washington DC. The Malagen article raises questions about the ethics of the contract signed by the company at the very least, and US authorities need to look into whether the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was not violated in this case. After all, given how unfair the contract is to The Gambia, one cannot help but wonder why would Gambian government officials sign such a contract.
