The Gambia's judiciary has rejected allegations made in the recent Afrobarometer survey, particularly those accusing judges and magistrates of widespread corruption. The survey, which revealed that 43% of Gambians believe most or all judges are corrupt, has sparked a forceful response from the judiciary, which calls the claims both damaging and unfounded.
The Judiciary's response, issued on March 19, 2025, strongly disagreed with the Afrobarometer's portrayal of its integrity, arguing that such allegations risk undermining public trust without concrete evidence to support them.
The Corruption Allegation: A Misrepresentation
The most troubling finding of the survey for the judiciary was the claim that nearly half of the population believes judges and magistrates are corrupt. In response, the judiciary stated that these sweeping generalizations are not only unfounded but also serve to tarnish the reputation of dedicated judicial officers who work under often challenging conditions.
The judiciary emphasized that corruption claims should never be based on broad, unsubstantiated assumptions. The statement clarified that any allegations of misconduct are taken seriously and addressed through the judiciary's established institutional mechanisms.
In its statement, the judiciary pointed out that it has taken action against judicial officers who have been found guilty of misconduct in the past, and that its internal systems are in place to address issues of corruption where they arise. The Judiciary's response made it clear that it is committed to transparency, accountability, and maintaining the highest standards of professionalism within the courts.
Institutional Safeguards and Action Against Corruption
The judiciary's response also highlighted the mechanisms in place to prevent and address corruption, including oversight bodies and internal audits. The statement further emphasized that for such serious accusations to hold weight, they need to be supported by solid evidence, not by perception or public sentiment alone.
For the judiciary, it is not enough to rely on public opinion or anecdotal evidence. The judiciary also made it clear that accusations without evidence can undermine efforts to build a fair, transparent, and effective judicial system.
The Danger of Generalizations
The judiciary expressed particular concern about the potential long-term effects of such allegations on public trust. With trust in the judiciary already fragile, the blanket accusations of corruption can significantly erode the public's confidence in the court system, even if these claims are not substantiated.
"This type of rhetoric damages the reputation of the judiciary and undermines the efforts of our judges, magistrates, and all court staff who work tirelessly to serve the public," the judiciary stated. The judiciary argued that these allegations are part of a broader narrative of distrust that has emerged in post-Jammeh Gambia, and while these perceptions must be addressed, they must also be handled with care and based on facts.
The Broader Context of Public Trust and Accountability
Despite the allegations of corruption, the judiciary's response framed the issue as part of a larger conversation about the justice system's performance, including the capacity to handle growing case volumes and public expectations. The Gambia has been on a democratic path of transition since the fall of former President Yahya Jammeh's regime in 2016, and the judiciary is still grappling with its legacy. Yet, the judiciary contends that public perception should not be the sole metric for evaluating the judiciary's effectiveness.
"Public perception is often shaped by socio-economic conditions, media narratives, and limited personal interactions with the judicial system," the judiciary said. "While public feedback is valuable, we cannot base our entire system of justice on generalized assumptions."
The judiciary also pointed out that the rising volume of court cases--up by 25% to 30% annually--reflects continued reliance on the courts. "If people didn't trust the judiciary, we wouldn't see an increase in case filings. But what we're seeing is a growing number of citizens turning to the courts to resolve their disputes," the judiciary noted.
A Call for Constructive Engagement
In its statement, the judiciary urged the public to engage with the institution in a constructive manner. While the judiciary disagrees with the Afrobarometer survey's conclusions, it remains open to dialogue and input that can help improve the justice system. The judiciary emphasized that strengthening the rule of law requires a collective effort, involving all sectors of society--government, civil society, and the public--working together.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
"We welcome feedback, but it must be fair, informed, and based on the facts," the judiciary concluded. "Only by addressing these issues together can we ensure that justice is served equitably and that trust in the judiciary is restored."
As the Gambia continues to navigate its democratic transition, the judiciary is focusing on reforms aimed at increasing efficiency, transparency, and accountability. But the Afrobarometer survey's allegations, particularly the accusation of widespread corruption, present an ongoing challenge in rebuilding public trust and confidence in the court system.
The judiciary's rejection of the Afrobarometer findings is a critical moment in the broader debate about the Gambia's judicial reform efforts, and it underscores the complexity of balancing public opinion with institutional realities. While the country's democratic transition has made great strides, the road to a trusted and effective judiciary remains fraught with challenges.
