To say, I oppose a third term does not make one a rebel and one should not be treated as such. To write an article against a third term or make a speech against it or organize a demonstration or go to court to challenge it are all peaceful, democratic and legal channels indicating political participation which is a constitutional right. These actions do not tantamount to rebellion by any stretch of imagination. 

Ismaila Ceesay must be advised not to weaponize words and undermine political rights just to silence citizens. Such actions are illegal and intended to bring back autocracy. 

Before everyone else it was Adama Barrow himself who first said that no Gambian should be president for more than 10 years. In his 2016 manifesto, he lamented self perpetuating rule and vowed to institute term limits if he became president. 

In multiple public statements and media interviews, he reiterated his commitment to a two-term limits. Was he rebellious according to Ismaila Ceesay?

As the CA leader, Ismaila had advocated for two-term limits for leaders which they have in fact put in their CA Constitution. At that time Ismaila Ceesay was an opposition leader and vowed to end self perpetuating rule. What changed?

To come at the end of his tenth year as president and now wanting to run for a third term must be challenged by all citizens. That’s a national duty for every citizen and that does not constitute rebellion nor makes anyone a rebel. 

If anything, those who are insisting on a third term today are the real rebels. In that case it is President Barrow and Ismaila Ceesay who are rebelling against term limits hence are the rebels!

By Madi Jobarteh