Why I Reject the Misleading Narrative Around Clause 13, Clause 14, and Demarcation
By Ndey Jobarteh
I’ve been having healthy and constructive discussions on my wall about Clause 13, Clause 14, and demarcation. These conversations are necessary because the government and some MPs are deliberately confusing the public. But let me be clear: we in the diaspora are not confused. We know our rights, we know the law, and we understand how it works.
Now let me clarify why I completely reject the misleading arguments being made around Clause 13 and demarcation.
This is what both clauses actually say:
Clause 13 – Qualifications for Registration as a Voter
A person is entitled to have his or her name entered on the register of voters in a constituency if he or she:
(a) is a citizen of The Gambia;
(b) has attained or will attain the age of eighteen years on the date of the holding of the next election; and
(c) is resident or was born in that constituency, or is resident in a foreign country.
Clause 14 – Registration of Gambians Living Abroad (this is the clause they removed)
The Commission shall register a Gambian living outside The Gambia as a voter if he or she satisfies the requirements for registration prescribed under this Act.
Now, here’s how to explain it clearly:
Clause 13 says you have the right to vote if you’re 18+, Gambian, and living either in The Gambia or abroad. That’s the theory. It includes diaspora Gambians, but it doesn’t say how they will be registered.
Clause 14 says the IEC must register Gambians abroad if they meet the same conditions. That’s the action, the part that would make the right to vote actually possible.
If you keep Clause 13 but remove Clause 14, it’s like giving someone a driver’s license but refusing to build roads. You’re telling them they can drive, but giving them nowhere to go.
Let me break it down even more simply:
• Clause 13 is like saying:
“You have the right to eat.”
• Clause 14 is like saying:
“We will make sure you actually get food, by giving you a plate, opening the kitchen, or making it possible to buy food.”
• Removing Clause 14 is like saying:
“Yes, you can eat, but we won’t give you the tools, access, or even the chance to get the food.”
It’s an empty promise.
That’s why Clause 14 was key. Without it, no one is responsible for making sure Gambians abroad are registered and able to vote. And without registration, there is no voting.
Now to those who argue for a “holistic” approach, saying demarcation should come first:
Let’s be real: Even if you demarcate diaspora constituencies, Gambians abroad still cannot vote unless there’s a legal obligation to register them. And that’s exactly what Clause 14 provided.
Here’s the key point:
• Demarcation means creating new diaspora constituencies so the diaspora can have their own MPs. That’s about representation.
• But demarcation does not register voters. The IEC must still go out and register people in the diaspora.
Without Clause 14 or a similar legal mandate, the IEC is not required to register diaspora voters—even if constituencies exist. So we could end up with “diaspora constituencies” but no voters. That’s like building polling stations but leaving the voter list empty.
Clause 14 was the bridge between the right to vote (Clause 13) and the action to make it real. Remove that bridge, and the entire process collapses.
In summary:
• Demarcation = Future representation
• Clause 14 = Access to vote now
We need both, but Clause 14 must come first to even begin the process.
WeKnowOurRights
Let’s not allow anyone to confuse us. If they are confused, or pretending to be, we in the diaspora are not! 
