06/06/2026
Political Memory Matters.
The Questions Talib’s Own Statements Raise.
Politics is often about what leaders say, but it is also about what they said before circumstances changed.
In recent days, Talib Ahmed Bensouda revealed in an interview that he wanted to quit politics in 2022 and that it was Lawyer Ousainou Darboe who convinced him to stay. That admission is significant because it provides a rare glimpse into a critical moment in his political journey. It confirms that at a time when he was ready to walk away, the UDP leader encouraged him to remain engaged in public life.
But that statement does not stand alone.
Between 2023 and 2025, Talib repeatedly maintained a public position that if Ousainou Darboe decided to seek the UDP flagbearership, he would not contest against him. He further stated that he would respect the party's internal democratic process and support whoever emerged as the chosen candidate.
Taken together, these statements create a timeline that deserves reflection.
If Talib was considering leaving politics in 2022 but was persuaded to remain by Darboe, and if he continued for years afterward to publicly affirm loyalty to the party's selection process, then the narrative that he was destined to leave UDP all along becomes much more difficult to sustain.
The question is not whether Talib had the right to leave UDP. Every politician has that right. Political parties are voluntary associations, and individuals are free to pursue their ambitions through whatever platform they choose.
The question is what changed.
What happened between the period when he publicly pledged support for the UDP process and the moment he decided to launch a separate political movement?
That is a legitimate political question because voters deserve clarity and consistency from those seeking to lead the nation.
This is not merely about Talib. It is about a broader tendency in Gambian politics to rewrite history once political alliances change. Yesterday's mentor becomes today's obstacle. Yesterday's institution becomes today's problem. Yesterday's political home suddenly becomes irrelevant to a success story that was years in the making.
But political memory matters.
Talib's rise did not occur in isolation. He became a national figure through the structures of UDP. He served as National Organising Secretary. He contested and won under the party's banner. He benefited from a political network built through decades of sacrifice by thousands of supporters across the country.
Recognising that reality does not diminish his achievements. It simply acknowledges the facts.
The danger for any political movement is when supporters become so invested in defending the present that they feel compelled to erase the past. Institutions matter. Mentorship matters. Political sacrifices made by others matter.
As The Gambia moves toward the 2026 elections, voters should pay close attention not only to promises about the future but also to how political leaders explain their past decisions. Leadership is not tested when everything is going well. It is tested when difficult questions arise and honest answers are required.
Talib's recent admission has reopened an important conversation. Not about whether he should have stayed in UDP, but about the importance of political consistency, institutional memory, and telling the complete story of how leaders arrive where they are today.
In politics, ambition is normal. Change is normal. But history should never become a casualty of either.
Comedy, Laughter, Politics.
