Mile II Central Prison is not simply a building; it is a scar on the Gambian conscience. Constructed by the British in 1920, it was designed as a fortress of punishment rather than rehabilitation. Its walls were meant to break bodies and spirits, not to restore dignity.
Generations of Gambians have testified to its inhumane conditions—overcrowding, torture, and deprivation conditions so severe that only those who never entered its gates can oppose the urgent call for a modern correctional facility.
In the 1980s, Gambian intellectuals and activists such as Halifa Sallah, Samuel Osseh Sarr, and Amie Sillah documented their experiences in pamphlets that exposed the challenges at Mile II and called for reform.
Their writings remain a civic milestone, reminding us that the prison is not solely a relic of colonialism but continues to impact human dignity.
Today, the government’s plan to sell Mile II to the Gambia Ports Authority for four million dollars, with proceeds earmarked for a new, modern correctional facility, represents a pivotal moment.
If approached thoughtfully, it could symbolise a break from colonial legacies and past abuses, aligning The Gambia with international standards of justice and human rights. If, however, the process lacks transparency, consultation, and strategic communication, it risks being perceived as another unclear privatization deal, possibly diminishing trust and public confidence.
Mile II was never built to serve Gambian justice. Its design shows the colonial focus on punishment and containment. From the First Republic to Yahya Jammeh’s rule, Mile II meant torture, overcrowding, and political imprisonment. Hearings of the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) confirmed its use for abuse.
At Mile II, Gambians lost their dignity and suffered cruelty. The pamphlets by Sallah, Sarr, and Sillah in the 1980s still matter. They remind Gambians that reform is not optional. Prisons should serve justice, not cruelty. To oppose a new prison now is to ignore real accounts from survivors.
Interior Minister Abdoulie Sanyang disclosed that Mile II will be sold to GPA, with proceeds funding a new correctional facility. The new prison is intended to meet international standards, improve inmate living conditions, and strengthen transitional justice.
Yet public opinion remains divided. Some argue Mile II should be retained as a historical landmark, while others insist it must be replaced to break with colonial legacies. Without transparent communication, the sale risks being perceived as an erasure of history or opportunism rather than reform.
The Mile II case is emblematic of a broader problem. Across the country, strategic assets are being privatized or handed to foreign companies. The Senegambia Bridge has been managed by Africa50 for twenty-five years. The Gambia Ports Authority is under Albayrak’s control. GAMTEL and GAMCEL, pillars of national telecommunications, are poised to be sold to Y Cell under an eighty-twenty agreement.
The Banjul International Airport is reportedly heading toward privatization. The Gambia Revenue Authority’s tax systems are largely managed by Arab Soft, raising sovereignty concerns.
These are not minor administrative changes; they affect sovereignty, revenue streams, and national identity. At the same time, the government’s public communication strategy on these matters has not been fully articulated.
Citizens often seek more information about the motives, terms, and benefits, especially given the potential risks: loss of public oversight, increased costs for consumers, and long-term effects on national interests.
Parliament debates may be insufficient. Without public education—explaining why assets are sold, how partners are chosen, what safeguards exist, what risks are involved, and how citizens benefit—privatization can appear more like dispossession than reform.
Other African nations faced similar choices. In Ghana, port privatization involved public input and revealed concession details. Citizens could check the terms and hold operators responsible. In Kenya, prison reforms were part of a larger human rights agenda. Civil society helped shape rehabilitation programs. In South Africa, the move to modern correctional facilities included a national discussion about justice and dignity.
The Gambia might benefit from considering these lessons. Privatization and reform efforts are most effective when accompanied by transparency, consultation, and education. Otherwise, they may be viewed as limited to elite interests rather than broader national progress.
Privatisation without explanation can obscure risks and challenge democratic oversight. Lack of information can breed suspicion, while transparency strengthens confidence. Citizens can hold government or private operators to account more effectively when they have access to contract terms, performance indicators, and financial models.
In the case of Mile II, clear communication extends beyond financial matters—it also involves moral responsibility to move beyond colonial legacies and develop a dignified correctional system.
The fate of Mile II Prison is an important measure of The Gambia’s civic maturity. Selling it without a detailed explanation could risk repeating past missteps.
However, replacing it with a modern, humane correctional facility—accompanied by clear communication about the rationale, terms, and benefits would honor the experiences of those affected and help fulfill transitional justice promises.
More broadly, the government might consider that strategic communication on privatisation and Public-Private Enterprises contributes to democratic legitimacy.
Gambians have a right to understand the reasons behind privatising bridges, ports, telecoms, prisons, airports, and tax systems, who benefits, and how national interests are safeguarded. In the absence of such clarity, every deal may invite doubt. With transparency, privatization can become a collective project for reform, efficiency, and dignity.
Mile II must not be remembered as a monument to silence and cruelty. It must be transformed into a symbol of transparency, justice, and national renewal.
The government’s voice clear, honest, and accountable, is the only bridge between suspicion and trust, between colonial relics and democratic legacy.
By Alagi Yorro Jallow
Post Views: 29