INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Public Governance in Stalemate: Understanding Political Ambition,  
Civil Society Pressures, and Security Sector Apathy in the Gambia’s  
Transition  
*Kebba Gibba  
Department of Management Sciences, School of Business and Public Administration, University of The  
Gambia, The Gambia  
*Corresponding Author  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100168  
Received: 21 November 2025; Accepted: 28 November 2025; Published: 03 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This paper critically examines the persistent political stalemate characterizing emerging democracies where  
ambitious political movements, activist civil societies, and a demotivated security establishment coexist in  
uneasy tension. Drawing on recent sociopolitical developments in The Gambia and comparable contexts, the  
study explores how excessive political ambition and fragmented civil advocacy, coupled with institutional  
fatigue within the security sector, have collectively contributed to governance stagnation and fragile state  
resilience. Through a governance and security lens, the paper argues that while political pluralism and civic  
engagement are essential to democratic deepening, their uncoordinated and confrontational manifestations often  
undermine institutional credibility, state authority, and social cohesion (Carothers, 2002; Resnick & Signé,  
2025). The analysis concludes by proposing a recalibration of the political-civil-security interface, emphasizing  
constructive engagement, professional accountability, and strategic national dialogue as pathways toward  
sustainable democratic consolidation (Osborne, 2010; Linz & Stepan, 1996).  
Keywords: political stalemate, democratic consolidation, civil-military relations, New Public Governance, The  
Gambia, civil society, political movements, governance reform  
INTRODUCTION  
In many transitioning democracies, political transformation has too often been accompanied by a cycle of  
ambition, activism, and apathy—where political elites pursue personal or party-centred goals, civil societies  
become increasingly reactionary, and security institutions lose the motivation and neutrality necessary for  
professional performance (Carothers, 2002; Linz & Stepan, 1996). The Gambia’s post-authoritarian experience  
offers a telling example of this political paradox (Nabaneh, 2024). Once celebrated as a beacon of democratic  
renewal following the 2016 transition, the country now grapples with institutional stagnation, partisan  
fragmentation, and growing public disillusionment with governance and security institutions (Resnick & Signé,  
2025; Daffeh et al., 2024).  
The resurgence of politically ambitious movements and vocal civic groups-commonly observed in transitional  
democracies (Diamond, 1999; Bratton & van de Walle, 1997)-often intensifies competition within fragile  
political environments. Although these actors advocate accountability, their adversarial posture can deepen  
mistrust and polarization (Putnam, 2000; Fukuyama, 1995; Schedler, 2013). At the same time, the security  
sector, responsible for national stability, frequently suffers from low motivation, political interference, and  
stalled reforms (Hutchful, 2003; Bryden & Hänggi, 2005; Ball, 2002), resulting in a lack of strategic direction  
(Sedra, 2010).  
This paper revisits the notion of political stalemate as both a symptom and a cause of governance fatigue. It  
seeks to unpack how these three actors-political movements, civil societies, and security institutions-interact  
within the post-transition landscape, shaping the trajectory of national stability and democratic governance. By  
Page 2099  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
analysing these interdependent dynamics, the study contributes to broader debates on the challenges of sustaining  
reform momentum in fragile democracies, calling for renewed synergy, institutional professionalism, and  
balanced state-society relations (Daffeh et al., 2024; Osaghae, 2020).  
The authors’ own experiences, along with secondary research, serve as the basis for the article. Due to  
insufficient academic literature on Gambian politics and security studies, relevant data has also been gathered  
from interdisciplinary academic sources, grey literature, journalistic accounts, and social media (Yin, 2018).  
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework  
This analysis is grounded in the New Public Governance (NPG) framework, alongside theories of democratic  
consolidation and civil–military relations.  
NPG emphasises pluralism, networked collaboration, and shared responsibility between state and non-state  
actors (Osborne, 2010). It argues that public value is co-produced through coordination rather than control.  
However, in fragile democracies, this networked ideal is often undermined by mistrust, competition, and limited  
institutional capacity (Ogunwa & Ogunwa, 2023).  
From a democratic consolidation perspective, transitions from authoritarianism depend on institutional maturity  
and civic moderation (Linz & Stepan, 1996). More recent analyses highlight that Africa’s democratic trajectory  
exhibits both consolidation and regression, shaped by institutional deficits and governance crises (Muhammad  
& Fanny Kinge, 2024; Carothers, 2002).  
Civil–military relations theory (Huntington, 1957; Finer, 2006) underscores the tension between military  
professionalism and civilian political oversight. When political manipulation occurs without structural reform,  
morale erodes, capacity weakens, and neutrality collapses. The Gambian experience reflects this dilemma, where  
reforms initiated after 2017 remain incomplete and inconsistent (Resnick & Signé, 2025).  
Together, these frameworks reveal how ambition, activism, and apathy intersect to sustain political stalemate  
rather than enable democratic progress.  
METHODOLOGY  
This study employs a qualitative research design grounded in documentary analysis. It relies on secondary  
sources, including official government reports, policy documents, and scholarly literature on political transitions,  
civil society engagement, and security sector reform. Particular attention is given to The Gambia’s trajectory as  
a post-authoritarian and transitioning democracy, where institutional restructuring and governance reforms  
remain contested.  
Documentary analysis is used to systematically examine materials related to political movements, civil society  
organisations (CSOs), and the security sector. This approach enables a detailed exploration of how leadership  
ambitions, institutional fatigue, and civic activism intersect to shape political deadlock (Yin, 2018). The method  
is well suited for capturing complex, context-specific dynamics that are not easily quantifiable especially those  
concerning political behaviour, institutional culture, and governance reform processes.  
By situating the analysis within The Gambia’s ongoing transition, the study highlights relevant governance  
mechanisms such as security sector reform frameworks and emerging participatory dialogue platforms that  
illustrate both progress and persistent challenges. This methodological approach therefore provides a conceptual  
basis for understanding the broader implications of New Public Governance (NPG) practices within democratic  
transition settings.  
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS  
Political Ambition and Fragmentation  
In post-transition contexts, political ambition can either energise democracy or destabilise it. While the  
emergence of new movements signifies political pluralism, unchecked ambition often deteriorates into  
Page 2100  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
competition for power devoid of policy coherence (Carothers, 2002; Bratton, 2007). Recent regional research  
indicates that weak governance and institutional fragmentation continue to hamper democratic consolidation  
across Africa (Resnick & Signé, 2025).  
The Gambia’s political landscape after 2016 reflects this paradox. The proliferation of political parties and  
movements-each portraying itself as a guardian of democratic renewal—has fragmented governance. Rather  
than consolidating democratic gains, elites have pursued personal or factional agendas, leading to coalition  
breakdowns and legislative paralysis (Daffeh et al., 2024).  
Populist rhetoric has increasingly replaced policy engagement, with leaders mobilising citizens around  
grievances instead of governance issues (Olasunkanmi, 2024). This creates cycles of political noise but minimal  
institutional output. Ambition without reform orientation becomes an obstacle to state performance, turning  
democracy into a perpetual campaign cycle (Carothers, 2002).  
These dynamics also strain civil society, forcing activists into reactive positions and polarising public discourse.  
The cumulative effect is a governance vacuum in which leadership legitimacy erodes and citizen trust diminishes  
(Minko, 2023).  
Civil Society: Between Advocacy and Polarisation  
Civil society organisations (CSOs) are vital to democratic deepening through accountability, service delivery,  
and mobilisation (Diamond, 1999). However, contemporary studies emphasise that CSO behaviour in Africa is  
shaped by embedded political networks, donor dependencies, limited autonomy, and internal fragmentation  
(Schritt, 2020; Ogunwa & Ogunwa, 2023).  
During the 2016 democratic transition, Gambian CSOs mobilised citizens and defended electoral integrity. Yet,  
with political liberalisation, internal divisions and strategic misalignment emerged. Some CSOs aligned with  
political factions or donor priorities, compromising neutrality, while others prioritised visibility over sustained  
policy engagement (Minko, 2023).  
This “activism fatigue” reduces credibility and undermines influence. Social media activism, though vibrant,  
often amplifies polarisation rather than promoting constructive dialogue (Ajaegbu & Ajaegbu, 2024).  
A recalibrated civil society must embrace policy dialogue, coalition building, and self-regulation. Only through  
renewed professionalism and autonomy can CSOs maintain legitimacy as governance stakeholders.  
Reforms without Transformation in the Security Sector  
Security institutions form the backbone of national stability yet are often neglected in governance reform  
(Bryden & Hänggi, 2005). Analyses of Africa’s democratic landscape confirm that civil-military relations and  
SSR remain essential to resilience (Resnick & Signé, 2025; Hutchful, 2003).  
The Gambia’s SSR agenda sought to modernise and professionalise its forces. However, progress remains slow  
and inconsistent. Morale within the armed forces and police has been eroded by irregular reforms, weak welfare  
systems, and political patronage (Ball, 2002). Leadership turnover and recycling of retired officers further  
demotivated younger professionals.  
The absence of a coherent national security doctrine has left institutions reactive rather than strategic (Sedra,  
2010). Public trust remains fragile due to historical memories of repression, creating a dual perception of security  
forces as both necessary and suspect. An uninspired security force contributes to national uncertainty.  
Motivation, professionalism, and autonomy are essential for anchoring democratic stability (Huntington, 1957).  
The Governance Triangle: Ambition, Activism, and Apathy  
The interaction among political movements, civil societies, and security institutions creates a condition of  
institutional fatigue (Bratton, 2007). Regional studies affirm that fragile democracies are plagued by overlapping  
challenges: weak checks and balances, polarisation, and security governance gaps (Resnick & Signé, 2025).  
Page 2101  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Each actor functions in relative isolation while expecting others to drive reforms. Political actors rely on civil  
society for legitimacy and on security forces for control. CSOs rely on political openness and security stability.  
Security institutions rely on political direction and public trust. When these interdependencies break down,  
governance enters a cycle of blame, mistrust, and stagnation (Diamond, 1999; Carothers, 2002).  
The result is a fragile democracy that oscillates between hope and frustration. Institutions appear busy but  
achieve little. Policies are announced but rarely implemented. Citizens alternate between electoral enthusiasm  
and post-election cynicism. The Gambian case exemplifies this cyclical pattern of reform enthusiasm followed  
by reform fatigue (Daffeh et al., 2024).  
RECOMMENDATIONS  
A sustainable pathway out of political stagnation requires leadership committed to long-term institution-building  
rather than narrow electoral gains. As seen in Ghana’s steady democratic consolidation, reforms anchored in  
issue-based politics, internal party democracy, and civic education have strengthened governance by reducing  
personality-driven competition (Carothers, 2002; Olasunkanmi, 2024).  
Civil society organisations must also evolve beyond confrontational activism toward structured, evidence-based  
policy engagement. Kenya offers an encouraging example: following the 2010 constitutional reforms,  
coordinated CSO platforms such as the Kenya Human Rights Commission and Uwiano Peace Platform  
demonstrated how self-regulation, transparency, and policy-oriented advocacy can meaningfully influence  
governance outcomes (Minko, 2023).  
Security sector reform should prioritise professionalism, meritocracy, and improved welfare to reinforce  
impartiality. Liberia’s post-war restructuring-led by ECOWAS, the UN, and national authorities—illustrates  
how merit-based recruitment, leadership accountability, and depoliticisation can rebuild trust in the security  
forces (Hutchful, 2003; Ball, 2002). Strengthening inter-agency cooperation through joint policy councils and  
shared governance frameworks is equally essential. Rwanda’s integrated planning model, which aligns ministries  
and local governments through performance contracts and cross-sector coordination, demonstrates the potential  
of such mechanisms to reduce bureaucratic fragmentation (Osborne, 2010).  
Finally, inclusive national dialogue initiatives grounded in truth, reconciliation, and transparency can rebuild  
cohesion in divided societies. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and The Gambia’s  
recent Truth, Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) show how structured dialogue processes can  
foster healing, restore confidence in public institutions, and lay the foundation for democratic resilience (Linz &  
Stepan, 1996). Together, these reforms present a practical roadmap for revitalising governance and restoring  
public trust across African democracies.  
CONCLUSION  
The political stalemate facing The Gambia and comparable democracies is systemic, rooted in misalignments  
among political ambition, civic activism, and institutional inertia. Political movements pursue rhetorical reform,  
civil societies grapple with overreach and fragmentation, and the security sector remains demotivated and  
structurally constrained (Resnick & Signé, 2025; Diamond, 1999).  
Through NPG principles, renewed civil–military professionalism, and sustained institutional dialogue, tension  
can be transformed into cooperation. Democratic consolidation requires coordinated ambition, engagement, and  
accountability. Only through synergy and shared responsibility can fragile democracies move from cycles of  
impasse to durable governance and stability.  
REFERENCES  
1. Ajaegbu, O. O., & Ajaegbu, C. (2024). The new democratisation: Social media impact on the political  
process  
in  
Sub  
Saharan  
Africa.  
Frontiers  
in  
Communication,  
9,  
1394949.  
https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1394949  
Page 2102  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
2. Ball, N. (2002). Democratic governance in the security sector. UNDP.  
3. Bratton, M. (2007). Formal versus informal institutions in Africa. Journal of Democracy, 18(3), 96–110.  
4. Bratton, M., & van de Walle, N. (1997). Democratic experiments in Africa: Regime transitions in  
comparative perspective. Cambridge University Press.  
5. Bryden, A., & Hänggi, H. (Eds.). (2005). Security governance in post-conflict peacebuilding. Geneva  
Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF).  
6. Carothers, T. (2002). The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of Democracy, 13(1), 5–21.  
7. Daffeh, A., Wahid, M. A., & Bangura, A. K. (2024). Trends in democratic governance in West Africa:  
A case study of The Gambia, Sierra Leone and Ghana. International Journal of Research and Innovation  
in Social Science (IJRISS), 8(4), 1138–1147. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.804086  
8. Diamond, L. (1999). Developing democracy: Toward consolidation. Johns Hopkins University Press.  
9. Finer, S. E. (2006). The man on horseback: The role of the military in politics (2nd ed.). Routledge.  
10. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Free Press.  
11. Huntington, S. P. (1957). The soldier and the state: The theory and politics of civil–military relations.  
Harvard University Press.  
12. Hutchful, E. (2003). Security sector reform in Africa: A review of recent literature. African Security  
Review, 12(4), 5–16.  
13. Linz, J. J., & Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation. Johns Hopkins  
University Press.  
14. Minko, A. E. (2023). The role of civil society in promoting good governance in Africa: Challenges and  
opportunities. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 6, 952–958.  
https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2023.70575  
15. Muhammad, A., & Fanny Kinge, R. (2024). An overview of democratic consolidation and regression in  
Africa. Hasanuddin Journal of International Affairs, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.31947/hjirs.v4i01.32505  
16. Nabaneh, S. (2024). Prospects for democratic consolidation in The Gambia: A cup half full, half empty,  
or more? In Democratic Consolidation and Constitutional Endurance in Asia and Africa: Comparing  
Uneven Pathways (pp. 203–226). Oxford University Press.  
17. Ogunwa, S. A., & Ogunwa, F. A. (2023). Revisiting civil society and democratic governance in Africa:  
Present or absent in Nigeria? JPPUMA: Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan dan Sosial Politik UMA, 11(1), 36–  
48. https://doi.org/10.31289/jppuma.v11i1.9261  
18. Olasunkanmi, O. (2024). Towards democratic consolidation: Exploring the role of elections and political  
parties in achieving good governance in Nigeria and beyond. African Renaissance, 21(3), 193–208.  
19. Osborne, S. P. (2010). The new public governance: Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of  
public governance. Routledge.  
20. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon &  
Schuster.  
21. Resnick, D., & Signé, L. (2025). Prospects for democratic resilience in Africa during uncertain times.  
Brookings Institution.  
22. Schedler, A. (2013). The politics of uncertainty: Sustaining and subverting electoral authoritarianism.  
Oxford University Press.  
23. Schritt, J. (2020). Janus faced activists: The social and political embeddedness of civil society in Niger.  
Africa: Journal of the International African Institute.  
24. Sedra, M. (2010). Security sector reform in Afghanistan: The slide toward expediency. International  
Peacekeeping, 13(1), 94–110.  
Page 2103  
www.rsisinternational.org