Africa-Press – Gambia. Public concern is growing over the Gambia Football Federation’s (GFF) recent inauguration of a football facility in Nyakoi, reportedly costing D14 million.
Madi Jobarteh of the Edward Francis Small Centre for Rights and Justice described the facility as comprising a football pitch, a modest structure reportedly serving as dressing rooms and offices, squat toilets, and a wired perimeter fence.
He noted that the grounds are reportedly neither paved nor landscaped and that the site lacks walkways, structured seating, spectator pavilions, scoreboards, lighting infrastructure, and other amenities typically found in standard stadiums.
The reported cost has prompted calls for clarification regarding expenditure and procurement processes. Stakeholders are seeking information on the project’s funding source, specifications, bill of quantities, contractor selection, and certification of completion. Questions have also been raised about whether the contract was awarded through open competitive bidding and if the final cost represents value for money.
While recognising the importance of sports infrastructure development in rural communities, commentators emphasised that concerns focus on transparency and accountability rather than the provision of youth facilities.
Under international football governance principles, national federations operate autonomously but are expected to uphold financial transparency and accountability. Observers note that autonomy from political interference does not exempt such organisations from public scrutiny, especially in cases of significant financial expenditure.
Attention has also turned to the Ministry of Youth and Sports, the National Sports Council (NSC), and the National Youth Council (NYC), which oversee sports and youth development programmes. Critics say these agencies have not publicly addressed the concerns raised.
In the context of limited public resources and high youth unemployment, stakeholders argue that disclosure of procurement documents, engineering assessments, and financial breakdowns would clarify whether the project represents prudent use of funds.
Calls have been made for the GFF and relevant authorities to publish contractual documents, budget details, and supervision reports to address the controversy.
The GFF had not responded publicly to these concerns at the time of filing this report.
