By Dr Lamin Keita.
Mayor Talib Ahamed Bensouda, a key figure from the United Democratic Party (UDP), is withdrawing his candidacy and resigning as organizing secretary, marking a significant turning point in the party’s trajectory and having profound implications for its prospects, particularly in the lead-up to the 2026 elections. This development must be examined within the broader context of internal party dynamics, public perception, and the evolving political landscape, which has led to insults and grandiosity, forcing Bensouda to step down. Considering these factors is crucial to assessing how Mayor Bensouda’s withdrawal might influence the UDP’s ability to consolidate power and appeal to a diverse electorate in the coming years.
The withdrawal highlights underlying fissures within the UDP that could erode its organizational cohesion and sway undecided voters. In theory, political parties often rely on unity and a clear leadership vision to mobilize supporters effectively. The exit of a popular and prominent member may signal unresolved conflicts or dissatisfaction with strategic decisions made by the party leadership. Such internal strife can erode confidence among party members and voters alike, potentially leading to factionalism or a decline in morale, as has been witnessed so far. For the UDP, maintaining internal stability will be essential if it hopes to present itself as a viable alternative to President Barrow in 2026.
The UDP and the party leader need to ensure that Bensouda continues to play a key role in running the party. If I were Darboe, I would make it a priority to ensure that Bensouda does not resign from his position as organizer. This would greatly benefit Darboe’s legacy and justify accommodation for all involved.
Furthermore, the public’s perception of the UDP is likely to be affected by this withdrawal. In contemporary politics, voter behavior is influenced not only by policy platforms but also by perceptions of the strength and integrity of democratic leadership. The departure of an influential figure may raise questions about the party’s direction and capacity for effective governance. Because if one individual can cost you 10,000 votes, reconsider your political strategies. Opponents could capitalize on this event to portray the UDP as fragmented or lacking a clear purpose, thereby diminishing its electoral appeal.
Overlooking this moment of transition and withdrawal will serve as a political smoke screen. It demands and catalyzes necessary reforms within the UDP by prompting introspection about leadership selection processes, policy priorities, and engagement with grassroots constituencies. If UDP and Ousanou Darboe had intervened earlier and managed the reforms adeptly, such changes might have revitalized the party’s image and expanded its support base beyond traditional demographics.
However, new leaders emerging from this period could bring innovative ideas that resonate more effectively with younger voters or marginalized groups, which are forms and degrees of democracy.
While the withdrawal presents immediate challenges for unity and public confidence within the UDP, it also calls for self-reflection and renewal ahead of the 2026 elections.
The ultimate impact will depend mainly on how party leaders respond—whether they allow division to deepen or leverage this moment as an impetus for constructive change. As political competition intensifies over the coming months, demonstrating adaptability and cohesion will be critical determinants of whether UDP can regain momentum and secure an electoral victory in 2026.
