SLPP Responds to Musa Tarawally’s Lawyers’ Seven-Day Ultimatum
The SLPP says it will maintain its position in the dispute with Musa Tarawally despite a legal demand seeking the withdrawal of a party notice concerning his status.
SLPP National Publicity Secretary Moses Sellu Mambu said the party would not respond to Tarawally’s lawyers, arguing that the party is managing the matter through its established processes.
The position follows a Sept. 19 public notice signed by Mambu directing SLPP officials, members and other stakeholders not to conduct official business with Tarawally using the party’s name, authority, logo or structures without authorization from party leadership.
Tarawally’s lawyers, Jengo, Sam & Partners, subsequently wrote to Mambu demanding that the notice be withdrawn. In their Sept. 21 letter, the lawyers characterized the notice as defamatory and beyond Mambu’s authority and argued that their client had not been subjected to the party’s disciplinary procedures.
The lawyers gave the party seven days to provide details supporting the notice, identify the party organ that authorized it, withdraw the publication and issue a correction and apology.
They also warned that they could pursue legal and regulatory remedies if the demands were not met. Those proposed actions include civil proceedings and complaints to the Political Parties Registration Commission and regional human rights bodies.
At the center of the dispute is Tarawally’s political membership.
On Sept. 17, SLPP National Chairman Jimmy Batilo Songa instructed Tarawally to stop presenting himself as an SLPP member or flagbearer aspirant. Songa cited information from the Citizens Democratic Party that reportedly identified Tarawally as still being a CDP member.
Tarawally disputes that position. He says he resigned from the CDP in June 2018 and subsequently returned to the SLPP. His lawyers also maintain that he is a paid-up SLPP member, a Grand Chief Patron and a national delegate who participated in the party’s 2025 National Delegates Conference.
The SLPP’s account and Tarawally’s account therefore remain directly opposed. Public reporting reviewed for this article does not independently establish which membership record is legally controlling.
Mambu has also indicated that the party is handling the matter internally and that public commentary should not be allowed to interfere with efforts to manage the dispute.
The immediate issue is now whether the SLPP will respond to the lawyers’ seven-day demand or maintain its current position while the broader disagreement over Tarawally’s membership is addressed through party or legal channels.
For now, the SLPP’s public position remains that Tarawally should not represent himself as an SLPP member or flagbearer aspirant, while Tarawally and his legal representatives continue to challenge that position.