Hamjatta,
Did I say that I will not answer any more question? There are thousand and
one issues that I still intend to take up. I am simply concentrating on the
1997 constitution so that we can reach a conclusion on this issue. You keep
on referring me to the National Consultative exercise. Can you not see that
this exercise was not unfavourable to the AFPRC. It was a coping strategy
for both the Gambian people and the AFPRC; a marriage of convenience. Now,
may I ask you which Gambians pressured the AFPRC to establish a National
Consultative Committee? Can you send me the name of the country which called
upon the AFPRC to establish the National Consultative Committee?
I have concrete facts of what led to the establishment of the National
Consultative Committee, and I will relay those facts at the appropriate
time.
My contention, which you continue to evade, is as follows: if external and
internal pressure could have led to the establishment of the 'ideal'
constitution within the shortest period of time, then why have that pressure
not been brought to bear since 1997 to eradicate the flaws which, to you,
should have led to the rejection of the constitution?
In your last piece, you insinuated that the July 22 Movement was pushing
people to support the 1997 Constitution. Were you in the country at the
time? Do you know that these people were campaigning vehemently for the
rejection of 1997 constitution because it stood for multiparty system whilst
up to the dissolution of the July 22nd Movement they were advocating for a
no-party system? Many people in Jarra and Kiang would tell you what those
whom we sent to explain the provisions of the constitution to them had to
undergo in hands of the members of the July 22nd Movement and the
traditional authorities. That is a history we are yet to tell. However, it
will be a narration that will be easy to make because the people will serve
as our witnesses. Our reporters who engaged in what we dubbed as a FOROYAA
Civic Education Programme, to give legitimacy to our action, were able to
convince people by explaining the guarantees of a multiparty system and the
impossibility of declaring a one-party state under such a constitution,
whilst the members of the July 22nd Movement were telling them to reject the
constitution so that it will be clear that the people did not want a
multiparty system. The confrontations were sometimes intense as some of the
members of this Movement questioned whether we had the legitimate right to
carry on a civic education programme.
Frankly speaking, I will be very surprise if you were to acknowledge that
you were in the country at the time and still maintain that the July 22nd
Movement was campaigning for the approval of the draft constitution when it
first emerged. You see, when people are not engaged in practice it becomes
difficult to understand reality. It becomes too easy to speculate. This is
precisely the reason why I wanted to give a historical account so that the
things we have not put on paper will become evident.
Let me inform you that because of our objectivity, embassies, NGOs and many
others supported the production of the booklets while others took up the
responsibility of explaining their content to the people. Sometimes people
changed decisions by minutes. This became more rampant when the July 22nd
Movement, Jawara, Sheriff and Assan Musa all found themselves in the same
camp calling for a 'no' vote. At that stage, those who were suspicious of
the July 22nd Movement thought it was best to vote against what they stood
for; and those who were also opposed to Jawara, Sheriff and Assan Musa also
saw the need to vote against what they stood for.
Realising that the 'yes' vote was gaining the upper hand, the AFPRC
leadership decided to make comments which gave the impression that they were
in support, but cannot be said to have really campaigned decisively for a
'yes' vote.
Similarly, the July 22nd Movement found it necessary to change its position
when the other forces intensified their campaign for a 'no' vote.
The referendum, therefore, witnessed a political situation which would
require a researcher to fully study, comprehend and explain. It was not as
simple as you try to make it to be.
I will come back to this in the historical account that I promise to give at
a more convenient time.
Hamjatta, on the question of the expansion of the democratic space, there is
no Gambian who will deny the fact that Gambians are now more interested in
how this country is governed than ever before; debate in the National
Assembly has taken a new character where it is being abundantly made clear
that they are the tax payers. Recently, public outcry led to national
representatives abandoning claims for allowances; that members of the
National Assembly are more powerful and vocal today than ever before. People
can see that they determine the salaries of the executive and themselves.
They approve the stationing of troops abroad after debate in the National
Assembly. They analyse international agreements and ratify them. They talk
about crude oil deals and human rights violations which are broadcast over
radio. They attack corruption and expose findings by the Auditor General
which are covered by newspapers and exposed on the national radio. When
Shyngle Nyassi was abducted the opposition parties came together and issued
declarations and imposed so much pressure that even the State denied any
connection to his abduction and was taken back home by his abductors in
secret. The courts could hold the heads of the prisons for contempt of court
in refusing to release prisoners as ordered by the courts. The Law Reform
Commission has written to political parties, National Assembly members and
so on and so forth to request a proposal for a review of the constitution.
Dr Saine's proposal is being covered by the press in The Gambia. The
Independent Electoral Commission has decided to review constituency
boundaries and has recommended the reduction of the five Foni constituencies
into two, expunge Janjangburey Constituency and adhere to the principle of
equal representation for equal number of inhabitants as prescribed by the
constitution. Women organisations are combating gender discrimination.
It is very clear that the Gambian people are becoming more informed and this
regime is finding it more difficult to govern in the old way. This is
obviously why the July 22nd Movement had to be disbanded. The Shyngle Nyassi
case had made it abundantly clear that forces existed in the country that
will not tolerate the operation of a force outside the ambit of the law. I
have no doubt if the forces that are interested in expanding the democratic
space in the country collaborate more on the basis of principle, the
democratic space will continue to expand irrespective of whether the
government in power wields it or not.
This, however, is beside the point. My task was to deal with two issues -
the 1997 constitution and the Koro Ceesay case. I believe our role in
fostering the restoration of constitutional rule in The Gambia is abundantly
clear. A memorandum was addressed to the Constitutional Review Commission to
give our view on the type of constitution that should guide the affairs of
the country in the Second Republic. This is what we are accountable for.
This is what we could be judged by. If anybody wants to challenge our
opinion, one would have to read and challenge the views expressed in the
memorandum.
The draft constitution is a by-product of the will of those who governed and
what had been gathered from the rest of the population. It was left to each
Gambian to review it and make a decision. All Gambians had the prerogative
to explain its provisions to others. We took up the challenge posed by Radio
1FM to give our views on the draft. We also published booklets to help
people have a better understanding. We have done our part. May be others
should now explain what part they played and why they did so.
I guess I will now proceed to deal with all the other questions raised by
you and Saul, the first being the relation between the indemnity provision
and the Coroner's Act. I hope that this would lead to a clarification of
matters dealing with Koro Ceesay.
Once these two issues are clear, I will be willing to treat any other
question, especially comments made by Saul about Suwaibou Conateh, the 1987
incident at Serrekunda School, PDOIS' participation in the 1996/97
elections, my political standing in Serrekunda and all other peripheral
issues.
Your questions regarding my attitude to Jawara and whether I still hold
anger for what may have happened to me personally and so on and so forth
will all be addressed. I hope this will serve as an assurance that the
debate is not being amputated. I am just yielding to your original
contention that the basic concerns are the 1997 constitution and Koro
Ceesay.
Greetings.
Halifa Sallah.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
