PDOIS, has once more demoinstrated that it is a party of intergrity and
knowledge, the fact that they alone are concentrating our minds to the most
fundamental issuse of the day confirms my assertions. At a time when
peoples thought derail and focus on the issue of Jawara PDOIS is
concentrating our mind to the essence. We must therefore show deligence and
avoid the euphoria and focus on the institutions that are central to the
elections we cannot allow ourselves to be diverted only to cry foul
afterwards. I think the alliance people are calling for most not be seen as
an end but only a means , in fact the very reason why there is a need for
alliance is the simple fact that Jammeh does not operate by the rule of law
in fact he operates like a monarch and have all his cronies such as Tamsir
Jallow, Tombong saidy AND FATOUMATTA jAHUMPA STRUGGLING TO DEFEND HIS
USUALLY UNTENEABLE POSITION.
To corect his acts of I do not care attitude and his disregard for the
constitution is therefore the essence of any alliance. The constitutional
anomaly he created has angered all genuine democrats, in fact had he abided
by the rule of law and people voted him then there would no have been any
need, but his arrogance is of the essence for an opposition alliance.
As for PDOIS they should be rest assured that people are no longer sleeping
and any attempt to tarnish their good image would be in vain, many of us
appreciate that their are those that will always try to thwart the truth and
try to show that they are anti alliance we know that is false IN EVERY
SITUATION IT HAS TO BE JUDGED AND THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT YOU LOT ARE DOING
WE, shall continue to rely on your gidance and honest judgement we know come
the dawn of awareness you shall be the leaders. After all we know OJS,
JAWARAS, DARBOES etc are no the the solution to the creation of a genuine
democracy.
After all just like Tamsir Jallow now Oj never saw anything wrong with
Jawara in fact he use to praise sing him so much you would think the guy is
a prophet, when he has accomplished absolutely nothing for three decades. So
PDOIS continue the good work we look forward to more postings as they are
always elightining.
SAUL
>From: Pasamba Jow <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: PDOIS'letter to the IEC on qualifications to be candidates for
> elections
>Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:54:06 +0000
>
>Letter To IEC On The Qualifications To Be A Candidate For Elections
> The Gambia is going through the most delicate period of its
>history. All
> political forces are now operative and the IEC is being called
>upon to give
> backing to what is being said on political platforms. Now, more
>than ever
> the integrity of the IEC is hanging on the balance. What it does
>or fails
> to do can tip the balance on one side or the other. It is
>therefore
> absolutely essential for the IEC to remain an independent
>institution which
> cannot be subjected to the dictate of any authority. The duty of
>the IEC is
> to conduct free, fair and transparent elections.
> The questions as to who is qualified to be a presidential
>candidate is
> being debated. Some have called on the IEC to be mindful that
>some
>people
> have been disqualified from being candidates in presidential
>elections. The
> IEC must not allow itself to be hooked by the diverse propaganda
>schemes of
> the various political parties. It should maintain its bearing and
>do only
> what is reasonable and justifiable under the constitution and
>other laws of
> the Gambia. The IEC should therefore strengthen its branch for
>legal advise
> as we move towards the elections.
> We have seen the need to inject fresh thinking into the debate
>that is
> unfolding on political platforms and the national media. It is
>important
> for the Commission to know where its powers start and end.
>Section
>39
> subsection (2) of the Elections Decree does state categorically
>that:
> A person who desires to be nominated as a candidate for any
>elective
> office shall, before the acceptance of his nomination papers
>satisfy the
> qualifications stipulated for that office in the constitution,
>this Decree
> and any other law.
> The Elections Decree has indicated what should happened during
>the
> nomination of candidates for president. In short, when a date and
>place is
> appointed by a Returning Officer to receive the nomination papers
>of those
> who deem themselves to be qualified under section 42 of the
>Elections
> Decree five thousand voters must put their names on the
>nomination
>form
> with two hundred voters being drawn from each administrative
>area.
>If this
> is not satisfy the returning officer should reject the nomination
>papers of
> the applicant. The candidate is also required to sign a
>declaration
> indicating the following:
> I, the undersigned, Am the Candidate to whom this nomination
>paper
> relates and I hereby state that I am willing to stand for
>election
>to the
> office of president of the Republic of The Gambia. I hereby
>declare that I
> am qualified to contest as a candidate in the presidential
>elections and
> that I am not disqualified to be elected as president of the
>Republic of
> The Gambia for any of the reasons mentioned in the constitution
>or
>other
> law relating thereto.
> Without submitting such a declaration, the Returning officer
>should reject
> the nomination papers. Thirdly, the candidate should deposit
>D10,
>000
> dalasi.
> According to section 45 subsection (2) of the Elections Decree:
>The
> Returning officer shall, on receipt of the nomination paper and
>other
> relevant documents, make entries of the date and time on which
>the
> nomination paper and other relevant documents were delivered.
> Section 46 (1) adds that where: a Returning officer satisfies
>himself
> that all constitutional and other legal requirements for the
>nomination of
> a candidate have been complied with, he or she shall accept the
>nomination
> paper and complete in duplicate the acceptance of nomination.
> Section 47 (1) of the Elections Decree adds that:
> Where the Returning officer finds, after examining the
>nomination paper
> and other documents, that the particulars appearing in such
>nomination
> paper and other documents do not comply with the constitutional
>and other
> legal requirements for the nomination of a candidate, he shall
>reject the
> nomination paper and complete in duplicate the rejection of
>nomination
> form....
> Section 47 subsection (3) of the Elections Decree adds:
> The rejection of a nomination paper shall be without prejudice
>to the
> delivering of a fresh nomination paper, provided that the
>subsequent
> nomination paper is delivered before the close of nomination.
> Here it is clear that the decree is more concerned with procedure
>than
> transforming the Returning officer into a judge who will
>determine
>whether
> a person is a citizen or has been disqualified in any way and
>manner that
> would require some judicial enquiry to determine right and wrong.
>This
> clearly falls within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This
>becomes
> absolutely clear when we subject the terms for raising objections
>against
> the nomination papers under review.
> Section 49 subsection (1) states:
> A registered voter may object to a nomination paper on all or
>any of the
> following grounds but on no other ground-
> (a) that the description of the candidate is insufficient to
>identify the
> candidate;
> (b) that the nomination paper does not comply with or was not
>delivered in
> accordance with the provisions of the constitution or this
>Decree;
> (c) that it is apparent from the contents of the nomination paper
>that the
> candidate is not capable of being elected to the office to which
>his
> nomination paper relates.
> Here the grounds for objection relates to the failure to abide by
>simple
> procedures. It does not require the IEC to constitute a revising
>court for
> adjudication on constitutional matters.
> It is therefore important for the IEC to bear in mind that
>section
>127 has
> stated categorically that:
> The Supreme court shall have an exclusive original
>jurisdiction-
> (a) for the interpretation or enforcement of any provision of
>this
> constitution other than sections 18 to 33 and section 36 (5); (
>which
> relate to fundamental rights and freedoms)
> (b) or any question as to whether or not any person was validly
>elected to
> the office of president or was validly elected to, or vacated his
>or her
> seat in, the National Assembly...
> It is obvious that section 62 subsection (3) has been a subject
>of
> controversy. This provision does require interpretation which
>falls within
> the jurisdiction of the IEC. Allow us to draw some salient
>points.
>Section
> 62 subsection (3) reads:
> A person who, while holding public office in The Gambia has
>been
> (a) compulsorily retired, terminated or dismissed from such
>office; or
> (b) has been found guilty of any criminal offence by any court or
>tribunal
> established by law; or
> (c) has been found liable for misconduct, negligence, corruption
>or
> improper behaviour by any Commission or Committee of inquiry
>established by
> law shall not be qualified for election as president....
> A careful reading of the provision would reveal many fundamental
>questions.
> Could it be said that the person who belongs to a government
>which
>was
> overthrown was holding public office when subjected to a
>commission of
> enquiry.? Secondly, the constitution came into force on 16th
>January 1997.
> If transitional provisions do not exist to make the provisions of
>section
> 62 subsection (3) applicable with retroactive effect can they be
>applied
> retroactively.? This is not a simple procedural question that the
>IEC can
> answer. This would require interpretation by the Supreme court.
> Take section 90 which has been referred to by some. The relevant
>portion
> being referred to is section 90 subsection (1) (e) which reads:
> No person shall be qualified for election as a member of the
>National
> Assembly if he or she has been found by the report of a
>commission
>or
> committee of enquiry, (the proceedings of which have been held
>and
> published in accordance with the relevant law) to be incompetent
>to hold
> public office by reason of having acquired assets unlawfully or
>defrauded
> the state or misused or abused his or her office or wilfully
>acted
>in a
> manner prejudicial to the interests of the state, and the
>findings
>have not
> been set aside on appeal or judicial review.
> It is clear that if a person is to be disqualified for election
>as
> president on account of not being qualified to be a member of the
>National
> Assembly on the grounds stipulated by section 90 subsection (1)
>(e), the
> Commission must state that the person is incompetent to hold
>public office.
> Suffice it to say, section 90 subsection (2) (c) sub-paragraph
>(ii) states:
>
> The period of disqualification under paragraph (d) or (e) of
>subsection
> (1) shall not exceed five years after the expiring of any period
>during
> which the person concerned has been debarred from holding public
>office.
> Hence, the IEC would have to have original records of the
>Commission to
> come to certain truths which is beyond its jurisdiction. Hence
>the
>period
> of debaring a person from holding public office must be
>stipulated
> It is therefore important for the IEC to concentrate on
>procedural
>issues
> and leave substantive issues of constitutional law to be
>interpreted by the
> Supreme court. It should not allow itself to be dragged into the
>province
> of the supreme court.
> By a copy of this letter, we also wish to call on the executive
>not to
> appear to be giving instructions to the IEC on its political
>platforms. The
> country needs standards. This is no time to govern by sentiments.
>Positions
> of leadership are positions of public trust. Rivalry between past
>and
> present regimes will not serve any purpose. There is no need to
>exclude any
> one by draconian means. What is required is to empower the people
>and leave
> them to express their sovereign power to decide who will manage
>the affairs
> of the country. Power belongs to no single individual. It never
>did! It
> never will! Power most fittingly belongs to the people. Whoever
>is
> entrusted with the responsibility of managing the affairs of the
>country
> should do so to promote the common good.
> To the Public in General
> We again wish to reiterate that the country needs a transition
>programme of
> one year to be led by an executive who can be trusted by all
>sides
>of the
> political spectrum, an executive which will be committed to
>carrying out
> its duty without fear or favour, affection or ill will, an
>executive which
> will pioneer constitutional and legal reforms that would
>eradicate
>all
> forms of political exclusion, an executive which will conduct
>civic
> education to ensure that there is no place for intimidation or
>inducement
> in our body politic, an executive which will free the national
>media to be
> utilised by political parties on a weekly basis not to insult but
>to
> explain their programmes to the people, an executive which will
>be
>capable
> of winning the respect and trust of the security forces and
>facilitate
> their re-orientation to be the true defenders of the sovereignty
>rights and
> properties of the people, an executive which will not hunger for
>power or
> wealth so as to overstay after a year, an executive which will be
>free to
> create peace and stability and call for fresh elections so as to
>ensure the
> undiluted choice of the people in free and fair elections that
>will earn
> the recognition of the whole world. This is the way forward.
>Those
>who try
> to cover up this way forward and continue to perpetuate the view
>that PDOIS
> has made it a precondition to lead a coalition or detach itself
>are just
> misleading people. The truth is too clear to be distorted. Gambia
>needs a
> democratic transition. This can be six months or a year so that
>all
> constitutional and legal instruments, democratic institutions and
>practices
> are put in place to make The Gambia free and stable for all
>Gambians.
> An Alliance for Democratic Transition is what the country needs
>not an
> alliance to share power. This is the simple and elementary truth.
>If we
> recognise it, the truth will set us free. If we ignore it we will
>only live
> to regret. History is again making its call to duty. It will be
>the final
> judge of all us. It will decide who the genuine patriots and who
>the power
> seekers are. Each of us must decide the final outcome by our
>practice.
> For The Central Committee
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>You may also send subscription requests to
>[log in to unmask]
>if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your
>full name and e-mail address.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
