The following is culled from Burning Issues (FOROYAA Publication) Wednesday, 7
March 2001

*********************************

The Government Spokespersons' Committee's Press Conference

A Government without Self Confidence

Journalists were enthusiastically waiting for the first press conference by
the new Attorney General as member of the government's spokespersons
committee.  Many journalists were expecting new pronouncements on the status
of decree 89, constitutional amendments and the status of the report on the
April 10 and 11th incident.

When some people engaged in speculation by asserting that the former
attorney general was removed for advising the  government to engage in the
un-progressive enterprise of trying to amend some progressive provisions of
the 1997 constitution  and for rejecting the reports of the coroner and the
commission of  enquiry on the April 10th and 11th incident.  Foroyaa
indicated that governments operate on the basis of the principle of
collective responsibility and that no judgment should be passed on the
former attorney general until the position of the government changes because
of acceptance of new policies.  The meeting of the spokespersons' committee
provided an opportunity to determine whether there were any policy changes.

The lessons became clear that the policy changes were minimal after the
spokespersons' committee gave their views on certain burning issues of the
day.

ON DECREE  89

The spokespersons' committee tried to evade the question but eventually
indicated there is 60% assurance that it will be repealed but that they
would do so at their convenience; that no one would pressure them to repeal
it. This confirms that this government lacks integrity and self confidence.
In short, the members of the PPP and other parties are part of the APRC.

They are speaking in favour of the APRC. Some are even former ministers. On
the other hand, some members of the PPP and other banned parties are
praising their parties and are criticising the APRC here and abroad. These
open criticisms have not done anything to undermine the stability of the
country, on the contrary, the Gambian people are being offered a new
opportunity to learn from the debates which are unfolding. This is what
democracy is all about. It is the empowerment of the people with knowledge
so that they can make informed choices. Nothing can be healthier than to
have the PPP and the APRC sitting side by side to defend their own records
while parties which offer alternatives join in to try to defend their own
programmes. This will enable the people to judge who can best serve their
interest. If the APRC had integrity and self confidence it would have been
quick to repeal decree 89 and open up the national media for a greater
national debate. The party lacks confidence in its policies and manner of
government of the country otherwise it would never be afraid of any
opponent, especially the PPP. Only a party which lacks integrity and self
confidence can put a barrier to prevent the PPP leadership from standing on
a political platform to defend its record.

In fact Sam Sarr did question the constitutionality of decree 89. The
Attorney General indicated that under section 7 of the constitution decrees
are laws. Sam Sarr pointed out to him paragraph 6 of the second schedule of
the constitution which indicates that existing laws shall have effect with
such modifications, adaptations, qualifications and exceptions as may be
necessary to bring them into conformity with this constitution.

This is why decree 57 which calls for detention for three months without
trial and which abolished the viability of court action to demand the
appearance of prisoners cannot be implemented while section 19 of the
constitution establishes the 72 hours limit for detention without court
appearance. This is why Sam Sarr pointed out section 26 to the Attorney
General which states in no uncertain terms every citizen of the country
shall have the right to vote and stand for elections at genuine periodic
elections and that such rights shall not be  subjected to unreasonable
restrictions.

Nothing can be more unreasonable than a monarchically inclined and
extravagant APRC leadership to restrict others right to stand for election
on the basis that they were misrulers''. The APRC has lost all moral
justification for self righteous pronouncements. What it should do is to
open up the political atmosphere so that political parties will debate on
the viability of their programmes rather than on decree 89 and other
restrictions of freedoms.

On the proposed amendments, the Attorney General indicated that they will be
considered by the next meeting of the national Assembly. He defended the
appointment of chiefs instead of their elections as  respect for tradition.

One wonders what is traditional in having a president elected by the people
appointing and removing a chief as he desires. This is nothing but a
characteristic of absolute monarchy. The fact that the Spokes persons of the
Government continued to defend the appointment of chiefs instead of their
election confirms that the APRC is not a progressive party. It is a party
which aims to restore monarchical institutions of by gone colonial years.

Lastly, the Spokes persons indicated what was said at the national assembly
that government has accepted the reports of the coroner and commission of
enquiry.  They however indicated that prosecution is ruled out as an option
in dealing with the recommendations of the commissions of enquiry. They
invited recommendations from the public. FOROYAA calls on the government to
give a copy of the report to the parents of the children killed, the media
houses, GAMSU and the Human Rights Organisations and then open up discussion
with the parents and GAMSU on the contents of the reports. The media houses
will then inform the public of the contents and ask for public opinion.

To conclude, it should be clearly stated that if there was conspiracy of
silence the government would not have changed its position. The role of a
government is to serve the interest of the people. No government is fit to
exist which ignores the demands of the people. The people must therefore
know what their rights are and insist for them to be respected. Otherwise,
they should remove from office any government which ignores their demands.
Democracy means the sovereignty of the people. They create governments to
serve them and remove them if they are guilty of misrepresentation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------