The following is from Burning Issues (FOROYAA Publication) Friday, 16 February
2001
****************************

The IEC, The Byelections, The Court Case And The Political Parties


  Since the IEC issued a notice of By elections for Central Baddibu and
Kiang East constituencies scheduled for 31st March 2001, some people and
political parties have been busy searching for candidates before 1st March
which is the date scheduled for nomination. The campaign period for the
candidates is scheduled from 15 to 29  March 2001.

It is ofcourse a constitutional provision that by election should be held
within 90 day days should the seat of a National Assembly becomes vacant.
The unfortunate thing, however, is that there are some constitutional issues
surrounding the IEC which have to be clarified.

The Present IEC members have instructed the administrative secretary to
address the following letters to the various political parties:
''I have been directed to invite all registered political parties to a
meeting to be held at the Commission's Conference Room on Wednesday,
February 14, 2001 at 1400 hours.
Matters of importance to all major stakeholders relating to the by-elections
in Central Baddibu and Kiang East Constituencies, will be discussed.
Political parties are urged to limit their delegation to not more than 3
representatives from the executive echelon of their party.''

The important point to note however is that the president's decision to
remove Bishop Tilewa Johnson and Imam fatty is conceived by many to be
unconstitutional. This is why the Supreme Court has to clarify matters.
Some political parties have decided to participate in elections before the
Supreme Court decision. PDOIS has communicated to the present IEC that it
cannot participate in any of its programmes unless the Supreme Court makes
its decision regarding the constitutionality of the removal of Bishop Tilewa
Johnson and Imam Fatty.

The State Of Things

When Bishop Johnson was removed, all the parties except the APRC conceived
the act as unconstitutional. They were only different in their approaches to
dealing with the issue. PDOIS favours an approach which will not be viewed
as ruling party versus opposition. PDOIS initially called on Bishop Johmson
and Imam Fatty to take up the matter with the courts so as to maintain their
independence failing which one of the parties could take the matter to court
so as to prevent the issue from being seen as an opposition issue and be
seen as a national one.

On the other hand, UDP and NRP had taken court action before discussion was
effected among political parties as to the best way forward. Mr. Ousainou
Darboe and Mrs. Mariam Denton are the counsels of the UDP and NRP. The
various positions have been heard in chambers and the judge is to make his
judgement any time. FOROYAA is waiting for the judgement and would communicate
all developments.

PDOIS' position however remains the same. It has indicated that until the
Supreme court makes a decision, it will not be able to respond to any
invitation made by the current IEC. This is a matter of principle. PDOIS
maintains that the removal of the IEC chairman is unconstitutional and
weakens the democratisation process. The best way to safeguard the IEC from
future encroachment is to wait for the Supreme court decision to give full
respect to its judgement

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

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