-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Foroyaa Burning Issues
From: "Amie Sillah" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, September 20, 2004 1:01 pm
To: [log in to unmask]
Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issues
Issue No. 74/2004, 13-15 September, 2004
Editorial
THE STRIFE FOR QUALITY EDUCATION
The results of the Gambia Basic Certificate Examination have been
announced. However the Department of State for Education could not but
admit that performance has dropped particularly in Mathematics and
English. The pass rate in the four core subjects this year are as
follows: English 13.06 % (1/8), Mathematics 10.00 % (1/10), Science
18.16% (1/6) and Social and Environmental Studies 42.22 %. The slogan of
the Department is for education to be accessible, affordable and of good
quality. While a lot has been achieved regarding access, affordability
and quality are still a thorn in the flesh. Education, especially senior
secondary school education is beyond the means of many parents. Many
students have to stay away from school for some time during the academic
year, which has effect on their performance. Secondly, even though the
building structures are there the facilities are lacking. The students
lack textbooks mainly because they cannot afford them. Teachers lack
teaching materials because schools lack adequate funds. Thirdly, the
size of the class is still a problem. Sometimes classes take up to 60
students. This makes teaching less effective and affects performance.
Fourthly, the double shift system, which allows for internal expansion
has serious flaws. The teacher gets exhausted after the morning session
and his or her performance is low in the afternoon compared to the
morning. The double shift system only eases the problem. It cannot serve
as a solution. The quality of teachers is a problem. A lot of teachers
within the educational system are unqualified. This has a negative
effect on the quality of education. Sixthly, teachers need motivation to
teach well and remain within the educational system. Very few Gambians
are motivated to continue as teachers. They are always looking for other
avenues. Teachers often complain of condition of teaching particularly
in the rural areas where even salaries are paid late. Unless the
problems outlined above are addressed poor performance in schools will
continue to be the order of the day.
OCEAN BAY HOTEL
Generator in Trouble?
Reports reaching FOROYAA talks that a new one-megawatt generator
belonging to Ocean Bay Hotel “exploded” and suffered serious damage.
This put it out of use. The cost of generator is about 20 million
dalasis. The reports say because the generator is inoperative NAWEC has
diverted supply to ensure electricity supply. What is more interesting
about the reports is that it is claimed that a second generator, which
could have served the hotel, has been taken to Kanilai for use. The
President is reported to promise to provide a replacement. We approached
the Social Security and Housing Finance Corporation for comment but
after several weeks there is yet to be comment. We hope that now that
the reports are public the Social Security and Housing Finance
Corporation will speak out.
DRIVERS COMPLAIN OF NEW POLICY
By Pateh Baldeh
The Gambia Transport Association has been accused by drivers plying the
Brikama/Serrekunda route of changing the rules of the car park without
informing them. Many drivers who talked to our reporter said it was just
on Friday the 10th September 2004 when they were asked by the
Association members and the Police in Brikama not to reach the car park.
The reason for doing so was not spelt out to them until late in the day
when they were informed that work on the car park was soon to commence;
but that until Tuesday 14th September 2004 they said they had not seen
any work going on in the said car park. They complained that it was the
Association in collaboration with t! he Police who have taken the
decision and failed to ask them their opinion about the whole issue.
They said they are also forced to pay duty to the Association amounting
to D2.00 which they claim should be done on a daily basis but that they
paid twice or even more as some of them were asked to pay after every
trip. They said that the policy is a bad one because in Serrekunda they
pay only once in the day. The system they claim has prevented many of
the drivers from going to Brikama and in fact caused a serious shortage
of transport on Tuesday 14th September 2004. The drivers say that they
are not also allowed to drive from Brikama to Westfield Junction and
that the Bundung Car Park does not favour them in getting enough
passengers to meet the cost of fuel. They claim that the payment they
are doing to the Transport Association should not be compulsory on them,
because some of them are not members of the association. Our reporter
went to the Association members responsible of the car park but they
declined to make comment on the issue. Passengers also complained that
they are suffering a great deal because of the new policy; that this is
creating a lot of transport difficulties and making them lose their
products as some of them are vendors traveling from Brikama to the
Serrekunda market. The passengers indicated the burden of economic
hardship on them is increasing every day. Editor: When the Police PRO
was contacted he denied that they were enforcing the payment of the D2.
He explained that at a meeting of members of the GTCA they agreed to
contribute a token sum for developmental purposes. He however
acknowledged that contributions cannot be compulsory. The role of the
police can only be persuasive, encouraging drivers to pay. FOROYAA will
continue to monitor the situation. Needless to say, no one can
compulsorily take money from any other person unless it is provided for
by law. Collecting money to contribute to development is noble but once
compulsion is used without the backing of law the act becomes unlawful.
SARE NGAI WARD
BY-ELECTION
Sare Ngai Ward in the Wuli West Constituency, Upper River Division is to
have a by -election next month. The IEC has issued a press release
stating that following the notification from the Basse Area Council of a
vacancy in the Council, will hold a By-Election for the Sare Ngai Ward,
on Thursday 4th October 2004. Nomination of candidates will be on Monday
27th September 2004 at the IEC Regional Office in Basse. Campaign is
from Wednesday 29th September to Tuesday 12th October 2004.
TRIAL OF SEEDY FANNEH CONTINUES
By Pateh Baldeh
The trial of Seedy Fanneh is a test case for human rights protection and
the effectiveness of avenues for redress. Readers would recall that
Seedy Fanneh, a resident of Brikama Madina had lodged a complaint to the
Inspector General of Police after being allegedly tortured by the
Brikama Police. Despite his complaint he was taken to court and on
Tuesday 24th August 2004 when he appeared before the Magistrates Court
in Brikama he applied for an adjournment. He told the court he had a
lawyer who should take his case and was granted adjournment to the 13th
September 2004. Mr. Fanneh appeared in court on the 13th day of
September. When the case was mentioned for hearing the magistrate
informed the court that Lawyer Ousainou Darboe, counsel for the accused
had written a letter to the court applying for adjournment. The letter
was given to the prosecutor to read. The magistrate sought his opinion.
He had no objection for adjournment. The case was then adjourned to the
29th September 2004, with the same bail condition. FOROYAA will
continue to inform its readers of any development in this case.
The Paul Commission
Sitting of Monday 13th Sept. 2004
By Aboulie G.Dibba
Testifying before the Paul Commission on Monday, Pa Ousman Jammeh
indicated that from July 1994 to October 1994 he was Deputy Permanent
Secretary at the Department of State for Agriculture, and as Permanent
Secretary at the same department. He was moved to Lands and Local
Government as Permanent Secretary from April to October 2001 and then
from October 2001 to June 2002, he went on a special leave. Mr. Jammeh
testified that this period is called special leave because he was given
a dismissal letter and when he was re-instated, it was indicated in the
re-instatement letter that that period be considered a special leave
without pay. He indicated that when he was re-instated, he was Permanent
Secretary at the Department of State for Agriculture and that in April
2003, he was moved to Works, Construction and Infrastructural
Development.!
Continuing his testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that from 1994 to date,
he has no other source of income except that during his special leave,
he received assistance from friends and relatives. He indicated that the
highest cash assistance he received during this period was US $500. He
pointed out that even though he engaged in farming, it is for
consumption only and at times he does sell but that too is below D5,
000. He testified that he is not a shareholder of any company and that
he has no investment whatsoever whether in treasury bills or petty
business. He indicated that he has not benefited from loan whether
government, institutions or individuals between 1994 to date and has not
sold any family property where he derived income. Continuing his
testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that sometimes he made savings from his
per diems, which goes to finance his building project in Kotu South. He
pointed out that at times he puts these savings in a bank account and
sometimes he spends them. He indicated that he paid his per diem in his
bank account. He said he sometimes saved between 30 % to 75% of his per
diem depending on the hospitability of his hosts. He pointed out that
between 1996 to date, he could not recall any time that he returned from
a trip without saving. Mr. Jammeh testified that his salary goes
directly to the bank and that he is banking with Standard Chartered
Bank. He indicated that July 1994 to date, he could not recollect anyone
paying money into his account. He is to produce his statement of
accounts within seven working days. Testifying further, Mr. Jammeh
pointed out that his income does not come to him directly even though he
used some of the income for family up-keep which he benefits from. Mr.
Jammeh indicated that his wife was on scholarship studies and after the
scholarship programme, she was engaged on work and studies and that when
she was returning home in 2002, she came with some money but how much he
could not tell. He pointed out that he has never sent a butut to the
wife; that instead, the wife was sending him money. Continuing his
testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that the vehicle under self in the
declaration form, the Renault 5 and 11 belong to him but that the third
vehicle was shipped by his wife even though he registered it in his name
because the wife was not town at the time. He was asked to furnish the
Commission with the necessary document for the shipping of the car
within the same 7 working days. Mr. Jammeh testified that his wife has a
plot of land in Sanyang and that is where she put the funds she came
with. Mr. Jammeh pointed out that during his time as Permanent
Secretary, Department of State for Lands and Local Government, Mr. Nai
Ceesay was the Secretary of State for Lands and Local Government. Mr.
Jammeh indicated that he left the department before the crisis on the
three layouts started. He indicated that he has not been allocated a
plot in the three layouts, and neither his relatives nor friends ha! ve
been allocated; that he has never appeared before any committee or
security agent for questioning regarding the three layouts. Mr. Jammeh
testified that between 1994 to date, he was not allocated land and that
he did not purchase any but pointed out that he has three landed
properties in Brikama and he is presently staying in one of them which
is a three bedroom bungalow; that in the second one his sister built a
two bedroom and parlour and she is living there; the third he bought at
a time when the three sides were already fenced and then he completed
the third remaining side. He pointed out that other than fencing, no
work is taking place at the third property. Mr. Jammeh indicated that in
his Kotu South property which is a storey building with three bedrooms
on the top floor and one bedroom, sitting room, kitchen and toilet. He
indicated that he completed the deck early this year (2004) and that
work is going on the second floor in which he invested D150, 000 from
foun! dation to the present level.
At this stage, he was asked by the Chairman of the Commission whether
this D150, 000 includes materials and labour, which he answered in the
positive. He was asked to furnish the Commission with all the receipts
for the purchase of materials within the same 7 working days. Mr. Jammeh
indicated that that his wife built two small rooms in her Sanyang
property and that she did no development in her Bijilo property. Mr.
Jammeh denied owning any property in Busumbala and that he does not
undertake any development in the family property in Brikama. Continuing
his testimony, Mr. Jammeh indicated that his wife operates a savings
account and he has never given her any money to deposit in that account.
He pointed out that he did not know when his wife opened that account
but that he will find out from her. He indicated that part of the money
in his wife’s savings account belongs to the wife’s brother who is
living in Sweden with his family. Moving towards the end of his
testimony, Mr. Jammeh pointed out that he once supervised building
projects for two of his friends, one in Sweden and the other in the
United States of America. He indicated that he has no investment in
jewelry, and that he had no insurance policy. He indicated that he is
not responsible for the education or maintenance of anybody outside The
Gambia as Permanent Secretary, he signed contracts but the tendering and
awarding were the responsibility of others. He said he does not
recommend!
anybody for a contract. He concluded his testimony by saying that he
has never received any gift from anybody.
The next witness to testify on Monday 13th September 2004 was Tenneh Mba
(Manneh) Jaiteh, Permanent Secretary, Department of State for Finance
and Economic Affairs. She testified that she has been Senior Secretary
to Department of Finance and Economic Affairs, Acting PMO, Permanent
Secretary for Trade, Industry and Employment and currently she is the
Permanent Secretary, Department of State for Finance and Economic
Affairs. She testified that other than her official emoluments, she has
no other source of income, and that her official emoluments include her
allowances contained in the assets evaluation form which she submitted
to the commission. She pointed out that her husband is a Civil Engineer
working with the Department of State for!
State for Works, Construction and Infrastructural Development. She
indicated in her testimony that she is paying the school fees of her
first child. She pointed out that the property indicated in the asset
declaration form is a freehold situated in Sukuta Sanchaba measuring 50
metres by 30 metres and that when they were leasing it, they were
informed that the plot is more than the normal residential plot, so it
is leased as two plots but in actual fact it is one plot.
Continuing her testimony, Mrs. Jaiteh pointed out that the property
belongs to her husband and not her and that the property was developed
in 2001 with a three bedroom bungalow and that she does not contribute
anything towards the development of the property. Mrs. Jaiteh stated in
her testimony that she was allocated a plot in Nema-Sutu but that she
has requested for a re-allocation in Tanji but that no development is
taking place in the Tanji property. She pointed out that even though she
has another plot in Brufut for which she is paying rate, she has no
title deed or document to show ownership. Asked by the commission
whether that is safe, she said it is a family agreement between her and
the uncle. She testified that the three bedroom bungalow was started in
2002 and that it has been roofed but the windows and doors are yet to be
fixed. She pointed out that she invested D100, 000 so far. She said this
is the property in Brufut. She testified that the husband has a property
in Jabang, Kombo North and that he purchased the plot. At this stage,
she was asked to furnish the commission with documents within the same 7
working days. Mrs. Jaiteh pointed out that she has no farm and is not a
shareholder of any company. She testified that the value of the jewelry
she bought from 1995 to 1997 is between £500 to £700 but that she could
not produce the receipts in respect of the purchase. She pointed out
that her sister sent her the money she used to purchase a 2 KV generator
but she could not produce receipts. Mrs. Jaiteh indicated in her
testimony that the car indicated in the form was jointly purchased. She
contributed D15, 000 and the husband the rest. She said she is operating
a savings and current account with IBC and that she has not benefited
from any bank loan but government loan which she is still servicing, and
that she could not tell whether he husband has benefited from any loan
facility. !
Moving towards the end of her testimony, Mrs. Jaiteh pointed out that
she made some savings from her per diem and that she is not responsible
for the education or maintenance of anybody outside The Gambia. She
ended by testifying that when she was returning from UK in 1998 she came
with some cash.
FOCUS ON CEDAW
The Initial, Second and Third Reports
Amie Sillah Reporting
Article 10
Equality In The Field Of Education
The Article is very comprehensive; it recognises the importance of
education in enabling women and men to participate on an equal footing
in all aspects of life in their countries. It provides thus: State
Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination
against women in order to ensure to them equal rights with men in the
field of education and in particular to ensure, on a basis of equality
of men and women: (a) The same
conditions for career and vocational guidance, for access to studios and
for the achievement of diplomas in educational establishments of all
categories in rural as well as in urban area; this equality shall be
ensured in preschool, general, technical education, professional and
higher education, as well as in all types of vocational training;
(b) Access to the same
curricula, the same examinations, teaching staff with qualifications of
the same standard and school premises and equipment of the same quality;
(c) The elimination of any
stereotyped concept of the roles of men and women at all levels and in
all forms of education by encouraging coeducation and other types of
education which will help to achieve this aim and, in particular, by the
revision of text books and school programmes and the adaptation of
teaching methods; (d) The
same opportunities to benefit from scholarships and other study grants;
(e) The same opportunities for
access to programmes of continuing, including adult and functional
literacy programmes, particularly those aimed at reducing, at the
earliest possible time, any gap in education, existing between men and
women; (f) The
education of female student dropout rates and the organisation of
programmes for girls and women who have left school prematurely
(g) The same opportunities to
participate actively in sports and physical education;
(h) Access to specific
educational information to help to ensure the health and well being of
families, including information and advice on family planning.” Here
even though there are not laws, which discriminate against the education
of girls, there is evidence of social discrimination, as boys are always
favoured. This Article therefore enjoins government to double its
efforts at ensuring that girls of school going age are enrolled in
schools. One important factor that has placed women at a disadvantaged
position vis-à-vis men in terms of their economic development and
political participation and their lack of access to education. According
to the 1993 census, only 27% of adult women in The Gambia are literate
whilst male literacy rate is twice as high at 55%. The urban rural
divide cuts across female population with regard to literacy level, 40%
of urban females are literate Vs 18.3% or rural female. The
ramifications of these differentials in literacy rates are compelling.
For women in rural and urban areas, high rate of illiteracy is linked
with economic hardships and drudgery as well as dependency and
uncertainty. Most important, illiteracy is directly connected to hosts
of social and poverty indicators such as maternal morbidity, infant
mortality, children’s malnutrition and illness. Also women’s illiteracy
is linked to neglect of children’s education, especially the girl child.
In the rural areas, Women’s illiteracy means that they are further
disadvantaged in terms of access to information and participation in
rural development programmes to improve productivity, farming technology
and marketing skills. Improving women’s literacy and access to education
will enable the to function as individuals. Further, illiterate women
are unable to move into more attractive white collar salaried positions
such as Managers, technicians, field extension workers and researchers,
in public and private agricultural sectors or to move out of farming and
agriculture altogether. Poor level literacy deepen rural women’s
dependence on men and few educated urban elite women to articulate their
needs. Ever the National Council for women requires basic level of
literacy for aspirants to leadership and representative roles (Women’s
Bureau 1999). Improving Women’s literacy is both a right on its own and
it is also an enabling right in the sense that it enables the person to
be aware of and demand other rights due to her. In response, government
has designed and implemented several adult literacy projects from the
1970s to date. The vast majority of beneficiaries were women. In
realization of the urgent need to correct the imbalance with regards to
girls’ education, a multi – sectoral working group on girls’ education
was established at the Department of State for Education. The main
objective of this working group was to identity policies, strategies for
attraction and retention of girls in the education system. A lot
sensitisation campaign was under the aegis of the working group. The
Department of state for education in collaboration with the Department
of State for Health is currently making an attempt to revive the drive
towards promoting girl’s education. There is therefore a proposal to
establish a steering committee on the education and health of the girl
child. This steering committee has a child mandate incorporating health
concerns of the girl child. Furthermore, the Department of State for
Education has set up a Girl’s Education Unit within the Department. One
of its mandate is to ensure that young girls are not deprived of the
benefit of their fundamental Right to Education. Several measures have
been adopted by the Department of State in attaining its objectives of
ensuring education for young girls. One such measure is the
establishment of the scholarship trust Fund for Girls. The Trust Fund is
designed to enhance access, retention and performance of the Girl-child
within the school system. On the policy level, the Education Policy
1988 –2003 was recently revised to take on board the special concerns of
the girl child. Hitherto, the policy gave very little attention to the
girl child. It is expressly stated in the Revised Education Policy that:
“A further fundamental issue (for the education system) is that of
equity and the reduction of gender disparities by ensuring that girls
and women gain access to education and achieve a high retention rate in
each of the programme areas.” In the same vein the Education Master Plan
stresses on the urgent need to increase girls Gross Enrolment Ratio at
the lower Basic Level, from 60 % in 1996 to 73 per cent by 2002. During
the same period, the Gross Enrolment Ratio for Girls at the Upper Basic
level is expected to rise from 34 percent to 47 percent. However,
despite all these efforts enrolment and literacy rates for females
remain much lower than those of males. The 1996 Education Statistics
reveal a very unfavourable picture of the population aged 10 years and
over, 54.4% of males are literate whereas only 26.4% of females are
literate. At the National level 40.1 percent of males Children of School
going age (i.e. males aged 7 to 22 years) are enrolled compared to 28.6
percent of females. A look at literacy and enrolment rates by gender
and Local Government Areas suggests that in all these areas the females
lag behind. The gender gap is however more pronounced in rural areas
than in urban areas. This is because the social, cultural and poverty
factors that inhibit girls education, are more obvious in these areas.
This trend has not changed as revealed in the Multiple Indicator Cluster
report, 2000. The report indicates that less than half (36) percent of
the population over 15 years in The Gambia is literate. Overall male
literacy rates have been found to be almost double the female literacy
rates (48% for males against 25% for females). The rates being lower in
the rural areas than in the urban areas. The more recent Education For
All (EFA) Report 2000 indicates that literacy rates remain constant at
37.2 percent from 1991 – 1994 and then dropped slightly and remained
constant at 37.1% ! from 1995 to 1998.
The implication of all the above statistics is that Government is faced
with a Herculean task as far as redressing the present education
imbalance is concern. With education and increase awareness, the Gambian
women will be well equipped and empowered to assert their rightful
position in society. Lack of education leading to less qualification is
inter alia, the Major stumbling block in the advancement of Gambian
women.
e-Government Project
Telecommunication To Be Liberalised
The Gambia Government has started executing the first phase of its pilot
e-Government Project which will involve connecting 10 departments of
states using a computer system. This was revealed in a press release
issued by the department of state for communication, information and
technology. It is hoped that this will enable the departments concerned
to communicate regularly on administrative and other official matters.
It is also expected to foster the sharing of information and data among
the governments departments and with the public. The equipment required
for this project is already at the Department of State for Communication
Information and Technology and installation will soon begin Meanwhile,
an offer to train 30 of its officials in Ghana has been secured by the
Gambia government. The trainees according to the press release will be
drawn from various departments and the initial focus will be on network
installation and maintenance, network security and web design and
management. Participants will be expected to serve as trainers and focal
points for e-Government. Meanwhile, the department has promised to
further liberalise the telecommunication industry in the Gambia with the
overall goal of making ICTs universally accessible and affordable to all
citizens.
Below are websites of various government departments and other
institutions;
NewGambia.gm
achievements, plans for future development StateHouse.gm
Office of the President; policies, speeches, news GambiaWomen.gm
Women’s
Bureau, role of Gambian women Gambia.gm
Dept.
of State for Trade, Industry & Employment DosCIT.gm
Dept.
of State for Communications, Information & Technology EduGambia.gm
Dept.
of State for Education GamPost.gm
Postal
services, policies and regulations
GRTS.gm
National broadcaster (TV and Radio); news
Gamtel.gm the
national telecommunications operator; plans
for
development of telecom infrastructure GamInfo.gm
news
and information from The Gambia Daily GIPFZA.gm
information on investment opportunities
NationalAssembly.gm
legislature: members and processes
JammehFoundation.gm
activities of the Jammeh Foundation for Peace VisitTheGambia.gm
tourism-related information
NRS.gm
National Records Service; slavery, slave trade
Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issues
Issue No. 75/2004, 20-22 September, 2004
Editorial
PRISONS: LOOKING UP TO HIGHER STANDARDS
Many see the prison as a dumping ground for outfits of society rather
than a correctional institution that reforms the convict to enable
him/her to join the main stream of society. There is need for
attitudinal change including those within the prison system. In a recent
interview with the Secretary of State for the Interior and Religious
Affairs regarding the situation of Baba Jobe, he did indicate that by
law convicted prisoners are not allowed visits until they have served at
least three months. He is quite right. Section 53 of the Prisons Act
states: ‘Subject to the provisions of this Act, a convicted criminal
prisoner shall be allowed one visit from friends after he has completed
three months of his sentence, and thereafter according to progressive
stages or as a reward for good conduct in accordance with rules made
under this Act.” Why deprive a convict a visit for three months?
Furthermore Section 56(1) of the Act also states: “Subject to such
conditions as may be prescribed, every prisoner other than a convicted
prisoner shall be given all reasonable opportunities of communication
with his friends or legal adviser and may write and receive letters.”
This means that a convicted prisoner who is deprived of visits for three
months is also not allowed to write or receive letters. What is the
minimum international standard required?
According to Part 1 (Rules of General Application) of the Standard
Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners “ Prisoners are to be
allowed regular contact with family and friends, by both correspondence
and personal visits. Prisoners are to be kept informed of current
events and important items of news.” The state should strive to attain
this standard. Prisoners and their relatives should realise that
according to Section 21(4) every judge, member of cabinet, divisional
commissioner or justice of peace “may when he thinks fit enter into and
examine the conditions of any prison ….. and may enter any observations
he may think fit to make in reference to the condition of the prison or
the abuses therein in the visitors book to be kept by the officer in
charge and it shall be the duty of the officer in charge to draw the
attention of the superintendent and of the visiting committee at this or
their n! ext visit to the prison to any entries made in such book.”
This is a safeguard for any prisoner or relative who has a complaint of
abuse.
BABA JOBE’S ASSETS
IS GOVERNMENT DEFYING THE SECURITY COUNCIL?
Apart from the nationwide broadcast by the Gambia Government that it
intends to freeze the assets of the former Majority Leader of the
National Assembly in compliance with UN Security Council resolution,
nothing is clear about the government’s intentions and actions. Legal
documents show that Baba K. Jobe owns 99 % of the shares of Millennium
Air but this company has not seized operation. There have also been
reports in the local press of Baba Jobe’s transport in motion. This
needs clarification by the authorities. Needless to say, Resolution 1532
(2004) of the UN Security Council is quite explicit. It stipulates in
paragraph 1 that the Security Council, “Decides that, to prevent former
Liberian President, Charles Taylor, his immediate family members, in
particular Jewel Howard Taylor and Charles Taylor Jr., senior officials
of the former Taylor regime, or other close allies or associates as
designated by the committee established by paragraph 21 of resolution
1521 (2003) (hereinafter, ‘the committee’) from using misappropriated
funds and property to interfere in the restoration of peace and
stability in Liberia and the sub-region, all states in which they are,
at the date of adoption of this resolution or at any time thereafter,
funds, other assets and economic resources owned or controlled directly
or indirectly by Charles Taylor, Jewel Howard Taylor, and Charles Taylor
Jr. and / or those individuals designated ! by the committee, including
funds, other financial assets and economic resources held by entities
owned or controlled directly or indirectly, by any of them or by any
persons acting on their behalf or at their direction, as designated by
the Committee, shall freeze without delay all such funds, other
financial assets and economic resources, and shall ensure that neither
these nor any other funds, other financial assets or economic resources
are made available by their nationals, or by any persons within
their territory, directly or indirectly, to or for the benefit of such
persons.” Well, what has this resolution got to do with Baba Jobe?
Pursuant to Resolution 1521 (2003) of the Security Council the Committee
referred has established a list of individuals and entities whose assets
are to be frozen. These are supposed to be close associates and allies
of former President of Liberia, Charles Taylor. According to Security
Council Press Release SC / 8147 the Committee revised the list on 13th
July 2004, to include Baba Jobe and Leonid Minin. According to the press
release Leonid is an Israeli possessing 4 passports (Bolivia, German,
Greek and Israeli). To put it in a nutshell what the resolution is
saying is that all states in which the listed persons have assets shall
freeze all such assets without delay. Are all assets of Baba Jobe frozen
or is the state or some other persons using them? This is the big
question that the state needs to answer. There is need for transparency
on this matter.
BAKOTEH WOMEN PROTEST AGAINST DUMP SITE
By Surakata Danso
On Friday 17th September 2004 the women of Bakoteh Housing Estate staged
a peaceful protest march against the odd Bakoteh Dumpsite. The
protesters, who were led by Madam Bajen Sanyang, started their march
from Saffideen to KMC, Kanifing. They were chanting, “We are tired of
the hazardous dumpsite, please help us now”. The women also chanted that
they are tired of the smoke, foul odour, the mosquitoes, and the other
harmful insects and creatures. Madam Sanyang assured the members of the
press and the public that their action is motivated by the lack of
concern by the KMC authorities. She noted that it is not only the lives
of the elders, which are at, stake but also more seriously is the
children of the settlement. Bajen finally indicated that on the 16th
September 2004, when she led her group to the NEA headquarters, they
were told that the NEA had provided KMC with the sum of 1.2 million
Dollars, for the better management of the site. Mrs. Sanyang said that
today KMC authorities are telling them that Gamworks has been paid since
May 2004 to address the situation. When the press met with the Public
Relations Officer (PRO) of the KMC, Pa Kalifa Sanyang he assured the
press that KMC is equally concerned of the state of affairs of the site.
Mr. Sanyang further added the council in collaboration with the NEA and
Gamworks are doing everything possible to put the health hazard under
control. When it was put to him that NEA had told the women that KMC is
already given 1.2 million Dollars to address the situation, the PRO
after consultation with his authorities indicated that the women must
have misrepresented NEA. He added that as far as the council is
concerned the said 1.2 million Dollars was earmarked for the Solid Waste
Management Project for poverty alleviation. This, Pa Kalifa opined, is
currently being managed by the Gamworks Agency; that the fund is to be
used for fencing and developing a road inside the dumpsite for easy
access and management. He added that at the moment KMC has been given a
copy of o! nly the study report, while Gamworks is to facilitate the
implementation of the project. The PRO also stressed that however the
issue of Bakoteh Dumpsite is a national issue and not KMC alone; that
this is why the actors are KMC, NEA, Gamworks and even BCC. On the issue
of the 1.2 million Dollars the PRO denied that such an amount has been
paid to KMC by the NEA. He left it to the press to find out who is right
emphasizing that NEA never paid 50 cents to KMC. He asserted that a
better and careful management of the dumpsite is that which in the best
interest of KMC; KMC spends D100, 000 on a bulldozer every 5 days to
clear the area. Finally on the issue of transferring the dumpsite to
Tambana, a few kilometres from Brikama, the PRO opined that all he knows
is that cabinet had discussed the transfer but could not say what is
holding the implementation.
NO FOOD FOR POLICE DETAINEES IN MANSA KONKO
By Yaya Dampha
Reports reaching FOROYAA intimated that the police detainees in the
Mansa Konko Police Station are not having their meals as required.
According to the sources, detainees’ food was being provided by
individual police officers who are staying with their wives in their
quarters. At the end of every month, the concerned police officers would
make their claims to the officer commanding for approval and settlement,
the report said. However, according to the same source, the amount
allocated for the purpose of meals by the police authorities is only
D1.50 (one dalasis fifty Bututs) per detainee daily, which it said is
not even sufficient to buy a cup of rice. The source further stated that
due to the meagre nature of this amount none of the police officers is
ready to take the responsibility thus making the detainees to stay a
whole day without food. When this reporter contacted the Officer
Commanding (OC) Mansa Konko Division, Ebrima Cham he denied that this
had ever happened. However, he confirmed that the amount for each
detainee’s food is D1.50 daily. He said that it is one Sergeant Sallah
who provides food for their detainees. He said every month Sallah will
prepare his claims and that he will give approval for payment from the
departmental warrant for feeding. He said it is since the time we
attained independence that the equivalent of D1.50 per prisoner was
catered for daily feeding. OC Cham also confirmed that that amount is
meagre but he was quick to state that no officer had ever complained
that to them. He said he had not also made any recommendation for an
increase of this amount. Other Police Officers when contacted did
confirm that at many times when they are on duty, they have witnessed
detainees going the whole day without food.
Will WAEC Pay Examiners?
By Justin J.S Yusuf
Information reaching FOROYAA indicate that the West African Examination
Council WAEC has not been able to pay the examiners in the Gambia who
marked this year’s Senior Secondary School Examination papers, since the
exercise completed four weeks ago. According to a group of examiners
who spoke to this reporter last Tuesday on condition of anonymity,
indicated that some officials at the council have assured them during
the examiners coordination meeting held on July 19, 2004 at the Gambia
Senior Secondary School main hall, that their payments will be expedited
immediately after the exercise. Complaining bitterly about WAEC, some
examiners said that since all Senior Schools were made to pay for their
candidates examination fees in full before sitting to their exams, the
council should also be able to pay them after their exercise. “This is
the second time WAEC is punishing us for efficiently doing our work for
them. We sacrificed our holidays energy and time for pittance which they
cannot pay while they always tell us that they cannot pay for the real
value of the services we render to them. It is only to show their
gratitude by refusing to pay us. This is a serious breach of contract,”
complained one of the examiners. Another examiner who was also in a
furious mood, emphasizes that if this will be the trend WAEC is going to
deal with the examiners, then they will have to take their examination
papers to Ghana, Nigeria or Sierra Leone for marking. “We are tired of
them. This is really frustrating and they must note how difficult it was
to get the required number of examiners to mark this year’s examination
papers”, lamented the affected examiners. The examiners stated that
some of them had to go and explain their personal problems to the
accountant of WAEC who is believed to be controlling the affairs at the
WAEC Banjul Office before being paid. One of the examiners revealed that
even the chief examiners who had to travel to Ghana and Nigeria for the
test standardization exercise, had to threaten them with boycott before
being paid. He reiterated that WAEC made promises but fail to honour it.
When contacted for comment, Mr. Njie, the head of WAEC in Banjul office
said they will pay the examiners. “We are going to pay them, they are
working under us but every year this is the way they act towards the
council when it comes to paying them” he said.
BABY THEFT REPORTED IN
BUIBA – JARRA
By Jobe Kebba & Yaya Dampha
On Friday September 10th, 2004, this reporter had a brief stop in Jarra
– Jappineh to visit a brother undergoing treatment with one Alhagie
Njie, a grand marabout notable for curing mental illness. Upon arrival,
it was disclosed that he, Mr. Njie has been contacted by the Soma Police
to help them in their ongoing investigation in connection to a month old
baby stolen from Buiba Imam Kunda. According to him, “A day before, I
was visited by a middle aged lady, medium built and fair in complexion
who gave her name as Mariama Jallow. She left a mobile number and
claimed to be a resident of Serrekunda. This woman said she had a
mentally sick relative, whom she intended bringing for treatment, which
was the purpose of the visit.” Alhagie said he consented. “Following
this, the woman gave me few Dalasis as charity and begged for prayers,
which I did and she left,” he posited. “But to my surprise, I am just
being contacted by the Police now enquiring as to whether I knew
anything about this lady,” Alhagie concluded taking a deep breath of
frustration. However, the story was confirmed by the Police as true and
has identified and withheld three other people under their custody who
are helping them in their investigation. These include two females and a
male, whose mobile number was used by the lady in question. Besides, the
Police report further indicated that the father of this one-month-old
baby (Modou Lamin Ceesay) has told them this woman pretended to be a
nurse at Soma Health Centre who visited the baby for a checkup.
She was wearing an apron. She recommended that the child be taken
to the Health Centre. When they got to Soma she took the baby from
the mother and asked her to wait at the garage. That was the last
time the mother ever saw her. It was through this the woman was
able to snatch their only first born baby. The woman is still at large
and it is therefore important for the whole Gambia to help the Police in
their investigation in bringing this woman to justice.
The Paul Commission
Sitting of Tuesday 14th Sept. 2004
By Surakata Danso
TESTIMONY OF RAYMOND SOCK, SOLICITOR GENERAL
In his testimony before a three member commission led by High Court
judge, Justice M. A. Paul, the Solicitor General, Mr. Raymond Sock who
is also the head of the civil service the State Department for Justice
and the Attorney General’s Chambers, told the commissioners that he had
received and filled a form from the commission. When asked to inform
the commission the positions he held from 22nd July 1994 to date, the
Solicitor General opined that at the time of the July 22nd military
takeover he was away until April 2000 when he returned; that following
his return he was appointed Solicitor General and Legal Secretary up to
date. Mr. Sock added that his career as Solicitor General was
interrupted for a month. Mr. Sock in his testimony told the commission
that he receives D8, 000 month. He also said that he has also served as
a board member of AMRC, Judicial Service Commission and the Police
Council; that he receives D500, D750 and D300 respectively per month. He
further denied having any other source of income and that he does not
hold brief for anybody in any business and he is not involved in any;
that from 2000 when he was appointed he did not take any loan from the
state nor any individual. On whether he has any bank account the
Solicitor General indicated that his wife and himself are operating
jointly a current and savings account at the Standard Chartered Bank.
Mr. Sock said that the accounts are operated by his wife; that Madam
Sock is a shareholder in Standard Chartered Bank. He further added that
they also opened accounts for all their kids in the same bank; that
since his appointment in 2000 he had made 11 overseas trips; that each
time he goes he makes savings of 200 – 300 Dollars. On his assets Mr.
Sock said apart from his current home, he has two plots; one in Sinchu
Alhagie and one in Jamburr that are on customary tenure; that the
Jamburr one which measures 40 m by 22 m is fenced with blocks at about
D15 – 20, 000. For the school fees of his children Mr. Sock said he does
not pay for them. The commission finally ordered him to produce within
10 days all statements of accounts of the joint bank accounts of himself
and the wife, plus those of their children. He was also ordered to
produce the lease documents and other relevant documents for their
Jamburr and Sinchu Alhagie plots. TESTIMONY OF MR. SAKU MBOGE
Also appearing the same day, 13th day of September 2004, was Mr. Saku
Mboge. Mr. Mboge told the commission that since 1994, he had handled the
following positions: Divisional Chief NIB July 1994 – September 1995,
Chief Executive NIPA, Jan 1996; DPS Trade in December 1999, Permanent
Secretary, Office of the President, January – June 2000 when he retired
and then in 2001 – June 2003 Chief Executive, GIPFZA. For the salaries
Mr. Mboge claimed that as Divisional Officer NIB he was paid D5, 000 and
D500 a board member of IBAS; as CEO of NIPA he received D8, 000 and as
Chairman of IBAS board D700; D3, 000 as the DPS Trade and D500 as IBAS
board member; Kuntaur Rice Mill he said could not remember; D66, 444 per
year he received as salary of PS, Office of the President and D500 as
NAWEC board member and finally for GIPFZA he received D120, 000 per year
plus D4, 000 responsibility and D250 residential allowances
respectively. Mr. Mboge also indicated that he is right now receiving
pension from both the Central Bank and GIPFZA but failed to say the
amounts. On his assets Mr. Saku Mboge accepted having had two state
allocations; one in Kanifing in 1984 where he is currently living and
the second one in Kotu in 1992. He went further to inform the commission
that he had sold the Kotu plot last July 2004 for D150, 000. On the
utility of the proceeds, Mr. Mboge said that D100, 000 was spent to
purchase a solar pumping machine and the D50, 000 went into the purchase
of a Pajero for his own use. He finally claimed having an agricultural
land of 12.5 hectares in Busumbala. He finally informed the commission
that he was and is still banking with AGIB and Trust Bank. The
commission before discharging him, ordered him to provide them within 10
days, all bank statements, leases of plots, the invoices and receipts
for the purchase of the solar pumping machine and the transfer of the
Pajero.
The Janneh (GAMTEL) Commission
Abdoulie G. Dibba
SITTING OF THURSDAY 9TH SEPTEMBER 2004
Continuing her testimony on Thursday, Ms. Penda Dibba indicated that Mr.
Hessling represented Siemens in the meeting of November 2002. She said
Exhibit 7, which she is seeing now for the first time, is a letter
written by Gamtel to Standard Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd. She indicated
that the reply of the letter was written by Mr. Mboob, which was a draft
protest letter. She pointed out that she does not know when it was, but
she had seen it before in his office and vetted it and after vetting it,
she referred it to the Finance Director. She indicated that after
vetting the protest letter, she was in agreement with its contents
because she said, “We believed that the bond should not have been
encashed in the first place.” Ms. Dibba pointed out that the guarantee
for international financing was needed for the project pending legal
advice. She argued that it was not a question of Gamtel accepting
liability. She said the Global Expansion Project was won by Alcatel and
it was Alcatel that was seeking for financing. She asserted that Alcatel
did not get financing. Testifying further, Ms. Dibba indicated that she
took her second trip for this particular saga from 4th to 7th of April
2003 and that when they arrived, they booked an appointment with a team
of lawyers through the Ambassador and the council. She pointed out that
they informed Siemens that they were looking for an embargo for the bond
agreement because they (Siemens) introduced them (Gamtel) to Befag. Ms.
Dibba indicated that they were contemplating two actions: a civil action
against Siemens and Befag, and a criminal action against the officials
of Befag. She pointed out that tickets, per diems and the 2001 project,
which did not materialize, are all damages on the side of ! Gamtel but
that suing Siemens and Befag does not mean that Gamtel lost the US $3
million. Ms. Dibba pointed out that at the moment, they are seeking
legal advice as to who among the players were to take legal action
against. She indicated that the reason why she does not report Befag to
the German police was based on the fact that they have already engaged
the services of lawyers who are responsible for this matter and that
they (lawyers) know the laws of the area and the appropriate action to
take. She indicated that they were informed by Mr. Becke subsequently
that they have actually reported the matter to the state prosecution in
Berlin. She argued that this was a result of a request they made to Mr.
Becke. At this stage, Ms. Dibba was asked to look at item 7 of Exhibit
9. After looking at it she acknowledged that approval was also sought
from the Office of the President to engage in dialogue with Standard
Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd for a long term loan to recover the US$3
million as their credit rating was affected. She pointed out that she
does not know whether the reputation of Standard Chartered Bank Gambia
Ltd was equally at stake over this matter. She indicated that their
legal unit issued a legal opinion on the liability of Gamtel, which was
conveyed, to the Board. She pointed that she is not aware of any written
document in this regard. Asked by Counsel Sissoho whether she could
recall how the board was informed of that legal opinion regarding the
Gamtel liability, Ms. Dibba indicated that the Chairman of the Board was
informed in a meeting and that in every Board meeting, the Befag issue
was raised and opinion given whether legal or financial. At this stage,
Ms. Ida Drammeh took the floor and indicated the following: “Is it
correct, is it not that before Exhibit 2 was signed, there were several
meetings between Gamtel and Standard Chartered Bank Gambia Ltd to reach
agreement on the text of Exhibit 2 i.e. the bond agreement?” In
response, Ms. Dibba indicated that she is not aware of any meeting. She
pointed out that she knew that she vetted the bank facility and sent it
to the Financial Director and that she had one or two agreements with
Mr. Bernard Mendy on phone. Ms. Drammeh again asked whether Ms. Dibba
saw anything in Exhibit 6, which should have permitted Standard
Chartered Bank London to refuse to honour this obligation? In response,
Ms. Dibba indicated that looking on the face of Exhibit 6 alone, she
will say no. Continuing her testimony, Ms. Dibba that if the text of
Exhibit 6 was brought to her before signature, she would have advised
Gamtel that the text be referred to the Befag agreement and that the
text would be a conditional guarantee. She indicated that she would also
advise that Gamtel be notified on presentation of the guarantee and that
payment of the grant financing after the grace period would render the
bond guarantee effective. Ms. Dibba pointed out that she did not know
why the text of the bank guarantee was not submitted to her for legal
opinion before being issued and that she did not ask because she was not
a party. So therefore it wasn’t an issue she said. Ms. Dibba pointed out
that her opinion is that the lawyers have already made a case against
Siemens and Befag. Ms. Dibba acknowledged that under the financing
agreement Befag has not done anything to be entitled to the US
$3million. She indicated that the only time that Befag could be entitled
to the US $3 million referred to in section 4 of Exhibit 1 was if Gamtel
was in breach of its obligations on Exhibit 1. Ms. Dibba acknowledged
that if she knew that Gamtel was entering into agreement with Befag, she
would advise Gamtel to exercise more diligence on how the execution was
carried out. At this stage, Mr. Chric E. Mene took the floor. In
responding to a question raised by Mr. Mene, Ms. Dibba acknowledged that
Exhibit 4 is an embodiment of several different things and that she does
not know who compiled them. Ms. Dibba pointed out that the protocol
dated 27th of June 2002 was signed by Mr. Abdourahman Mboob and that it
was in relation to the effective date of the contract that was already
signed. She also pointed out that the signatures of the contract were
Dr. Bakary Njie, Phoday Ceesay Finance Director, Mr. O. B. Hessling and
Verooka Everle. She indicated that it was signed in Banjul on the 14th
of December 2001 according to the document. Continuing her testimony,
Ms. Dibba acknowledged that Exhibit 16 is the contract between Siemens
and Gamtel and that it was signed on the same day as Exhibit 4 of 1 of 1
to 30 of 30 according to the document. She acknowledged that the
contract section contained in Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 16 are one and the
same except that other documents from elsewhere that have been added.
Ms. Dibba pointed out that the letter dated on the 15th of October 2002
written by Gamtel to Befag, was done by her on behalf of Gamtel. She
acknowledged that the letter dated 10th March 2003 was signed by her
requesting the Ambassador of Brussels to use his good office in relation
to the saga. She also po! inted out that she saw the letter dated 14th
April 2003 and the annex letter. She indicated that the first letter is
informing Mr. Phoday Ceesay, Finance Director that a copy of his letter
is sent to the Ambassador of Brussels together with the memorandum and
that the second letter is from Mr. Becke to the Ambassador of Brussels.
Continuing her testimony, Ms. Dibba indicated that Exhibit 64 is a bill
in request of legal action for the lawyers in Germany and that Exhibit
65 is a power of attorney signed by the Director of Gamtel at the time,
Mr. Abdourahman Mboob to enable legal action to proceed in Germany. She
pointed out that she recognized the signature on Exhibit 33, which is
the signature of Lamin Jabbi. She indicated that Exhibit 33 is a
memorandum forwarding Exhibit 2 to the Managing Director, Mr. Mboob
recommending him to sign it. She indicated that it is usual for Gamtel
to have documents involving serious legal complication being signed
without seeking legal advice. She argued that that is always there since
her employment with Gamtel. Ms. Dibba pointed out that after the Befag
contract agreement, the Board resolved in one of their meetings that for
any contract that Gamtel is going in for, the contract must be signed b!
y the Managing Director and the Secretary of the Board. She acknowledged
writing a report which was copied to the external auditors, the Managing
Director Dr. Bakary Njie and all the other Directors of Gamtel got a
copy of the report. She pointed out that the Managing Director, Dr. Njie
was not happy with the report and indicated that he should sign it
before it is issued to the external auditors, which according to him was
not done. Ms. Dibba indicated that among the present management who were
Directors at the time are: the Finance Director Phoday Ceesay, the
Managing Director Omar Ndow and Mr. William who is currently the
Director of Human Resources. In responding to a question raised by Mr.
Sissoho, Ms. Dibba pointed out that she knew what amendments are and
that amendments are made and made when eventually signed, they become
part of the document. At this stage, she was shown the amendment of the
contract agreement 2002 and asked whether she recognized the signature
under Gamtel. In response, Ms. Dibba indicated that the signature under
Gamtel is a distorted signature and underneath the signature looks like
a photocopy being pasted. She acknowledged that all pages of Exhibit 4
are signed. She indicated that her opinion on Exhibit 5a, the bond
agreement is that it should have been conditional. Concluding her
testimony, Ms. Dibba indicated that she does not know whether the
personnel in Standard Chartered Bank were in a position or not to advise
Gamtel on the legal implication in Exhibit 6 and that as she indicated
in her evidence-in-chief, Standard Chartered Bank should not have paid
for the encashment of the bond guarantee.
FOCUS ON CEDAW
The Initial, Second and Third Reports
Amie Sillah Reporting
Article 11
Equality In The Field Of Employment
This article deals with women’s equal rights in employment. It also
deals with necessary measures to eliminate discrimination in employment
on the basis of marriage or maternity and a periodic review of labour
legislation. It provides thus: 1. “Parties shall take all appropriate
measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of
employment in order to ensure, on the basis of equality of men and
women, the same rights, in particular
a) The right to work as
an inalienable right of all human beings;
b) The right to the same
employment opportunities, including the application of the same criteria
for selection in matters of employment;
c) The right to free
choice of profession and employment, the right to promotion, job
security and all benefits and conditions of service and the right to
receive vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeship,
advanced vocational training and recurrent training;
d) The right to equal
remuneration, including benefits, and of equal treatment in respect of
work of equal value, as well as equality of treatment in the evaluation
of the quality of work;
e) The right to social
security, particularly in cases of retirement, unemployment, sickness,
invalidity and old age and other incapacity to work, as well as the
right to paid leaves;
f) The right to
protection of health and to safety in working conditions, including the
safeguarding of the function of reproduction;
2. In order to prevent discrimination against women on the grounds
of marriage or maternity and to ensure their effective right to work,
state parties shall take appropriate measures:
a) To prohibit, subject
to the imposition of sanctions, dismissals on the grounds of pregnancy
or of maternity leave and discrimination in dismissals on the basis of
marital status; b) To
introduce maternity leave with pay or with comparable social benefits
without loss of former employment, seniority or social allowances;
c) To encourage the
provision of necessary supporting social services to enable parents to
combine family obligations with work responsibilities and participation
in public life, in particular through promoting the establishment and
development of a network of child-care facilities;
d) To provide special
protection to women during pregnancy in types of work proved to be
harmful to them.
Protective legislation relating to matters covered in this article shall
be reviewed periodically in the light of scientific and technological
knowledge and shall be revised, repealed or extended as necessary.” This
is also another area where even though the law does not discriminate;
however, discrimination is experienced in practice. The Public Service
Commission is responsible for appointments, promotions, transfers and
disciplinary action of public officers. The P.S.C. Regulations and the
General Orders under which the Commission operates do not contain any
expressed discriminatory provision. Yet still women’s access to
employment is limited, in terms of getting employed in the first place,
staying in employment and making it to the top. The population data bank
shows that women occupy 12.8% of managerial positions, 13.9% of the
professional and technical, 26.3% of the clerical, 9.4% of the skilled
labour force, and 61.9% of the unskilled labour category. Access to
employment is determined by qualification, experience and availability.
Due to a multitude of factors, women have not been able to compete with
! men in meeting these conditions. These include low educational levels
leading to lesser qualifications, absence of special measures or
affirmative action policies in training institutions or in the work
place, the dual career role of women i.e. child care and family
responsibilities together with work responsibilities.
In The Gambia women are entitled to maternity leave. The General
Orders and the Labour Act provided that a woman is entitled to six weeks
leave before giving birth and another six weeks leave after giving
birth. It is also provided that women are entitled to their
salaries and benefits during these periods. However, women who are
not in permanent employment (those who fall in the category of daily
wage earners) are not entitled to maternity leave.
In addition, there have been several complaints that the six weeks leave
after birth is far too short. This short period forces mothers to
go back to work at a time when their babies most need their
attention. This means that babies will have to be left in the
hands of nannies, (who in most cases are too young and inexperienced to
take proper care of babies), who may be negligent in their duties.
There have been several campaigns by women to have this period extended
so as to enable them to take care of their children. It is also
important to note that men are not entitled to paternity leave.
This is a manifest indication of the attitude of Gambian society i.e.,
it is the responsibil! ity of the mother to take care of the children
and babies. Thus women are usually burdened by both their
household chores and official duties without any assistance from their
men. The idea of childcare support system does not exist in the
Gambia, women and men are however, entitled to the same retirement and
pension benefits. They are also entitled to the same Social
Security and Housing Finance Corporation Act. In conclusion, while
women are making significant strides, they still have several factors
that militate against their access, retention and upward mobility.
Attrition rates are still high due to childcare and family
responsibilities and negative socio-cultural biases.
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
--
Chi Jaama
Joe Sambou
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
