Extreme Errors
The Independent (Banjul)
COLUMN
June 29, 2001
Posted to the web June 29, 2001
A Patriot And Democrat
Banjul, the Gambia
In the recent past, President Jammeh seemed to have disagreed with the
Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) in the demarcation of constituency
boundaries without going to the people. He was quoted, as saying that he
will dissolve the IEC after the elections, (The Point Friday June 1, 2001).
He has said that the IEC has no mandate to enact laws. Therefore he said his
government would not accept any individual or institutions that are out to
sabotage their development efforts. He made those remarks whilst addressing
a meeting with the committee of elders from Banjul on Wednesday 30th May. He
advised the elders to preach the message of peace, discipline, tolerance and
development in their communities. Secretaries of State Ousman Badjie and Nai
Ceesay also told the delegation that Banjul will still retain its three
constituencies and urged the people of Banjul to register for the
forthcoming general elections.
In another development, the IEC is said to be holding talks with the
country's political parties over which method of vote counting to implement
when voting ends on Election Day. With the exception of PDOIS which still
boycotts IEC meetings following the sacking of Bishop Solomon Tilewa Johnson
at the end of last year, all political parties, APRC, UDP, NRP and GDP are
said to be taking part in the discussions that may determine whether the
counting of votes should take place at polling stations immediately after
the casting of votes.
Communiqués from the parties addressed to the administrative secretary of
the IEC have subscribed to the counting of votes at various polling stations
immediately after the closure of voting. The parties expressed the belief
that this measure would be fairer, transparent and less expensive in terms
of logistics to conduct the elections. They also observed with a certain
degree of apprehension that the transportation of ballot boxes from remote
areas to divisional headquarters by security agents who have been known to
be partisan in favour of the ruling party. They added that during the 1996
elections, some party agents witnessed what they called ballot fixing while
others were intimidated, harassed and even beaten by security personnel, and
based on that experience, the opposition believe that a considerable part of
the electorate are reluctant to exercise their voting rights, believing that
vote-rigging through force will mar voting day.
Meanwhile the APRC has expressed reservations over the suggestions of
counting votes at polling stations immediately after the polls close.
The ruling APRC has refused so far to accept the method suggested by the
opposition. According to a letter from the party dated 12th June and signed
by the deputy administrative secretary Kebba Kinteh the APRC leadership
demanded to know the rationale behind what he called the abrupt departure
from the traditional method of counting which it argued has proven to be
hitch-free, transparent and of less security risk.
The APRC is of the opinion that the IEC should liase with the government
particularly the security forces and not political parties if an informed
decision on the matter is to be taken (The Independent page 1 and 2, 15 - 17
June 2001).
My first advice is to PDOIS a party I do not belong to but whose principle I
respect. Their enlightening of the electorates, particularly the booklets
they wrote on the Constitution during the stormy weather of the transition
to democratic rule is commendable. Can PDOIS not see from the references of
The Point and The Independent quoted above the reasons for sacking Bishop
Johnson or do they want APRC or the court to tell them? In my view, all
parties should compromise their principles in the interest of the country
just to give a new lease of life to politics in this country. Otherwise, it
will be like sacrificing the country for PDOIS' principles. Please blend
your energies and experiences for the good of the country.
As for UDP, please forget about pursuing Mahawa Cham's victory in court and
work for the coming together of the many heads of the opposition parties to
rescue this country from the clutches of the APRC. The only party that the
APRC often accuse of sowing seeds of discord and tribalism is the UDP. Well
all those on the side of God and the truth who are concerned with the proper
development of The Gambia know why. It is because the party carries a lot of
support as evidenced by the 1996 presidential election results which
appeared after the declaration of the results by the PIEC, in a foreign
newspaper. From then to now, the UDP is APRC's headache and will remain so
as long as the political complexion of The Gambia remains the same.
As for the APRC, the party has a problem without seeing it, much more is to
listen, even to opposing views which are progressive and for the good of the
country.
I must admit, I supported the AFPRC takeover from the 25th July, 1994 after
I read the interview with the then Lieutenant Yahya Jammeh by Rodney D. Sieh
of the Daily Observer, who was also the BBC correspondent in Banjul,
together with an earlier one by Momodou Musa Secka, also of the Daily
Observer, at State House on Friday 22nd July, 1994 (see Daily Observer
Monday 25th July, 1994, page 8 and 9) under the heading of "Why we took
over". Parts of the interview, which influenced my support, were as follows:
-
Daily Observer: How soon should we expect a new government to be named?
Lt. Y.J: A new government will be named as soon as possible. We are not
naming a government now, because we need the support of the civilians,
intellectuals and patriotic Gambians who are clean, who will make sure that
they serve in their appointments without fear or favour and for the good of
every Gambian.
D.O: What are your plans for the establishment of democracy, which was one
of your main objectives for taking over?
Lt. Y.J: Well, as soon as a new government is instituted, which is composed
of mostly civilians, democracy would be in place and we will welcome all
contributions from all corners of the country to make sure that everything
is done in the right way and that transparency and accountability will be
the order of the day. We will not tolerate any sort of corruption; we will
not be secretive in anything that we do. We want the press and the
international community, including Gambians, to criticise us where we go
wrong. We are not here for praises; we are not here to enrich ourselves. We
are here to set up a just system that is not corruptible, to make sure that
the living standards of Gambians will be augmented to an acceptable standard
within the limits of our resources. But we are not here to use the limited
resources of the country for our own good at the detriment of the masses.
D.O: Will you make any effort to question them about the whereabouts of
government funds?
Lt. Y.J: Well, it is up to them to come back as Gambians and account for
whatever they have to account for. But as for the president, we all know
that we owe it to him that the name of The Gambia has reached that
international level and we respect him. But the people who were behind him
misled him. They were corrupt, did whatever they wanted to do because he was
too lenient. We have no intention of harming him - the former president - or
humiliating him. We want to treat him as an elderly man. He is free to come
to the country as a Gambian citizen and we can provide for his security if
he needs it, and from time to time we will need to consult him. We will not
sideline him; we will consult him for advice. We have nothing against him,
but the people behind were doing whatever they wanted, uncontrolled.
D.O: So how soon, then, can the ordinary Gambian say, "I am looking forward
to free and fair elections", what timetable can you give.
Lt. Y.J: Well, we are not giving any timetable for free and fair elections.
That does not mean that we are here to stay long; we are not here for that.
D.O. How long, then?
Lt. Y.J: I cannot give you a fixed timetable because we have to a make sure
that Gambians are aware of what their rights are, what kind of leader they
want and what type of system they want to put into effect in this country,
that's all. And we also want to make sure that the term of the presidency in
this country is limited. We don't want life presidency, a president who will
rule for decades. So from that you will know that we are just transitional.
D.O: So what term are you suggesting for the presidency in The Gambia.
Lt. Y.J: Well that will be up to the Gambian people. I cannot decide for the
people. I am no here to dictate what should happen to Gambians. We will
organise a national electoral commission and a referendum as well to ask the
people of The Gambia what kind of leaders they want and the term of office
they want that leadership to serve. Certainly it will not be a term that
will exceed ten years. In fact, ten years is too much for a third world
country like The Gambia, so we will make sure that there's a democratic
system of government, that will be elected by the people and can be kicked
out by the people if they don't want it, peacefully, and through the ballot
box, and that's all we want (Daily Observer, Monday 25th July, 1994 page 8
and 9).
A delegation of the AFPRC led by Chairman Jammeh visited Senegal and at the
end of that visit, he was quoted as telling the press that the AFPRC will
hand over to civilians after four years. On his return he was quoted as
telling the press that what he told the Senegalese press was that AFPRC will
rule for years before handing over to civilians. However, when the AFPRC
presented their timetable for democratic constitutional rule in the presence
of a large crowd including the diplomatic community, on Monday 24th October
1994 at the Independence Stadium, it stretched from November 1994 to
December 1998, a period of four and a half years. What a beautiful
coincidence with the Senegalese press's wonderful guess was my reaction;
what was yours Mr. reader or did you not hear it? Indeed that timetable gave
rise to reactions of all types at home and abroad. This necessitated the
setting up of a National Consultative Committee, which submitted its report
in January 1995. The AFPRC yielded to the wishes of the majority of Gambians
to arrange to return the country to democratic rule in two years with effect
from 22nd July 1994. I withdrew my support for the AFPRC when the draft
constitution was released because I was sure that the four-man Council was
out to take Gambians for a ride and they had an agenda to rule for more than
a decade as opposed to the Chairman's promise in his interview with Rodney
D. Sieh that ten years was too much for a third world country like The
Gambia. A committee set up by the council, the Constitutional Review
Commission, after a countrywide consultation, recommended two terms of five
years. The draft of the constitution did not do this at the discretion of
the four-man council. Gabriel Roberts, the then Chairman of the Provisional
Independent Electoral Commission confirmed this in an exclusive interview
with the Daily Observer by stating that "a great majority of Gambians had
recommended that the term of the president should be limited to two terms of
five years each which, he continued, was contained in the report submitted
to the council" (for full story see Daily Observer May 17 - 19, 1996 page 1
and 14). In fact, Gambians should question why at the tail end of their term
in office the APRC should embark on so many constitutional amendments but
still ignoring the wishes of the majority of Gambians to limit the
presidential term to two terms of five years each.
Going back to the IEC discussion with parties on which method of vote
counting to implement when voting ends on election day, the truth is clear
and simple. Four parties are taking part in the discussion and three of
these are in favour of the counting of votes at various polling stations
immediately after the closure of voting.
The APRC does not support this idea, which was introduced by our God-fearing
Bishop Solomon Tilewa Johnson at the time of the Sami Chieftaincy election.
It is said that according to a letter dated 12 June and signed by the deputy
administrative secretary Kebba Kinteh the APRC leadership demanded to know
the rationale behind what it called the departure from the traditional
method of counting which it argued has proven to be hitch-free, transparent
and of less security risk.
Well it appears that consultation with government is not the best in our
situation. I have no doubt that Bishop Johnson as vice chairman of PIEC and
returning officer for the Western Division in the 1996 presidential
elections learnt some lessons which he decided to put into practice when he
became Chairman of the IEC. The method of vote counting he has introduced
cannot certainly be a source of convert for all parties especially the weak
ones.
I suggest that the APRC start to listen to and respect opposing views
intended for greater transparency. The other side of the answer is that the
traditional method the APRC referred to as hitch-free was so until before
the 1996 presidential elections. In the history of elections in The Gambia
the only election, which had the results that later, appeared in a foreign
newspaper was the 1996 presidential elections. I can say that the PIEC made
their move widely known by issuing a press release over Radio Gambia that
some results of the presidential elections were going round but that they
were not authentic because it was not signed.
I am surprised that the APRC now want us to go by tradition in respect of
vote counting. Where were the ears of the AFPRC Council members when parties
wanted to maintain the tradition of holding presidential and National
Assembly elections on the same day? Why was the ruling party conspicuously
absent from the reconciliation meetings initiated by members of the student
union after the January 1997 elections? While students were crying for
justice following the death of Ebrima Barry, government security agents
caused the nation to shed more tears by adding another 14 young corpses to
that of Ebrima Barry. The European Union, the international community,
individuals, embassies and high commissions all expressed concern over the
matter but everyone was later disappointed with the cabinet's decision to
reject the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission of
Inquiry into April 10. But the APRC turned a deaf ear to the people's
legitimate appeals for justice.
During one of the debates of the National Assembly, I heard the Secretary of
State for the Interior Ousman Badjie saying that it was for fear of revenge
that the white man in South Africa opted for a Truth and Reconciliation
Commission. Yes Mr. Man of Law but don't you think that it is far better
than The Gambia government's amendment of the Indemnity Act as the basis for
reconciliation and burying all the truth?
Let us all retract our politics and save our country from the path of
destruction, which is where we seem to be heading.
Even our young people are aware that politics in The Gambia has never been
worse than what it is today.
Let me now leave all Gambians with these wise words from Maya Angelou, the
black lady who was Bill Clinton's choice to compose a poem for his swearing
in ceremony. "I don't tell everything I know, but what I do tell is truth.
There's a world of difference between truth and facts. Facts can obscure the
truth". "And still I rise" she said "you may write me down in history with
your bitter twisted lies, you may trod me in the very dirt but still like
dust I'll rise".
So as an opposition sympathiser, I sound critical of the government but what
I support is the truth. This is why I sometimes defend President Jammeh in
opposition circles but he embarrassed me during his 'Meet the People Tour'
last year when he said at a meeting in the Nianija area 'meng mang lafi
mansa kunda la i te mansa kunda la kodo domola' (he who does not support the
government will not benefit from the government money). This I heard one
night during the highlights of the tour on Radio Gambia. It only sent me
laughing as I said President Jammeh does not know but Mansa Kunda has no
money. The money belongs to all Gambians Mansa Kunda is just a custodian to
apply the funds for national development irrespective of tribe, religion or
party affiliation.
Next time I shall explain what it means to belong to a party but support the
truth at all times to restore what Gambians are known for from colonial
times, which makes us hospitable peace loving and law abiding.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
