Halifa,
    I read with keen interest your posting of January 1st. Apparently you
were offering me what you called "new evidence" but (perchance my PC is not
millennium bug compliant-laugh) I couldn't glean from your posting any new
evidence. Save of course a passing remark about a post mortem report.
    You wrote "in short, the reason why I am saying that we will not engage
in any wild goose chase is because of the fact that a post mortem examination
of the deceased person was already held by duly qualified medical
practitioners." Halifa this hardly new evidence except of course to those
members who were not back home when Koro died. In any case you have not told
members what this examination has to say about the deceased's death. Has it
not struck you odd and suspicious that the post mortem report is gathering
dust somewhere else whilst the Ceesay family are crying out for justice? What
do you make of the fact that no-one has yet to learn what that report
contains save of course those who ordered and executed those orders? Halifa
isn't it circumstantial evidence that notwithstanding a post mortem report,
the State hasn't done anything to invoke the Coroner's Act to hold a public
Inquest into Koro's death? What do you infer from this?
    Interestingly enough, you went on a plangent lamentation of why the State
never bothered revealing the content of the post mortem examination. You said
"as far as I am concerned, even the present allegations of hitting with a
base ball bat and shooting in the head could be confirmed by a coroner if the
result of the post mortem examination of the deceased are revealed." Have you
bothered asking yourself the simple question of why they never revealed the
post mortem examination in the first place? Doesn't this have the gut
wrenching stench of complicity on the part of the State and reeks of
insinuations of foul play?
    The most interesting part of your posting was your insistence on not
taking up the circumstantial evidence aforementioned and lead I offered for
the simple reason that it would lead to a wild goose chase. Unfortunately you
never bothered to make mention of why it would tantamount to a wild goose
chase. Well, I would tell you and members. Halifa should anyone pick up this
lead/circumstantial evidence the best avenues to head to would be:
1. The Law Courts. Unfortunately this would turn out to be a cul-de-sac for
no sitting Judge would entertain a suit that questions the AFPRC actions
during the transition thanks to your beloved 1997 constitution's Blanket
Indemnity Clause.
2. Private Investigations. Again this would be hamstrung by the alchemy of
the notorious Blanket Indemnity Clause.
    Which always takes us back to the wisdom of voting for that 1997
constitution when it was a glaring reality that it contains provisions that
are monstrous travesties of justice. Has it occurred to you that the Blanket
Indemnity Clause nullifies even the Coroners Act which in any case we would
need to reveal the truth behind Koro's death? Koro's death always takes back
to the 1997 constitution. I have noticed that during the Referendum campaign,
you have never highlighted to the People the dangers of voting in that
constitution; that it contains monstrous travesties against justice like the
Indemnity Clause. The more we stretch the argument the more we see the
alchemy of murky miasma that was partly your own creation and which most
definitely would stain your integrity and judgement.
    Foroyaa is an instrument of influence. Being editors of Foroyaa, places
you in an instrument of influence. If a compatriot of yours like Koro's
family make daily and fervent pleas for justice for their son, surely you
have a role to play. Hound the State every minute, every day, every week
until their consciences are pricked to the point where it would no longer do
to keep a muted silence. You helped unwittingly to allay fears/panic when
Koro died, surely it would be right for you to have a special Justice For
Koro Ceesay Campaign corner in your paper. Believe me it works. And by the
way Koro is worth the effort and sacrifice.
    In conclusion let me interrupt your excitement over that Section 86 of
the 1997 which according to you indicates that "An Act of the National
Assembly may make provision for private prosecutions." Exciting isn't it? Our
own very Ken Starrs. Halifa how will this help your fallen compatriots case?
Isn't this another cul-de-sac in the face of the infamous Blanket Indemnity
Clause of your precious 1997 constitution? The Blanket Indemnity Clause makes
this provision impotent. So long as we have the Indemnity Clause in that
constitution, forget about justice for Koro on the basis of the due process
of the law. This is why you correctly concluded it would be a wild goose
chase. I prefer cul-de-sac.
    I anticipate your usual wiseacres
Hamjatta Kanteh
hkanteh

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

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

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