Mr.Dampha,
i must begin by thanking you for forwarding
my posting to the L ,the other day when i had trouble
with my computer and for expressing your concern about
the recent ended voter registration exercise.
First,i would like to take this opportunity to thank
the UDP registration agents who participated during
the exercise for the impressive showing and courage
done under extreme pressure and against a state
machinery that saw no bounds and spared no efforts in
its use of national resources as you rightly stated
the immigration,NIA,police,chiefs and agents of the
July 22nd movement.
we have heard through the press,the widespread
intimidation and harassment perpetrated by the
government on UDP registration agents.
UDP registration agents reported incidents of
intimidation by some district chiefs who are also the
chairmen of the July 22nd movement in their respective
administrative areas.The chiefs named are
chief-Sambujang Jagne of Farafenni and chief-Jarjussey
of Jarra Soma.However,these matters will be deal with
immediately by the party's legal secretary-Mariam
Denton at the revising courts.
Also there are reports that so many illegal registered
voters took place mainly around Sere Kunda ,Farafenni
and Fonis but some of these cases are going to be
difficult to prove hence, the claimants had the
backing of the immigration and some village elders.
The alleged intimidation and harassment played by the
government had a decisive role in the low turnout
registration of voters.
For the principle of transparency,the IEC is expected
in a matter of days to consult with the chief Justice
for the appointment of Magistrates for the revising
courts and to come up with a press release stating the
following:
[a] Total number of registered voters in each
administrative area.
[b] Total number of rejected registered voters in each
administrative area.
[c] Overall total number of registered voters nation
wide.
Dampha,still there is an avenue for one to appeal to
the supreme court against a decision of a revising
court on section 29. of the elections decree and i
will bring that portion later.
Finally,UDP will always dedicate itself to the worthy
and patriotic objective that it has set itself to
achieve and would play its full part for the
betterment of our nation as a genuine opposition
party.
Saihou
--- Dampha Kebba <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Mr. Mballow, thanks again for the information.
> However, I have to tell you
> that this is a very disturbing piece of news. My
> major problem is with
> Section 28: "GROUNDS ON WHICH APPEAL FROM REVISING
> COURT BARRED: NO APPEAL
> or notice of appeal SHALL BE received or ALLOWED
> against the decision of a
> revising court on any question of fact or upon the
> admissibility or effect
> of any evidence or admission adduced or made in any
> case to establish any
> matter of fact only." Emphasis mine.
>
> Mballow, this Section severely restricts the ability
> of 'objectors' to
> challenge the decisions of these revising courts
> (magistrates). Now, if the
> magistrate makes a mistake in his fact-finding,
> there is nothing one can do
> about that. If we have the name of a dead person on
> the rolls and we sought
> to bring in a Death Certificate to prove that the
> person is dead and the
> magistrate refuses to admit that piece of evidence,
> we cannot appeal against
> that ruling. If some village elder stands up and
> says that Isatou Kujabi is
> not a Gambian and as a matter of fact, just moved
> into the village from
> Casamance after Yaya came to power, and the
> magistrate decides to ignore
> those facts, there is nothing we can do about that.
>
> Granted, a lawyer of Ousainou Darboe's caliber can
> wriggle his way out of
> these types of restrictions on litigants' rights of
> appeal. Darboe can
> always couch an issue to make it a 'question of law
> (as opposed to a
> 'question of fact' which is taboo with these
> restrictive rules). For
> example, in the above scenario Darboe can argue that
> the evidence from the
> village elder is coming in to prove a point of law;
> i.e. legal residence.
> Therefore, if mistakes are made by the magistrate
> regarding that point, the
> decision will be 'appealable'. But this is a
> long-winded argument and grief
> we do not need.
>
> This is a bad law, especially in an environment
> where the illegal government
> we have is going to collaborate with the IEC to
> register ineligible voters.
> We have a government that has made an elaborate and
> a concerted effort to
> rig the rolls. The shenanigans started when the
> Immigration Department would
> go to people's houses to illegally grant them our
> national identification
> documents. Here we are NOT just dealing with minor
> irregularities in the
> voter registers that can be easily fixed by a lay
> magistrate without any
> contentious arguments from the parties involved.
> Here we are dealing with a
> racket. We are dealing with an illegal government
> that will do anything to
> steal the elections. We are dealing with a whole
> government machinery. State
> House, NIA, Immigration, Police Department, IEC, all
> bent on populating the
> rolls with non-Gambians that are going to vote for
> APRC. Compound that with
> the 'refugee problem' we have. Add to that the fact
> that our borders are
> very porous and we all share the same physical
> characteristics in the
> Sub-region. You take all that to consideration, you
> realize that you are
> dealing here with a potentially very volatile
> situation. At the very least,
> we are dealing with a 'challenge' process that is
> going to be highly
> contentious. This is not about some cosmetic changes
> on the rolls. If we
> look back to the chaos that characterized the
> registration process (APRC
> stalwarts forcing IEC to shut down their operations
> at various registration
> centers), we can tell that we are going to have
> heated arguments dealing
> with who is eligible to be registered and who is
> not.
>
> Now, is it prudent to leave this very important
> decision in the hands of a
> magistrate? Not even a High Court Judge? I hope the
> Opposition look into
> this matter some more. In my humble opinion,
> overturning the erroneous
> decisions of these magistrates is going to be an
> uphill task. Maybe legal
> luminaries like Ousainou Darboe, Ousman Sillah,
> Antou Gaye, Mariam Denton
> and others can do it. But it would be wise to assess
> first and foremost what
> kind of legal issues the appellate courts are going
> to accept. If we realize
> that the higher courts are going to give carte
> blanche to the inexperienced
> magistrates by interpreting every issue as a 'matter
> of fact', let us call
> it quits. I would not be surprised at the end of the
> day if the Chief
> Justice decides to fly below the radar screen by
> telling his judges not to
> accept any appeals from the decisions of the
> magistrates. The judges can
> always come up with dubious ways of interpreting the
> issues we are aggrieved
> by. We are dealing here with judges that do not take
> controversial cases
> affecting this government. Anything the judges can
> do to pass the buck, they
> will do it. I can see all of them dismissing these
> appeals by saying that
> they have no jurisdiction to hear the appeal because
> they are prohibited by
> Section 28.
>
> The more I see where this exercise is taking us, the
> more I become convinced
> about the case to boycott the elections. It is the
> prerogative of the
> Parties on the ground to assess the situation for
> themselves and call the
> shots. However, I hope they are mindful of these
> repugnant laws and how the
> government is going to railroad this registration
> exercise and the entire
> elections process. The Opposition should agitate for
> ALL the decisions of
> the revising courts to be 'appealable'.
> Alternatively, the Chief Justice
> should be given the responsibility to hear these
> cases. Let us put the man
> on the spot. Let his reputation and his life ride on
> these decisions.
> Instead of having inexperienced magistrates hearing
> these cases, let the
> Chief Justice hear them. I know that if the decision
> was mine, there is no
> way I am going to partake in this 'challenge'
> process.
>
> Mballow, thanks again for your contributions. I hope
> you and your Party
> study the situation thoroughly. I am confident that
> given Darboe's legal
> knowledge, he is in a lot better position to advise
> your Party on this
> matter. But I also recognize that when your Party
> assesses this issue,
> political considerations also come into play. I pray
> that you come to the
> right decision at the end of the day. My motto is,
> never to enter into a
> fight you cannot win.
> KB
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> 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.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
