GAMBIA-L Archives

The Gambia and Related Issues Mailing List

GAMBIA-L@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Hamjatta Kanteh <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 9 Feb 2000 15:58:01 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
Members,
I shall take this rare opportune moment to extend my sincere gratitudes to Buharry who volunteered to pass on the Indemnity Clause and Saul Khan who also attempted likewise but was hindered. Having said that, i shall address this contentious issue which has been the subject of intense haggling between me, Saul and my learned friend Halifa.
I hope now that everyone has read what Buharry has gallantly forwarded, many of us have by now deciphered the reality from  the vaporous clouds of nonesense that has persisted here for sometime in the absence of the Indemnity Clause itself.
Halifa, with all his intellectual profundity, is ignorant of one basic fact when he analysed why i asserted here repeatedly that the Indemnity Provisions are so pervasive and sweeping that they are a monstrous travesty of justice and that they do make the Coroners Act impotent. He was ignorant of the basic notion of over-riders in interpretations of legal documents/nuance.
Instead, he has chosen to rely on a whittled subparagraph (1) of the Indemnity Clause which  literally is not encompassing enough to be called sweeping. But jog further down to subparagraphs (3), (4) and (5) and you would notice how sweeping these are to the point of over-riding the whittled subparagraph (1)and nullifying it should it's weakness be exploited. [i trust y'all have the Indemnity Clause]
Now let's bring in the Coroner's Act and the issue of Koro Ceesay. If today Koro's family were to litigate a suit to force the State/Gov't to carry out an inquest into their son's mysterious death, subparagraphs 3,4, and 5 would suffice for the State/Gov't to throw out the case. The sweeping and pervasive nature of this subparagraphs are such that even the Coroners Act could not against their might. And another thing. These clauses are entrenched.Meaning, you need a two thirds majority to expunge them.
Lawyers i trust are online. Now is the time for them to make their presence felt. Let them adjudicate. As Halifa himself said, the debate is wide open.
I hope all will push forward their thoughts on this very salient national issue.
Hamjatta Kanteh

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

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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2